Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Salary sacrifice to be taxed

560 replies

SomethingInTheAirToday · 08/11/2025 19:02

https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/1986914552093745592?s=46

not only are my generation not going to have a state pension or private healthcare, but we also can’t save into our own pensions because we need to fund the current generation.

this makes me so angry

Politics UK (@PolitlcsUK) on X

🚨 NEW: Rachel Reeves will use the Budget to impose a £2k-a-year limit on how much salary can go into a pension before paying National Insurance The move will raise £2bn and hit salary sacrifice schemes [@thetimes]

https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/1986914552093745592?s=46

OP posts:
Thread gallery
7
Cheeseontoastghost · 09/11/2025 14:41

222days · 09/11/2025 14:18

Lol. A lot of that chaos had a lot to do with a Labour Government as well, as I remember? And here we are again. Yes, interest rates were higher. But higher interest rates on a debt that was a much tinier multiple of your household income still equate to a much lower proportion of your household income overall than paying lower interest rates on a debt that is a much higher multiple of your household income. And this time not for a decade, but in perpetuity.

There was also significant inflation during that period which meant that people’s mortgages pretty much inflated away. This only works, however, if the inflation is accompanied by corresponding salary rises. In the 1970s and 1980s that happened. Now, however, this is not happening and there has been barely any real-terms salary increase for the last two decades in most occupations. On top of this people have ever-increasing costs for childcare (because now the vast majority of families have two working parents: workforce participation is at its highest level since it started being measured properly in the early 1970s, despite the Boomers claiming young people are lazy slackers - the evidence shows a higher proportion of them are working and a higher proportion are working full time, than their parents’/ grandparents’ generation who are now retired). Meanwhile we have had charges imposed on education, housing costs going up by many multiples in real-terms, the economy and growth unnecessarily damaged further by Brexit (guess who was the largest cohort voting for that?), and taxes at an all time high since before the Boomers were born.

Your false equivalences will not wash, I’m afraid. Even without an economics background a look at some basic graphs will demonstrate to you that the above are all established economic facts which are indisputable. The pretence that somehow the retired generation had life harder is simply nonsense. Their parents’ generation had it very hard, who actually fought in the second world war, but very few of them remain.

The people I am talking about are their children, who have been a generation who lived in a time of huge opportunity, rising living standards and economic opportunity, opportunities for social mobility, and simultaneously sold off and trashed the country’s public infrastructure and public institutions and stripped everything to the bones like a pack of piranhas, pulled every ladder up behind them and now have the audacity to blame everyone else for objecting to impoverishing further the subsequent generations in order to keep them in luxury that they have neither paid sufficient money to fund nor funded for their own parents or grandparents who were far more deserving because they were the ones who set up all of the infrastructure and institutions that the current retirees benefitted from and then destroyed for those who followed.

The absolute refusal to accept to take any responsibility for their own choices when they were the ones making the decisions, their continued stranglehold on politics preventing any change that’s not for their own personal benefit despite knowing damn well that they are the first generation in history to have left their children worse off than they were, is quite disgusting. Obviously there are exceptions, but a large proportion of that generation are supremely entitled and selfish and seem to have convinced themselves that all of the economic data is falsified and somehow everything they have extracted from society is the fruit of their own labour. I’m afraid that it is perfectly clear to everybody else, and an indisputable fact, that this is not the case and as a cohort they have an enormous debt to the rest of society which they are going to have to start to repay now.

Aaah yes a Labour government who inherited the crap the Tories left us in!
Quantative Easing was just kicking the can down the road!

You are not rational in blaming a tiny portion of the population for the economic situation we are now in so I will leave it there.
I presume you mean Baby Boomers ?
Im not one BTW and its not really a description that has ever applied in the UK.

Never mind it gives you someone to hate I suppose 🤷

EasternStandard · 09/11/2025 14:45

222days · 09/11/2025 14:41

The Resolution Foundation?!!?

Hahahaaaaaaaa

I mean, I really just give up.

You’re telling me to learn about economics? This is my job.

Please explain how means-testing the state pension and tapering it away as they do in Australia so that no pensioner is left with an income below that which exceeds the net income of someone earning the average UK salary of £37,500 per year would create pensioner poverty?

