Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To ask how much you think income tax will rise by?

900 replies

Wonderofwimbledon · 06/11/2025 20:33

We’re absolutely financially at our limit… I’m so incredibly stressed. An income tax rise will break us and we won’t be able to afford it. We won’t have money to eat.

What do you think it’ll be? I just want to curl up and cry- we can’t take anymore increases our bills , mortgage everything has increased we have no spare money at all

OP posts:
Thread gallery
39
BloominNora · 08/11/2025 12:07

Lkjjr · 08/11/2025 12:05

Benefits should be temporary and should be conditioned on a pathway to getting out of them. I.e. finding better paid work, or budgeting better

Or until people can access the medical help they need to get well.

Flixon · 08/11/2025 12:08

I think it’s fair to say that the squeezed middle - those of us who are net contributors, did not vote for being increasingly squeezed . And that those who did are generally those who will benefit from others contributions.
People who have invested in their education, worked full time , made a decent living and are having more and more of their ‘extras’ stripped away to fund people / families who do not work, and are expected to just suck it up. We are not wealthy enough to employ tax specialists , to have off shore trusts , we have some equity in property for having paid mortgages (funded by our own jobs - sometimes two jobs) but nothing else.
Im so so disillusioned and fed up. I would never have voted Labour but I was accepting that I live in a democracy and thought maybe this Government might do ok. But it’s a shit show and always always going for the soft easy targets

EasternStandard · 08/11/2025 12:10

Polaris81 · 08/11/2025 12:04

The issue is - even if Labour was able to tackle the welfare state (it isn’t given last summer’s back bench rebellion), there is no meaningful growth, so where would these people work?

That is a major problem. Labour policies are creating a more difficult labour market.

BloominNora · 08/11/2025 12:11

Lkjjr · 08/11/2025 12:01

As in they should be self sufficient and not rely on welfare

Benefits for low earners exist because wages don't rise enough to cope with inflation.

You could raise the minimum wage to a point which means someone would get the same amount of money but direct from their employer, bit business would have fit and it would screw the economy further.

Benefits for working people is just the governments way of redistributing some of the corporation tax paid by business back into workers pockets. They could close a lot of the Corporation tax loopholes to cover that bill.

BionicWomansAnkle · 08/11/2025 12:14

quartile · 08/11/2025 10:29

I'm not sure i could somewhere where half the year i could barely go outside and have to live in an air con bubble.

There are other reasons like wanting to live in a democracy, living in your own culture that keep people in the uk

Could this level of discussion about a government minister happen openly in some of the middle east?

Edited

living in your own culture that keep people in the uk’

ok.

EasternStandard · 08/11/2025 12:15

BloominNora · 08/11/2025 11:12

I could probably find one but rather than searching and having to double check all of the biases, it would be quicker to build it myself from published data sources.

What are your focus and concerns? Just the numbers that are economically inactive, unemployed, claiming and the benefits bill?

Anything else you would want to see?

That’s nice but don’t feel you should spend time!

I haven’t really looked into it but just various headlines on 6.5m can’t actually recall what exactly, and the earlier post in unemployment being low ish just made me start wondering what the whole picture is.

I think it can be the case that unemployment is lowish but we have an issue with higher economically inactive and state dependency.

That chart below was what I wanted to see, but if it’s problematic then I wondered if ONS had similar.

FurForksSake · 08/11/2025 12:15

In an ideal world no working person would need top-ups and government support, they’d be paid enough not to need them. But they aren’t, we need people to do low paid work, but don’t pay them a living wage to do so and this may well influence people not to work.

Lkjjr · 08/11/2025 12:15

WunTooThree · 08/11/2025 12:07

Why do you assume that someone on benefits can not budget? Or is capable of better work?

We need people to do low paid work. Or are you saying that people in low paid work deserve to live in poverty. They were celebrated during Covid.

Some jobs are low paid because they are low skilled and quite frankly deserve to be paid that.

Some jobs are low paid because the government controls the funding and forces down the wages due to monopoly power.

All jobs are essential, they weren't magically better than anyone else.

Lkjjr · 08/11/2025 12:17

BloominNora · 08/11/2025 12:11

Benefits for low earners exist because wages don't rise enough to cope with inflation.

You could raise the minimum wage to a point which means someone would get the same amount of money but direct from their employer, bit business would have fit and it would screw the economy further.

Benefits for working people is just the governments way of redistributing some of the corporation tax paid by business back into workers pockets. They could close a lot of the Corporation tax loopholes to cover that bill.

