Suggestion that over 40s pay slightly higher tax to fund social care

[Bishybarnybee]

This seems to make sense - at least it gives younger people a few years of not having to pay for care while they are getting established. I know many 40 year olds will still be right in the middle of raising children and there's never going to be a good time to find extra tax - but paying for care over the second half of your life seems as good a solution as any.

No surprise that on MN no one wants to pay more tax for better social care. Tax is only good if its other peoples money being hit, am I right

40 yo seems a good age to start it. Personally I think making people sell their house is a better idea. Legalising assisted dying might also help.

Closing tax loopholes, catching tax dodgers, increasing the digital taxes etc can all be done as well, its not an either/or.

There has been a lot of stuff in the Press about a one-off tax to pay for the economic effects of the costs of Covid-19.

Didn't they do that in Australia after the credit crunch?

I think the current 20% basic tax rate is unsustainable and there will have to be a tax rise.

The situation isn't helped by a lot of retail companies only offering 20 hours contracts even there's a need for more hours to be covered so that's two people not paying tax or pension contributions....

Tax is only good if it's other peoples money being hit
Evidently so in your opinion. You seem to think a 40 year old living in deprivation should pay more tax than a wealthy 25 year old.

Tax needs to be based on ability to pay. Which is defined by income and assets and not age.

Don't patronise me OP. My view might not chime with yours but I've watched my DM die in a hospice and currently have a grandparent with dementia existing in a care home, exactly what he didn't want. No I don't want to live beyond the point that I can fend for myself and I'll say it to anyone who asks for my view on adult social care.

So, get younger people used to having a higher level of disposable income, or just making ends meet, then reduce it on their 40th birthday? Sounds like a recipie for disaster.

@ZombieFan

No surprise that on MN no one wants to pay more tax for better social care. Tax is only good if its other peoples money being hit, am I right

40 yo seems a good age to start it. Personally I think making people sell their house is a better idea. Legalising assisted dying might also help.

Closing tax loopholes, catching tax dodgers, increasing the digital taxes etc can all be done as well, its not an either/or.

I'm willing to pay more tax! I said so upthread!

I'm willing to pay more tax on a fair system that uses that tax revenue well. Using age as a measure for what tax you pay is frought with difficulties though, especially as 'the over 40s' are not some homogenous group who earn, provide care, and live equally'.

*SheepandCow: " Tax needs to be based on ability to pay. Which is defined by income and assets and not age:

And who has said this tax wont be based on ability to pay when you are 40? Works in other countries!

Not near 40 but would be over 10 years until I’m affected but no thank you. Even though it is a ‘break’ while I’m young, it is going to hit me hard when I still will be paying 9% of whatever I earn over 19,000 to pay off my loan, have children that I’m still paying childcare costs for and to be honest you look at the current situation. It isn’t exactly going to improve things for the young, it is not putting extra money in their pocket, just not taking more out it. The vast majority of the young are not high rate tax payers, the problems they have are not because they pay too much tax.
Plus with regards to use not paying enough tax- those countries that have higher rate tax also have higher average wages and their education, health and welfare systems are much better. I would pay more if it would make our systems better but without massive tax reform and overhaul of public services we will end up paying more for a mediocre system.

I would say that 40 pluses tend to earn more anyway so already do pay more tax. The tories don’t want to raise taxes for the better off which is what is needed. And when I say better off I mean those earning £40k+, not just the super rich who will just avoid it anyway. We all need to pay for our own pensions and later life care, a lot of people very much have their heads in the sand about this and will have a miserable retirement as a result

I would be happy to pay more tax if it would actually fund a decent social care system. I rent, have young kids and not higher rate payer. Massive student loan debt as I went to uni late 30s.

As we can't trust the government to provide this with the extra tax, I would rather pay into a compulsory social care insurance scheme via my employer as I do with pension and NI.

Germany is not a good comparison.
In Berlin (where I live) childcare and university are so heavily subsidised as to be almost nothing for most people. More people rent than buy and there are great rent control laws and strong tenants rights.

All of this means more income and security for people in their 40s and 50s and so paying higher taxes is more palatable.

No. My household pays too much tax as it is.

Social care is a huge expense for the gov but the financially best option is to incentivise and cultivate a society where families look after their own elderly relatives.
There are a great many countries where this is the norm and there is a societal obligation/expectation to care for them and honestly it works better.
I mean I’m not jumping for joy at the prospect of caring for my elderly parents but there is always the option of either private care homes if you can save/sell their assets and pay for that.

The U.K. is quite selfish and ‘it’s not my problem-why should my earnings/lifestyle be dictated to by caring for them?’ about this but nobody wants to pay extra for their elderly to be cared for and I’ve read many a ‘fuming’ social media post about elderly parents being forced to sell their homes to fund care, from adult kids who obviously had their heart set on inheritance!

Essentially nobody wants to take physical or financial responsibility for the elderly and whilst some element of responsibility does fall on both the government and the relatives they just seem determined to spend their time pointing at each other and shouting ‘this is your problem’.

I know there will be an onslaught of ‘I’m an only child and need to work full time’ or ‘I’m an only child and live in a different country’ BUT I stand by my point, your parents and elderly relatives are not everybody else’s problem anymore than they are yours!

Our NI contributions have crept up in the past few years anyway.