I agree with @Plantatreetodayon seeing this budget coming.

On pension tapering you’d need a system change that doesn’t have an impact on behaviour. It might be possible to do that, but with anything behaviour is a factor.

222days · 09/11/2025 14:45

Thisiswhathings · 09/11/2025 12:57

Wasn't MIRAS there to help people with mortgage interest rates?

Only just seen you’d noticed this before me!

Yes, the dirty secret of the Boomers that is never mentioned when they bang on about interest rates on the half a peanut they paid for their house…

Most young people now would chew off their own arm for their mortgage interest to be tax deductible!! Can you imagine how that would transform things for many young families?

WildLimePoet · 09/11/2025 14:52

nearlylovemyusername · 09/11/2025 14:18

Can you share any links?
I don't doubt it, the level of Labor incompetence is shocking, I hope they can grasp some basics, although party full of the likes of Angela (can she count??)...

It was reported by Sam Coates of Sky News in his podcast. Not the kind of thing that this incompetent government likes to have get out into the public, but the journos got hold of it.

Thisiswhathings · 09/11/2025 14:59

Yeah I noticed the PP didn't comment on it , odd as it ran for 17 years a massive chunk of the life of a mortgage if you took it out in 83.
I'm not sure if the outcome of this though it would super charge the housing market and it's prices if brought in now. And of course the cost say £20bn ?

SailingAwayAgain · 09/11/2025 14:59

Plantatreetoday · 09/11/2025 13:14

The ni exemption for pensioners has nothing to do with an assumption of people’s poverty.

The current system
Pensioners don't pay National Insurance after reaching State Pension age because the NI system is designed to stop contributions once you are above a certain age ( ie now you’ve paid in you get your pension )

You still pay income tax on your pension if your total income is over the personal allowance, but NI contributions on earnings (if you're still working) and on your pension income itself are discontinued at this point.

I think it would be better for ni contributions to increase for all up to the 40years required. ie For those who have an income that is taxable and have not paid ni for the 40years ( based on the current yrs req ) that is required to receive the full state pension

But we all know that NI is essentially just another form of income tax.

Perhaps the answer is for NI to be abolished altogether and for income tax to be increased to cover the shortfall. Then, anyone with an income would be paying it, regardless of their age.

222days · 09/11/2025 15:00

EasternStandard · 09/11/2025 14:45

I agree with @Plantatreetodayon seeing this budget coming.

On pension tapering you’d need a system change that doesn’t have an impact on behaviour. It might be possible to do that, but with anything behaviour is a factor.

It’s very simple. As I’ve said multiple times here and on other threads we don’t need to reinvent the wheel.

Australia used to have a pension system modelled on ours. Like us, they realised several decades ago that this ponzi scheme would be completely unsustainable due to demographic changes. Unlike us, they reformed it.

They now have a means-tested system tapering the payment away for those who do not require it. Simultaneously, they mandated and gradually increased the levels of private pension savings (which was affordable for both employees and employers because they didn’t have to pay such high taxes to fund the state pension ponzi scheme anymore). The public there generally accepts that this is a good, robust and fair system and it works.

What we need to do is remove the opt-out from auto-enrolment so make pension saving for individuals mandatory (with a similar mandatory system for the self-employed unless they can demonstrate sufficient assets to self-fund their retirement already). This protects against future demographic changes (given the falling birthrate, this is essential: the problem with the ponzi scheme is not going to go away). Then mandatory contribution levels need to be raised, gradually, to ensure that the majority of people have sufficient funding for themselves.

Obviously it would have been far better if the Boomers who are now retired had implemented this decades ago when the problem was well-known and foreseen in advance, but they didn’t do so. They voted for tax cuts for themselves instead. So now the change will have to happen with a far less gradual pace but that’s entirely of their own making, frankly, and any gripes about that should be directed to the politicians of their own generation who failed to act at the appropriate time several decades ago.

This isn’t rocket science. Just like with healthcare, education, taxation, other parts of the welfare system, childcare provision, we know which systems work and which do not because there is copious evidence from decades and decades of them being implemented in other countries. We’re not feeling our way in the dark here, we have the evidence.