If you actually look in retail, food margins are small. Businesses cannot afford to pay more.

If the NMW was raised, they'd just fire workers and automate where they can.

WunTooThree · 08/11/2025 12:18

Lkjjr · 08/11/2025 12:15

Some jobs are low paid because they are low skilled and quite frankly deserve to be paid that.

Some jobs are low paid because the government controls the funding and forces down the wages due to monopoly power.

All jobs are essential, they weren't magically better than anyone else.

But the people doing them need to be paid enough to live too. But as it is, they are not, so they get UC top ups.
But you want that to stop? How will they then afford to live?

WildLimePoet · 08/11/2025 12:25

OP, if you don’t pay, how will this government piss money up the wall and give out endless benefits to the millions not working, the 1000 people going onto disability benefits a day, the motability card for ADHD.

Where will this government get cash for corrupt and endless handouts to the net zero crowd, who rip you off once by taking your taxes and then charge you more for your energy too.

Without your taxes, how will they fund billions in asylum accommodation, the huge numbers of civil servants who like to work from home as their productivity drops each year.

How will the government fund the billions of bribes to their union mates.

Think about it. Everyone needs to do their bit for this stuff.

BloominNora · 08/11/2025 12:26

Flixon · 08/11/2025 12:08

I think it’s fair to say that the squeezed middle - those of us who are net contributors, did not vote for being increasingly squeezed . And that those who did are generally those who will benefit from others contributions.
People who have invested in their education, worked full time , made a decent living and are having more and more of their ‘extras’ stripped away to fund people / families who do not work, and are expected to just suck it up. We are not wealthy enough to employ tax specialists , to have off shore trusts , we have some equity in property for having paid mortgages (funded by our own jobs - sometimes two jobs) but nothing else.
Im so so disillusioned and fed up. I would never have voted Labour but I was accepting that I live in a democracy and thought maybe this Government might do ok. But it’s a shit show and always always going for the soft easy targets

Please do not lump us all in together.

I would say that many of us who have invested in our education understand that our taxes are not 'funding people who don't want to work', they are funding the wealthy who are asset stripping the country while demolishing public services and using tax loopholes to send that money offshore to avoid it coming back into the economy.

Anyone who has truly invested in their education, or in fact anyone with an ounce of common sense, who wants to live is a well functioning society which rewards hard work, provides opportunity to achieve, but also looks after the most vulnerable who aren't able to do that would have done the work to understand who really gains the most by the way the economy is currently set up.

Of course there are plenty of people who have invested in their education who aren't bothered about living in that sort of fair society where everyone can flourish and who only care about what they have and what is taken from them. Who seek to find ways of making themselves better off while fawning over the wealthy who they wish to emulate and looking down with disdain on people who they perceive to be beneath them, begrudging them every crumb that society throws their way.

Only you know which one of those you truly are.

BionicWomansAnkle · 08/11/2025 12:27

WunTooThree · 08/11/2025 12:18

But the people doing them need to be paid enough to live too. But as it is, they are not, so they get UC top ups.
But you want that to stop? How will they then afford to live?

It will stop so we’ll have to cross that bridge when we come to it. Contributors have been squeezed too hard, Labour have broken the social contract and people have had enough of supporting those who never stop demanding more and more and more at the expense of our own families. It will stop,

BloominNora · 08/11/2025 12:30

Lkjjr · 08/11/2025 12:17

If you actually look in retail, food margins are small. Businesses cannot afford to pay more.

If the NMW was raised, they'd just fire workers and automate where they can.

Exactly, which is why the government step in to provide the subsidy.

If NMW isnt raised AND in-work benefits are stopped, how would people become self-sufficient in the way you suggested they should when the cost of living continues to increase?

WunTooThree · 08/11/2025 12:31

BionicWomansAnkle · 08/11/2025 12:27

It will stop so we’ll have to cross that bridge when we come to it. Contributors have been squeezed too hard, Labour have broken the social contract and people have had enough of supporting those who never stop demanding more and more and more at the expense of our own families. It will stop,

How are people who work full time and not being able to afford to live without UC, demanding more?

You are happy to have those low paid people clean your office, provide childcare for your young kids, and look after your elderly in cares homes. Yet are happy to see them destitute if their top up stop.

BionicWomansAnkle · 08/11/2025 12:33

BloominNora · 08/11/2025 12:26

Please do not lump us all in together.

I would say that many of us who have invested in our education understand that our taxes are not 'funding people who don't want to work', they are funding the wealthy who are asset stripping the country while demolishing public services and using tax loopholes to send that money offshore to avoid it coming back into the economy.

