To think paying tax on jobseekers allowance is just crap

[20thcenturygirlwithherhandsonthewheel]

I was made redundant a few months ago. I have worked just under 30 years and never claimed any benefits before. DH and I have always saved to make sure that we have money aside just in case of emergencies (especially as housing benefits don’t pay the mortgage), so we have over £16k in savings and can’t claim anything means tested.

fair enough.

the only benefit I could claim when unemployed was contribution based jobseekers allowance: a massive £93 a week that I could only claim for 6 months.

thankfully I was only unemployed for 8 weeks. But to my surprise I’ve just recieved a letter from HMRC telling me that the paltry £93 a week was taxable. So really; probably will end up about £70 a week.

really pissed off: being putting money in the kitty for 30 years but getting so little when we needed it

And btw , I did find a job after 8 weeks; but there was no guarantee that I would. I know plenty of others who have been out of work in my industry since last year. And I applied for over 100 jobs; so really made an effort

Almost every post on here is whataboutery and facts contorted to meet the point the writer wants to make.

Good, I'm pleased for you. Just disagree with you moaning about paying tax on the JSA.

Do you think anyone receiving that benefit should be exempt from paying tax? Or just if you have worked X amount of years prior?

Personally I agree that it’s pittance and not enough to live on. I feel sorry for people struggling on benefits. I do agree everyone should pay tax on their earnings over the threshold though. People do it if they work so why not if they’re unemployed?

Do they really write a letter demanding tax even if you haven't reached the threshold for paying tax, surely that is not right.

Well. I don’t really have any choice about paying it or not do I? But I can be as pissed off about it as I like petal

We need a two tier benefits system. A more generous, non-means tested one for those who have worked, and a subsistence one for those that haven’t. And workers should have to pay more NI to receive these benefits. Working has to be incentivised.

Probably wouldn’t have minded so much, but if I received the income related jobseekers allowance then it wouldn’t be taken. I’d rather it was upfront and they just paid £70 a week instead or £90 and then taking the tax back

I don't think it is very well known that it's taxed as earnings, people just think its benefits and you get it but it's treated similar to the state pension.

But how would they know your tax liability at the point you claimed? Does it matter when the tax is deducted?

If you have mortgage insurance (used to be a thing) you would have had to claim even if you were earning £1m a year. And national insurance is exactly for that. So do buzz off those people who think OP shouldn’t claim

Why would you? I had mortgage insurance and didn’t claim because I didn’t need to - great redundancy package. It wasn’t £1 million though. I only took it out because it was a condition of the mortgage.

The first £12570 is your personal allowance, then between that amount and £37,700 you are taxed at 20%, followed by £37,701 to £125,140 which is taxed at 40%. Anything above that is taxed at 45%. We don't have a 50% tax band any longer. Your tax bands seem to be a bit out of date. I do appreciate though that many people don't understand the tax system, just as they don't seem to understand the benefits system!

But that's just a supposition. That would take a long while to implement as otherwise we would end up with another WASPI situation. Individuals need plenty of years to prepare if the state pension is going to be withdrawn. I can see the triple-lock system going first, followed by the state pension age being increased to 69 or even 70.

Also, remember in Scotland the rates are a wee bit different too

Well, for us in our late 40s and younger… we’ve got 30 years to prepare. I really hope I’m wrong btw

Well, good for you. Most people would claim though. As that’s the whole point of insurance

Apologies. I was thinking of the tax bands in England. Still no 50% tax band in Scotland though.

Fingers crossed that you are wrong. My DC are in their 30s and obviously have workplace pensions, but I would like to think they would also get a state pension on top of that.

No, the point was that they wouldn’t give me a mortgage without it.

I’m sorry, but I cannot understand at all why you wouldn’t claim! I could kind of understand if you don’t want to cost the taxpayer: but an insurance company???

I have only got 3 years service so it's a lot less than £30k it's the Op which I thought had been there 30 years but she clarified she was only there for two years.

Is it fair that some people cannot work because they have a disability? Is it fair that some people simply don't have the intellect to be a Chief Exec but others do so have much greater earning capacity? It isn't fair but the benefits system goes a small way to ensuring that those who are disadvantaged do not fall. You are not disadvantaged. You are privileged to be in a position to earn well and to have earned enough over a long period of time to have thousands in savings.

You're increasingly coming across as a spoilt brat. It's all about you isn't it. Fuck those who actually need the money!

Oh come on. Don’t play dumb. Plenty plenty people play the system: especially with PIP. I know family members and other acquaintances that do.

i have no problem with people with genuine disabilities claiming. Nor people who have lost their jobs. But there are plenty who see it as a lifestyle choice

Yes and no.

YABU for two reasons:

1. I believe tax should be paid from the 1st £, not a the same rate of course, but still something so that everybody contributes.
2. You were taxed on your early income. If someone only earned JSA for a year, I don’t believe they would be taxed (or would they??)

YANBU, it is not fair that years of contributions are not accounted for in the JSA amount. In France, if you lose your job, and assuming you were employed for some time, you’ll initially receive an amount similar to your previous income, gradually decreasing with time until it reaches the base amount - ie what someone with no contributions would receive.