The problem is politicians in the UK refusing to implement evidence-based policy and instead wrecking the economy and deliberately making everyone poorer and poorer because they don’t have the backbone to articulate to the electorate the changes that need to be made. Primarily because, as we can see on this thread, a large proportion of the electorate don’t want to hear it and would rather stick their fingers in their ears and shout “Give me my cake! Otherwise it’s not faaaaaaaiiiiiirrrrr!”.

People in the UK seem to believe that things can’t get worse. They very much can. A lot worse. Over history the fortunes and prosperity of different countries have risen and fallen many times and there is no innate right for people here to have a higher standard of living than those in China, India, African countries, Afghanistan… we have this currently because of historic events. Other countries have Governments working extremely hard to ensure that they are the ones with higher living standards in the future. If we do not soon get a Government determined to and capable of doing the same then our living standards will drop like a stone in a pond and the UK public really needs to understand this fact before it is too late.

But it seems many pensioners don’t care and their view is “I’ll be dead by then and it won’t affect me so it doesn’t matter”. A disturbingly large proportion of them seem to have far less care for their children and grandchildren than any generation before or afterwards, a weird a supremely self-centred view on the world which has caused so much damage to our society and will continue to do so as long as their stranglehold on politics remains in place. Somebody needs to stand up to them finally and tell them enough is enough, but we have no politicians with the backbone to do so.

Bruisername · 09/11/2025 15:01

I don’t agree mortgage interest should be tax deductible as it’s so open to manipulation. I do think childcare costs should be

Thisiswhathings · 09/11/2025 15:02

WildLimePoet · 09/11/2025 14:52

It was reported by Sam Coates of Sky News in his podcast. Not the kind of thing that this incompetent government likes to have get out into the public, but the journos got hold of it.

It doesn't feel like the gotcha it's been presented as . Wouldn't all government ministers be briefed by policy experts in some form or another? Ministers are moved from one distinct portfolio to another potentially in short time. They don't have the luxury of time to get up to speed organically.

Negroany · 09/11/2025 15:06

Thisiswhathings · 09/11/2025 15:02

It doesn't feel like the gotcha it's been presented as . Wouldn't all government ministers be briefed by policy experts in some form or another? Ministers are moved from one distinct portfolio to another potentially in short time. They don't have the luxury of time to get up to speed organically.

Of course, it's entirely normal. And probably mis reported anyway.

MPs are just normal people, they get elected on policy but there's no requirement for them to be experts on anything. They are representatives of the people.

222days · 09/11/2025 15:06

Bruisername · 09/11/2025 15:01

I don’t agree mortgage interest should be tax deductible as it’s so open to manipulation. I do think childcare costs should be

It was alright for the Boomers though, huh? How many of them campaigned against MIRAS?

Did they refuse to use the tax deduction it if it was apparently such a bad system, or campaign against it?

< tumbleweed >

Plantatreetoday · 09/11/2025 15:08

SailingAwayAgain · 09/11/2025 14:59

But we all know that NI is essentially just another form of income tax.

Perhaps the answer is for NI to be abolished altogether and for income tax to be increased to cover the shortfall. Then, anyone with an income would be paying it, regardless of their age.

This could be a good solution and potentially cheaper to run
It would also mean everyone that earns pays into it. Which isn’t the current case
It would also mean, in theory, everyone gets a full state pension and the need for pension credits is abolished. Again a reduction in the cost of administration although possibly offset by an increase in pension costs.

WildLimePoet · 09/11/2025 15:10

Thisiswhathings · 09/11/2025 15:02

It doesn't feel like the gotcha it's been presented as . Wouldn't all government ministers be briefed by policy experts in some form or another? Ministers are moved from one distinct portfolio to another potentially in short time. They don't have the luxury of time to get up to speed organically.

If you think it’s a gotcha or designed to be, then your bar is so low that you’re trippin’ over it.

Ben then it doesn’t surprise me. The people who elected these parliamentarians are not the sharpest knives in the drawer either.

WildLimePoet · 09/11/2025 15:11

Negroany · 09/11/2025 15:06

Of course, it's entirely normal. And probably mis reported anyway.

MPs are just normal people, they get elected on policy but there's no requirement for them to be experts on anything. They are representatives of the people.