Anyone who has truly invested in their education, or in fact anyone with an ounce of common sense, who wants to live is a well functioning society which rewards hard work, provides opportunity to achieve, but also looks after the most vulnerable who aren't able to do that would have done the work to understand who really gains the most by the way the economy is currently set up.

Of course there are plenty of people who have invested in their education who aren't bothered about living in that sort of fair society where everyone can flourish and who only care about what they have and what is taken from them. Who seek to find ways of making themselves better off while fawning over the wealthy who they wish to emulate and looking down with disdain on people who they perceive to be beneath them, begrudging them every crumb that society throws their way.

Only you know which one of those you truly are.

Edited

Of course if the economy was based on virtue signalling and self righteous nonsense then yes we’d be flying high under this Government , but it’s not.

FurForksSake · 08/11/2025 12:33

Bring back the workhouses!

I help to support the establishments I have mentioned: they cost enough: and those who are badly off must go there.

EasternStandard · 08/11/2025 12:41

BionicWomansAnkle · 08/11/2025 12:33

Of course if the economy was based on virtue signalling and self righteous nonsense then yes we’d be flying high under this Government , but it’s not.

I think we need to be more realistic I agree.

Lkjjr · 08/11/2025 12:43

WunTooThree · 08/11/2025 12:18

But the people doing them need to be paid enough to live too. But as it is, they are not, so they get UC top ups.
But you want that to stop? How will they then afford to live?

They should take responsibility for their own lives to make ends meet. At some point it's not up to the taxpayer.

PandoraSocks · 08/11/2025 12:43

Polaris81 · 08/11/2025 11:50

Given the polarisation in the debate, would it be broadly accurate to conclude that those who are pro-Labour are in receipt of welfare support, or who have friends/family who are?

It just seems that the debate is so binary.

According to the Times people dependent on benefits make up a core element of Reform supporters. Make of that what you will.

To ask how much you think income tax will rise by?
To ask how much you think income tax will rise by?
BionicWomansAnkle · 08/11/2025 12:45

WunTooThree · 08/11/2025 12:31

How are people who work full time and not being able to afford to live without UC, demanding more?

You are happy to have those low paid people clean your office, provide childcare for your young kids, and look after your elderly in cares homes. Yet are happy to see them destitute if their top up stop.

You’re commenting on a whole thread about them demanding more?!?

My family comes before yours in my priorities, I’m obviously going to vote to stop you constantly reducing their quality of life to improve your families quality of life. There was a tolerable level of helping out, but I’m personally well passed that now and I think ten years of people supporting themselves might be a good remedy for this toxic entitlement.

WunTooThree · 08/11/2025 12:49

Lkjjr · 08/11/2025 12:43

They should take responsibility for their own lives to make ends meet. At some point it's not up to the taxpayer.

Then the people moaning about getting squeezed for more tax should also take responsibility for their own lives too.
The tax they pay is out of their control, just like the cost of food and housing going up for people who are struggling to pay it is too.

If you are facing paying more tax, step up and take responsibility. Get a better job.

Flixon · 08/11/2025 12:49

@BloominNora I make no apology for being one who looks to supporting my own family first. I make no apology for being pissed off that I’m counting pennies to feed my family when I have done my very best to be a net contributor. I am lucky that I have not been unable to work through illness but I have also pushed myself (I am a single parent with children I have raised alone) to provide for them. I do not see investment in education, health, transport, appropriate social support. I see waste, corruption and, through my work, an increasing number of citizens who regard welfare as their right and live at least as comfortably as I do. I see families raising their children with no intention of working, I see entitlement and selfishness. Why am
i expected to be selfless and sacrifice my security for society, but the less well off are not.
I have always (until the last few years) made regular donations to charities I can support, I have volunteered my time and expertise to support community endeavours. I’m not some rich person who inherited wealth and thinks others are beneath me. I have inherited nothing, everything I have I have worked for and yes, I resent giving more and more due to political targeting of soft targets.
No apologies from me. I’m pissed off & afraid of the future.

Cinnamon77 · 08/11/2025 12:51

PandoraSocks · 08/11/2025 12:43

According to the Times people dependent on benefits make up a core element of Reform supporters. Make of that what you will.

That's not surprising. Their policies are Trumpian / populist, and are based around stopping immigration and spending much more money on essential public services and much less on stuff like asylum hotels.

It's completely unworkable but can see why it appeals

1apenny2apenny · 08/11/2025 12:52

Well said @Flixon, I completely agree and I believe thousands in this country do also. People have had enough.