To feel utterly miserable about a future with Andy Burnham as PM?

[OneWarmHazelQuail]

I feel like I'm being stung in every possible way at the moment- £15 a day on tube to work, high mortgage costs, high energy costs, private schooling for SEN child (I was told state wouldn't be unlikely to assist him as he isn't mute or violent). My parents have had to help fund schooling it felt like my only hope as son has behavioural issues.

I also have an unsold old home that I have to rent out as it wouldn't sell. Buy-to-let mortgage costs, agent fees, maintenance and tax put me in a loss position.

I can't bear what the future holds with Andy Burnham. I have no doubt that he will find new and imaginative ways to keep me in this financial nightmare. I'm literally struggling from food poverty but regarded as rich by policy.

YABU- Andy Burnham is actually going to make things better

YANBU- I'm screwed

If all they own is one home then I don't think that's really the issue

We don’t need to stress - the markets will do the talking the minute Burnham tries to implement one of his rehashed Corbyn policies.

I’ve been a higher rate tax payer for almost a couple of decades, as has my husband. Neither of us has ever claimed a single benefit. Still think we should tax the super rich. HTH.

It is if it’s the reason they’re a millionaire and according to a pp they’re not supposed to claim their state pension.

You have an extremely privileged life and it’s offensive for you to imply otherwise.

You do realise that there are people who can’t afford food but don’t own 2 homes, who pay an insane amount in rent and do not have the security that an owned home provides.

They are also going through traumatic events but can’t just up and leave.

They also have DCs with much higher needs than yours but do not have the money or family money to send them to private school.

You are moaning about your sons needs and money but then you chose to have a second child?

You can absolutely ask for advice on here but you are one of the most privileged in this country and you need to recognise that.

Carry on fighting for the EHCP.

Aside from that, your biggest issue is owning 2 homes.

You can either - live in your first home and sell your second home, if the first home won’t sell.

Or if you’ve tried everything else, then you can raffle it off - people pay £10 a ticket and you set a minimum for it to go ahead.
You get the money to pay back the mortgage and someone gets a home for a tiny price.

Of course you are - happy to pay 60-80% tax - sure thing 😉

Let's have some facts!

I think you don't understand what PP means when she says to tax the 'super rich'

It doesn't mean people who earn 200k

Oh dodgy territory there! Facts are very unwelcome in threads like this.

It's insane that people who own their homes outright and have a private pension income in the higher-rate tax band on its own are still eligible for a 12.5K benefit, isn't it?

Why are you unwilling to help yourself then?

And do you think that’s because the problems are insoluble or because this government are unequal to the task?

It would be if it was actually a benefit but it’s not. It’s taxable income. Anyone in the higher rate band will be paying it back anyway.

I’m not the super rich though! Read what I wrote properly.

And the adults are? Farage? Cameron back again?

And finally. Do you see what it is yet?

@ThatSunnyCrow

‘Equalising income tax and CGT is a terrible idea.’

You probably won’t be surprised to find that I disagree with that!

‘Two thirds of total tax take comes from income tax, national insurance, VAT and corporation tax. These are the big levers to pull if you want to increase government income.’

The big levers that the wealthy care not one jot about but put yet more pressure on the middle classes.

‘CGT is currently about 1% of tax take. Equalising with income tax raises this to about 2.5%. It won’t bring in meaningful money.’

I just checked and it is currently 1.6% (according to the IFS), so it would probably go up to closer to 3%. That’s more than we spend on our entire defence, so certainly a significant sum.

‘In the early 90s around 50% or shares in uk listed companies were owned by uk pension funds, Gordon Brown took away their pension tax credit and it’s about 2% today. And we wonder why uk growth is sluggish.’

I don’t know where to start here! It is a different issue anyway but the whole world has globalised a lot since the 90s. I doubt the pension credit was a major factor.

‘Incentivising people to invest and take risks benefits us all in the long run. If you massively increase CGT people will stop investing and hold onto assets rather than sell them.‘

Again, this doesn’t make a lot of sense. Real investors do tend to buy and hold fairly long term. Look at Warren Buffet. I am not sure we want to incentivise punting as opposed to investing.

I also think that the wealthy aren’t taking more risk, they are merely being tax efficient. Look at share buybacks, as opposed to paying dividends. It is exactly the same cash flow, but miraculously suddenly taxed at a much lower rate.

There are so many legal ways at transferring income into CGT without really increasing risk. It is pretty much the basis of private equity (large loan and lots of equity priced at a peppercorn amount).

We could still have ‘founder’ tax breaks and things like that for genuine entrepreneurs who start a business and then sell it, but not for the tax lawyers and spins who are merely creatively minimising tax.

‘But saying tax wealth sounds good on tv/social media hence the reason it’s a popular phrase right now. Anyone with any common sense (or a calculator) knows it’s just a popular sounding phrase.’

It sounds good because is is fair and makes sense! Taxing wealth is leaning into a pro wealth policy that governments have followed for years (QE, Covid subsidies, globalisation etc etc). The U.S is the extreme where their mean wealth looks great but, despite all their economic successes, on all meaningful metrics (life expectancy, infant mortality, median wealth etc) they lag even the poorer members of the EU.

Where I do agree is that wealth tax doesn’t work practically unless we impose it globally, which will never happen.

But a fair property tax (which affects the wealthy, not the already squeezed middle class) and CGT equalisation are a good start.

You are still going to be taxed into oblivion, they are coming for you, and anyone earning more than minimum wage. Luckily you don’t mind giving away your salary, so not an issue for you. Others may take another view.

I don’t particularly dread him. I doubt I will notice much change compared to Starmer or the previous Tories in terms of taxation levels and how much of my money they government helps itself to.

Can I politely suggest life is a little more complex than that. Like many older women my pension is shall we say " fragmented" 2 children, zero support from family, partner shift worker. Bye bye career. Bye bye pension.
Still have a morgage, still working at 70.

More union propaganda being regurgitated.

If you are on benefits it won’t affect you, agreed

This is the problem with emotion based thinking - "they're already rich so why do they deserve a state pension ".

If you means test state pensions all you will do is discourage people from investing in their own private pensions and encourage them to spend the money now.

We don’t agree but thank you for a reasoned reply, rare on here!

My son was my first born. People spoke of terrible 2s etc, I didn't know anything was wrong until after I was pregnant. I had never heard of autistic regression.

Have I lived an otherwise privileged life? How on earth would you know that? Ridiculous assumptions. The purpose of my post is to really to say that the so-called rich aren't necessarily rich. I have parents working minimum wage jobs to try and help fund care for my son. I'm working full time, I'm doing everything I can.

I dont lead a luxury lifestyle. People hear 'second home' or 'private school' and miss the context. You are clearly one of them