You’re right, they’re not experts on anything. Most have never had real jobs, or done anything of note that would constitute financial and economic success.

Teebow · 09/11/2025 15:15

222days · 09/11/2025 13:06

Funny how they always neglect to mention SERPS, isn’t it?

Just like the unspoken secret of MIRAS, when they start banging on about the very short period of a few weeks when they had to pay high interest rates on the peanuts they paid for their houses that they now want to sell to young families at ten times the price in real-terms.

Ahhhhh, MIRAS. I wonder how young people today would feel about being allowed to deduct their mortgage interest from their tax bill. Strange that all of these people hankering after the “good old days” aren’t campaigning for MIRAS to be reinstated so that young people now can enjoy that same tax relief, and in fact should apparently also have their pension contributions taxed as well! And pay student loans of course.

Absolutely no entitlement or selective memory, of course. Nothing to see here…

Just “GIVE ME MY TRIPLE LOCK. I don’t care if I have a house worth two million pounds with 4 spare bedrooms. Why should I downsize and use my own (largely untaxed) money to pay for myself? TAX THESE LAZY YOUNG PEOPLE MORE! Stop giving people welfare. Except me of course. Keep giving it to me of it wouldn’t be faaaaaaiiiiir! 😭 I want at least 3 cruises next year.”

Edited

How far are you @222days off retirement? Because some of your posts - like this one - make you seem about 12.

Bruisername · 09/11/2025 15:15

222days · 09/11/2025 15:06

It was alright for the Boomers though, huh? How many of them campaigned against MIRAS?

Did they refuse to use the tax deduction it if it was apparently such a bad system, or campaign against it?

< tumbleweed >

That’s irrelevant to the point - we can harp on about the past and hate the world for it but we need to look forward and the situation we are in

europe is on the down and current policies aren’t helping. We’re not the superpower anymore and we need to stop acting like we are

Thisiswhathings · 09/11/2025 15:19

WildLimePoet · 09/11/2025 15:10

If you think it’s a gotcha or designed to be, then your bar is so low that you’re trippin’ over it.

Ben then it doesn’t surprise me. The people who elected these parliamentarians are not the sharpest knives in the drawer either.

Then wants wrong with asking policy experts to come in ? Frankly I would say it's incompetent if they didn't.

If it's not a gotcha what's your issue with it ?

222days · 09/11/2025 15:22

SailingAwayAgain · 09/11/2025 14:59

But we all know that NI is essentially just another form of income tax.

Perhaps the answer is for NI to be abolished altogether and for income tax to be increased to cover the shortfall. Then, anyone with an income would be paying it, regardless of their age.

I’d go further than that and roll employer national insurance into personal taxes as well so that there’s proper transparency over what people are actually paying.

From an employer’s perspective they do not care which part of the taxation is classified as their tax or the employee’s tax. All they look at is “what will be the total cost of me hiring this person including all salary, taxes, pension contributions etc?”.

Effectively - as we saw last year - employment taxes levied on employers are paid by the employee. If you raise the employment taxes on the employers they can still only afford to pay the market rate for the individual so this results in lower salary rises in future until the money is recouped, or reducing any pension contributions that they give to employees above the legal minimum, or not hiring new staff and increasing workloads for existing staff instead so they work more hours for free, or if none of that recoups the money then they make redundancies. The employee is always the one that will pay because the employer cannot continue to operate if they make no profit.

the 15% NI charge to employers is therefore also in everything but name another tax on employees. All of this should be rolled into income tax so that the electorate can actually see how much they are being taxed. The marginal tax rates at certain points in salary scales already exceed 100%!! This has been shown in independent economic studies to be one of the main drivers of low productivity and growth in the UK (therefore falling living standards). These studies were even reported in The Guardian for goodness sake, so hardly right wing propaganda or whatever, they are economic fact. You can see in HMRC data the bunching of taxpayers below each threshold where punitive marginal tax rates are imposed at various levels with withdrawal of child benefit, the imposition of student loan repayments, the withdrawal of the personal allowance and childcare funding, and the much too high withdrawal rate for universal credit for those working in low-income roles which makes it not worth them taking on additional hours.

