The budget 2014

[VikkiMumsnet]

George Osborne is all set to deliver this year's budget on Wednesday 19th March.

Here's a useful link for what's expected to be covered. Headline issues are likely to include property tax and stamp duty, as well as an increase in the personal tax allowance (up to £10,000).

What do you want to see as part of the budget, and what are you dreading coming up? Share your thoughts below.

Oh gosh silly me, of course rich people keep the economy alive by need staff to serve them in restaurants (that cost more than my food budget per year) and by paying domestic help to clean their collection of houses...

Never mind the poor people who get squeezed and squeezed again after all they only buy things like food and school uniform, they only scrabble together rent month after month and pay more per piece because they can never afford the upfront cost of bulk buying

Herrena. By taking Money off Rich People ,and the Government "Burning" it ,does not help the people you talk about.

All of the measures I've suggested are cost neutral

most of those by other people are NOT

if you are going to give with one hand you have to take with the other
OR
you are adding to the debt that your children will have to pay

there is no free lunch

the US government is currently borrowing from the taxes of my grandchildren (my kids are still at school)

but X can only eat one meal at dinner, need one mattress, need one driver, drive one car at a time etc. if x's millions were distrubted across 20 Ps instead that would be 20 meals, mattresses, cars, cleaners etc.

the reality is a million in one persons pocket is worth a lot less to the economy that 100k in ten pockets.

My fear is that we are all falling for the divide and conquer tactics that pretty much all politicians seem to be employing. By encouraging us to fight amongst ourselves over whether it's right to add 5% tax to a small group of easily targeted people or another tax because you have a big house (the sum amount of which will not solve any of the country's biggest problems) then it distracts from the real issue that none of the political parties seem to have a coherent vision of what is best for the future of country and how we should get there.

I think some of the suggestions raised so far are excellent, but the overriding theme seems to be that most people want to see more effective economic policies as long as it's someone else paying for it.

the top 10% already pay over 40% of tax
the bottom 30% pay no tax
how wide and soft and fluffy should the safety net be?

I have a HUGE issue with unemployed people having a financial bonus to having a kid each 4 years
something the employed would never consider (even my uber rich friends)

TalkinPeace do your numbers refer to income tax or does all the other tax (VAT, excise, road, fuek come into it too). Because everyone pays tax - and given that other taxes are regressive I.e. not based on earnings I think the total contribution is more evenly split than you think.

TIP you're missing the point the real question is how little should the super rich be allowed to get away with paying that bottom thirty per cent? that's the reason they don't pay tax - because their wages are so low as to not be able to.

the top ten per cent also take a vastly disproportionate percentage of the profit so it's hardly surprising they also pay more tax. if they want to pay less tax spread that profit around.

thegreathunt / honeybadger
you both need to do a LOT more reading about how "developed societies" are funded

the bottom 25 % pay nothing but get free schools, cheap houses, free health, cheap transport
where does that money come from?

So do you. The bottom 25% buy food, drive, use petrol. Therefore they pay taxes. To say they pay nothing demonstrates your naivety!! As for cheso housing

VAT in NO way covers the cost of schooling, the NHS, road tax, social services and state pensions

the vast bulk of UK taxes are distributavie : ie they take from the rich and give to the poor

the BIGGEST social security cost is pensions : it utterly dwarfs ALL unemployment benefits

but pensioners vote
so the "triple lock" is in place

Vat is the third biggest source of tax after NI and income tax. Yes most taxes are progressive, the more you earn the more you pay. But if you factor in VAT then it isn't so clear cut.

As a proportion of income, VAT hits the poorest the hardest so if you take all income vs all tax paid it is probably about equal in percentage terms.

The rich benefit from free schooling if they choose to use it, the NHS (you don't get private health care if you are hit by a car!) and I'm sure they use the roads.

I doubt very much that anyone in this country pays no tax at all. All but the most basic food stuffs are taxed.

I also think the straw man of benefit scroungers is blown far out of proportion. Benefit fraud consists if only 2% of all benefit claims.

Personally I feel that if some small minority of people are selfish enough to have a child every four years to keep on benefits then thank goodness we live in a society that will ensure those poor kids are fed.

I think there is a middle ground.

I think well off people who have worked and earned their money deserve to be taxed differently to people whose ancestors shot people and clung on to the assets they seized.
Yes this is idealistic and impractical but I still wish it were true.

I think child benefit should become universal again because no matter your circumstances if need be you can feed your kid on it

I think big corporations should be paying big taxes and small business should get plenty of support with things like long term sick and maternity leave.

I think early years intervention is paramount to creating a future I want to live in

I think not enough is invested in our up and coming teens and that it's unsurprising they become disillusioned. Funding should be made available for projects in schools that encourage young adults to design and see to fruition facilities in their area so that they can create a world they want to live in.