Not keen

Knowing the government, despite promising it would be spent on future care, it would end up going on care for today’s pensioners. Nothing left for those of us in 30 years time.
I agree with this. Totally fed up with the baby boomer generation getting it all on a silver spoon while everyone else does worse.
It was the generation above that, who lived through the war, that had shit pensions that paid for fuck all. Beefed up I timecforvtge baby boomers.
The baby boomers (in general not all of them) had nice final salary pensions, could plan and retire at 55,then live in their big house that they bought for a pittance in the 80s.
Their children will be working til they are 70, no guarantee at all of what their pension funds will be worth, may not own their own homes, and now can pay more tax for the privilege.
Fuck that. Either everyone can pay more tax to fund social care, or noone does. The whole point of tax for public services is everyone shares the cost, not you only pay tax if you use the service.

your parents and elderly relatives are not everybody else’s problem anymore than they are yours!

But what about elderly people with no children? Or what if their children are all the people on here explaining why they couldn't possibly pay more tax at their stage of life? And is it fair that if you're a single child you have to pay the lot while if you're from a big family you spread the cost?

I think I read that 1 in 4 will need long term care. That's quite a lottery. 3 in 4 get off scot free, 1 in 4 gets hammered. I'd much rather see the risk and burden spread across everyone in a planned way.

the financially best option is to incentivise and cultivate a society where families look after their own elderly relatives.
This predominantly would fall to women who are likely to also be working and raising children.
I don't believe people are selfish and won't look after family. I think our capitalist society has made it almost impossible to do so. Nearly everyone works,because its hard to live on a single income and because work outside the home is more socially valued and arguably more rewarding than work in the home. Many people live a long distance from their parents and it's hard to move when there are jobs/houses/children at school in the mix.

I would support a tax, but everyone needs to be paying it. And I'd do a windfall tax on baby boomers property - or when they convert their pension to lump sum.

They should be targeting businesses and individuals who avoid paying the fair amount of tax. That needs to include the self employed book fiddlers (not all I know, but many), celebs and sports stars, big businesses and the super rich first. But they won't.

How about we sort out taxes for the super rich who seem to be able to dodge it.

It again stitches up the generation that have already seen multiple stitch ups. Gen X really are the forgotten generation.

But what alternative? Selling homes to pay causes uproar, taking tax instead, more uproar.

Personally I would like the option to opt out and go the dignitas route like a PP. Thus has always been my view and in no way financially motivated, but I don't see that being an option in the UK in my life time.

The less fortunate 40 and 50 somethings - the low waged, the disabled, those struggling financially after relationship breakdowns, those unable to work full-time because of caring for a disabled child. For these people an inheritance is their only hope of having a permanent home for themselves and their children - as they themselves head towards old age. Council housing is no longer widely available. It's false economy denying them their inheritance. We're looking at huge housing benefit bills for the growing number of older private renters.

Far better to have higher taxes, based on ability to pay. Income and wealth (assets, properly, etc).

I agree with PP. I plan to go to dignitas when the time comes. It's certainly not financially motivated, not least because it's very expensive. Quality of life matters. I don't want an extra few months or years of intolerable pain and loss of dignity. If anyone's interested I recommend looking at the Dignity in Dying website. They campaign for a more compassionate policy for those with terminal or progressive incurable illness.

@Pumpertrumper

Social care is a huge expense for the gov but the financially best option is to incentivise and cultivate a society where families look after their own elderly relatives. There are a great many countries where this is the norm and there is a societal obligation/expectation to care for them and honestly it works better. I mean I’m not jumping for joy at the prospect of caring for my elderly parents but there is always the option of either private care homes if you can save/sell their assets and pay for that.

The U.K. is quite selfish and ‘it’s not my problem-why should my earnings/lifestyle be dictated to by caring for them?’ about this but nobody wants to pay extra for their elderly to be cared for and I’ve read many a ‘fuming’ social media post about elderly parents being forced to sell their homes to fund care, from adult kids who obviously had their heart set on inheritance!

Essentially nobody wants to take physical or financial responsibility for the elderly and whilst some element of responsibility does fall on both the government and the relatives they just seem determined to spend their time pointing at each other and shouting ‘this is your problem’.

I know there will be an onslaught of ‘I’m an only child and need to work full time’ or ‘I’m an only child and live in a different country’ BUT I stand by my point, your parents and elderly relatives are not everybody else’s problem anymore than they are yours!

Well I’m an only child with divorced parents who are both at early and later stages of different dementias. I already have cared for my DF BEFORE he went into residential care so it’s not a matter of either or, even the most patient selfless people cannot physically manage difficult mental decline, when it means aggression, violence and toilet problems (I don’t just mean wetting themselves) on a daily basis, with no let up or support. Caring always falls on women’s shoulders in families. I am now a constant support to my DM. Since my early 30’s just after having children I have been a carer. I can’t work full time anymore, I have no way of saving for my own inevitable decline so will be an even more massive burden on the state when my time comes. Do you think I am hoping for an inheritance - Ha! I’m too busy praying I don’t inherit bad genes. My parents until their illnesses lived pretty carefree existences and I envy that. I expect to be caring for them in many forms until it kills me off. As it’s 1 in 4 that need care a fairer society would help shoulder the burden. But no. Leave it to those unlucky sods whose illnesses aren’t really covered by the NHS.