All of this results in lower economic participation, skills shortages, higher immigration needs, lower tax revenue, lower productivity, higher welfare bills and lower growth. And higher inflation as well.

This is all entirely within the Chancellor’s gift to fix immediately in this budget by removing the cliff edges and there is robust evidence that within months this would give the UK economy a huge boost and actually raise tax revenues.

Instead, her proposal is to introduce more cliff-edges and more totally illogical, irrational variations in marginal tax rates that will create perverse incentives and harm economic growth further by screwing around with applying extra tax charges to pension contributions. This will, quite obviously, exacerbate these already clearly-evidenced economic effects and make the economy tank further.

You really couldn’t make it up.

Bruisername · 09/11/2025 15:22

Part of the problem is that ‘people are sick of experts’ and politicians etc do a good job of doing them down when they present something that goes against their ideological belief

WildLimePoet · 09/11/2025 15:23

Thisiswhathings · 09/11/2025 15:19

Then wants wrong with asking policy experts to come in ? Frankly I would say it's incompetent if they didn't.

If it's not a gotcha what's your issue with it ?

Edited

The fact that you think it’s no big deal that thickos are being voted in (by thickos) to vote on issues they don’t have the first clue about, at a time when they country is in serious trouble, says everything.

222days · 09/11/2025 15:27

Thisiswhathings · 09/11/2025 15:19

Then wants wrong with asking policy experts to come in ? Frankly I would say it's incompetent if they didn't.

If it's not a gotcha what's your issue with it ?

Edited

Maybe they should have talked to such experts to design a viable policy prospectus before being elected?

Maybe after their catastrophic budget last year and the (entirely predictable and predicted) effect that it had on the UK economy they should have consulted some experts about how to fix this?

If you don’t think it’s concerning that the Chancellor of the Exchequer is having to be briefed on the very basics about economic cause and effect because she is still trying to work out what policies she should put in place just over two weeks before her annual budget (never mind thinking through the details properly and having a clear plan in place for implementation before announcing things, eh?) then I’m not sure what to say to you.

Do you think that indicates her being competent to run the UK economy and that she has a viable economic plan in place that has any prospect of working? Particularly given she’s leaking things like the topic of this thread to the media which is one of the most economically illiterate things I’ve ever heard?

Unfortunately, even if you do for some inexplicable reason believe this indicates competence or is remotely acceptable for someone in her role, I don’t think anybody in the markets will be in agreement with you.

222days · 09/11/2025 15:28

WildLimePoet · 09/11/2025 15:23

The fact that you think it’s no big deal that thickos are being voted in (by thickos) to vote on issues they don’t have the first clue about, at a time when they country is in serious trouble, says everything.

Exactly. Honestly I’ve tried so hard to be polite but some of the comments here are just so stupid it is extremely difficult to maintain.

Thisiswhathings · 09/11/2025 15:29

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Thisiswhathings · 09/11/2025 15:35

222days · 09/11/2025 15:27

Maybe they should have talked to such experts to design a viable policy prospectus before being elected?

Maybe after their catastrophic budget last year and the (entirely predictable and predicted) effect that it had on the UK economy they should have consulted some experts about how to fix this?

If you don’t think it’s concerning that the Chancellor of the Exchequer is having to be briefed on the very basics about economic cause and effect because she is still trying to work out what policies she should put in place just over two weeks before her annual budget (never mind thinking through the details properly and having a clear plan in place for implementation before announcing things, eh?) then I’m not sure what to say to you.

Do you think that indicates her being competent to run the UK economy and that she has a viable economic plan in place that has any prospect of working? Particularly given she’s leaking things like the topic of this thread to the media which is one of the most economically illiterate things I’ve ever heard?

Unfortunately, even if you do for some inexplicable reason believe this indicates competence or is remotely acceptable for someone in her role, I don’t think anybody in the markets will be in agreement with you.

Edited

How do you know they haven't spoken to the experts before?
Where is the evidence she is having basic lessons, maybe Sam coates is in the same room as well. I don't believe everything the press writes.

WildLimePoet · 09/11/2025 15:35

Glad you agree that thick people voting and thick people running the country should have some failsafe measures in place. Finally, you’re getting it.