I read this morning that they'll be pushing through this change to the nursery voucher scheme.

If we have to change jobs at all (the rules state you can stay in your current scheme unless you leave your company) This will leave us £600 per year worse off as we currently both take the maximum amount of vouchers saving around £1800 per year in tax and NI. We've deliberately waited to have another child until DD is more or less out of full time childcare, but it now looks like we'll be penalised for that.

And anyway, a £6000 average childcare bill?! That's total fiction if you work full time. Ours is almost double that for one child.

i think you miss the point that even if low earners don't pay tax they still contribute their labour to making billion profits for those further up the food chain.

they don't need to cover the cost of their schooling and the nhs etc because the same profiteers to whom tehy're giving their cheap labour are benefiting from their education and their healthcare etc.

labour IS a contribution. tescos can't make billions of profit without minimum wage workers. just because they're paid so little they can't directly pay tax from their earnings does not mean that they aren't contributing massively to productivity and income generation and the salaries and profits of those further up the food chain.

we don't educate the poor for their sake you know - we do it so that we can use them to make money.

the bottom end workers are the ones MAKING the money, literally, doing the work and producing. just because they are only given a miniscule fraction of that money doesn't mean they're not making it! they're just making it for someone else.

and on the vat front given low paid workers spend every penny they get they will be paying taxes via VAT on a much higher proportion of their income than wealthier people who are saving, only spending a certain percentage of earnings etc. plus 100% of their income goes back into the economy. not to mention they'll be renting their houses and paying other people's mortgages in the process and supporting the rental industry. income tax is not the only way people contribute.

think about how much income tax is generated from one person earning 100k. it would be really interesting to trace that 100k and see how much of it goes into tax free isas, overseas investments, etc and how much goes back into the economy.

it would then be good to do the same with 10 x 10k incomes. no income tax paid but where does that money go? how much vat is generated, how much goes into the pockets of landlords who then pay tax on their rental income, how much goes into local business that then pays tax etc.

i don't have the info to be able to do this but i'm convinced it would turn out that the ten times 10k generates a whole lot more tax and GDP than the 1 x 100k.

HoneyDragon you raise inconvenient truths. If you stripped out low paid workers then the overpaid executives wouldn't be quite so wealthy.

Benefit fraud consists if only 2% of all benefit claims.

This figure is always quoted. There's a difference between detected and undetected fraud. The figure could obviously be much higher and likely is.

I'd happily see inheritance tax increased - and I say that as someone who is likely to benefit from a modest inheritance. When we have equality of opportunity (or move as close to it as we possibly can) by having decent education for all, I'll be intensley relaxed about disparities in wealth/income.

with regards to the pension (which somebody mentioned upthread). Most pensioners would have paid in, so it's a little disingenious to "lump it in" with other benefits.

I'd happily see the State Pension scrapped; however, you'd have to reform the pensions industry and scrap N.I. I can't see that happening anytime soon.

Actually Contrarian DWP do a lot of work on fraud assessment levels so the figure is pretty accurate.

And out of work benefits account for a small fraction. Most benefits are for pensioners or people that do have jobs. Hardly scroungers.

Hold tight, my assertion that there is a difference between detected and undetected fraud still stands. They can detect a certain amount and extrapolate, but that's about it.

I never once used the word scroungers. Take the chip off your shoulder and engage in the debate!

Agree with TalkinPeace's very sensible suggestions:

"merge ni into tax all on a cumulative basis
esp class 2 and class 4

add another 10 bands to the top of council tax
abolish ALL council tax discounts on band F or above properties

abolish non dom status

force LLPs to have uk taxpayers as their beneficial owners

make stamp duty stepped rather than cliff edge

align investment and earnings income tax rates"

Many of these have the effect of making the rich play more & making things fairer, without the headline-grabbing easily-dodged tactics like putting the HRT up to 50%.

"Inheritance" Tax is the most amoral and unfair tax.

Why Can't people Leave their Tax Paid Money, Assets to who they like without being "Double Taxed" ?

The people who will get punished by Inheritance Tax will be people like the Local Business man/women who works 30 years,to build up a successful business . Because they have net assets of £2 million built up after paying vast tax ( Never Claiming a penny from the state) Why should the beneficiaries of the Estate pay 40% On anything over £350 Single £700k Double.

The idea of stopping people from getting a "State Pension" "Because they are Wealthy" is appalling . If some one pays N.I for 40- 50 years the least you should expect is a "pension" regardless of "Wealth".

What I am talking about does not effect me Personally , I just don't get the "Envy" in peoples ideas.

The Serious Rich do not have any "Fear" of IHT , because provision has been made to avoid the tax. The people who will get caught will be the Family of said Businessman/woman up thread.

Yes DWP do work to assess the fraud levels including undetected fraud. You made the assertion that undetected fraud is probably higher. Based on what?! Nothing but your own chip.