Anyone else lost a bit of ambition now they’ve been taxed to the brink?

[Peasontoastt]

I used to be extremely ambitious and was really eager to reach some sort of financial security. As a consequence, I’m in what’s considered a highly paid career, I work hard and it took me many years to train.

Just as I paid off my student loan (which took many years), I then had a baby and returned to work to be stuck with the childcare dilemma. I struggled through that phase and have come out the other side but being taxed so much, no child benefit, still paying for nursery even though dd has ‘free’ hours now. It’s likely that savings are going to be bashed next, so what’s the point in even putting anything aside when there’s likely going to be a 4K cap on ISAs.

I used to feel so ambitious and of course I know money isn’t everything, not by a long shot. But having worked my way up the ladder and with huge responsibilities only to feel penalised financially for doing so…what is the point? Yes I have more financial security than someone claiming benefits but equally, I am not being flippant when I say a few years of resting and being at home and being frugal is starting to seem so much more attractive. Has anyone else started feeling this way? I feel taken the piss out of by every financial angle!

In scenario A, are we putting either the 20% or 40% thresholds down too?

Because otherwise that really does significantly benefit the wealthier and leave everyone else in the same situation.

Are you thinking they shouldn’t have children? Because we desperately need more people to have children, and educated professionals are more likely to have children who excel at school, who are more likely to pay more taxes etc etc.

We should put at least 2% on each tax band and give everyone child benefit, a nil rate band and free childcare. That’s where we can start improving public services.

Not at all. I don’t think anyone should or shouldn’t have children.

I think it’s unreasonable to complain about informed choices that you made.

so how does this correlate with people having children they can't afford in first place? childcare or not? do we need to support them?

My experience of some people living on benefits is that they live very comfortable lives and don't go without.
I'm sure that I will get shouted down for stating that but it is my experience

The rate of universal credit for a single person is just under £400 a month. If you can live a comfortable life on that and not go without you’re clearly a miracle worker because I couldn’t.

Is that £400 after rent/council tax?
Not having to pay to get to work?
Yeah, well it's not going to be a luxury life, but do able.

That isn’t true, is it? When I started work the basic rate was 33% and the top rate was 83%. Basic rate tax payers were looking at deductions of 42% including NI - the same as higher rate workers now.

@Peasontoastt

Well you could try living on benefits but if its DLA or PIP you also have to live with a disability or a debilitating illness or terminal illness - or that of your child. That's the catch and perhaps not quite as cushy as you seem to imagine. I certainly do not feel jealous of ppl on higher rates knowing how bad the disability they\ their child has to endure to qualify. Especially if its their child.

Also for older disabled children \ young adults there is no childcare, so its not a holiday of being frugal where you get your old life back at some point.

Hope that helps.

It doesn’t include rent but it has to cover council tax, utilities, food and everything else. I couldn’t do it and I don’t know anyone who could if they were being honest.

Yeah, if it was me, I would be left with about £50pw after bills etc. That £50 would be for food, cleaning supplies, toiletries, clothing etc.
Nothing spare in case the fridge decides to die.

I don't see a breakdown for them figures. I'd guess it includes uni students who will go in to pay tax, pensioners who have already paid lots of tax, disabled people who may or may not have previously paid tax, people on maternity leave, people who have reduced their working hours to care for children but have and will again pay tax, people who have had to reduce their working hours to care for elderly or disabled relatives who have paid tax and are saving the tax payer money through reducing the social care bill.

Average workers have historically low tax rates.

Higher earners (to whom I refer) have historically high tax rates, which are getting worse every year due to fiscal drag.

eg the 40% rate applied to 3% of workers when introduced, and now impacts around 15%.

The 60% tax rate has not moved for 15 years - if it had, it would be around £70,000 higher than in it today.

My own top rate is 100% due to tax and loss of benefits - over tens of thousands of pounds.

You can’t count loss of benefits as a tax rate. Conflating two completely different things to get the result you want is disingenuous. The highest actual peace time tax rate historically was 90% in the 1950s and 60s.

There is no way we need to be paying means tested benefits to people on £100k+.

Where does that end? I’d like some UC, might pop a claim in.

If you’re outside the means test, you’re outside the means test. For a reason.

Why are people so bloody greedy 😂. You don’t need childcare funding, and other people do. Accept the privilege and get over it.

I remember someone many years ago saying on here that they had a bit leftover after bills and used the leftover welfare to buy and Xbox.

Top rate payers weren’t paying that though. There used to be endless loopholes. Get paid in gold, wine, jewellery. All tax free. No one ever paid 83%.

I absolutely couldn’t. My housing costs wouldn’t be fully covered by UC. £400 would cover our council tax and then maybe 2 more bills.

We absolutely couldn’t manage on benefits, and definitely would have to experience a real loss of quality of life. Things we only have because we can afford them now.

Would seem a bit “cut your nose off to spite your face,” to me.

I’m pretty sure they did. And obviously every basic rate taxpayer on PAYE was paying 42% - the same as current higher rate payers. To say taxes are at an historic high is just plain bollocks.

And?
People get a fixed amount. If they have some spare after the essentials are paid for, then they can spend it how they want.

I mean. Shows that they could have managed with less

Depends on what their outgoings are. Some people can cope on less, and others can not.

https://ifs.org.uk/articles/how-tax-burden-high-when-most-us-are-taxed-so-low

But if your income is £99,999 you get approx the same for your net salary but are also entitled to tax free child care so someone on £100,000 is worse off than someone on £99,999