New health and social care tax....

[worriedmum20000]

...I can't find a thread about it, have I missed it? Staggered really that anyone earning over £10k will be expected to pay, that someone earning £20k will pay £130 extra yet someone on £100k just £1,130pa which of course and the cap is only £86k yet stamp duty has recently been increased on transactions over £125k

And how the fuck is it that NI on incomes over £50k gets to be a smaller and smaller proportion of your salary

It’s been spun as a positive but it’s the lower paid that bare the brunt of if!

I'm one of those that will benefit - high value property, decent salary etc but it seems so wrong to ask those earning so much less to contribute. Why not at least make the income threshold higher and make up the shortfall with staged payments increasing like tax bands. Crackers.

Here are the sums:
A simple graphic on the BBC today explained the impact of the new social care bill:
How much will I be left with under the government's new (social care) proposal:
starting assets:£100, 000 > left with £20,000
starting assets:£270, 000 > left with £184,000
starting assets:£500, 000 > left with £414,000
(assets primarily being one's home)

And if you add in the travesty that is continuing health care funding, this is hardly a reform of social care.

Many thousands of those who will fall under these new financial rules should simply not be paying anything at all, as they have sufficient health care needs to qualify for funding from the health authority. In the main they do not know this; and everyone conspires to keep it that way.

It’s still not going help people like me. I’m disabled no assets or house or savings. My entire benefits are classed as income. There is no cap on what you pay on your income only assets. I live in my own home mim care in 14 years time I will have paid £86,000 that’s 6k a year I will keep paying that till I die I’m only 40!

Once you have used your savings but have pension of say £400 they will still charge you huge amount as it’s income. So totals will keep on going up and up and up. I presumed someone like me after I had paid £86k (not counting what I have paid last 20y of course) would then get free care.

All money will go into letting richer people keep all assess after £86k meanwhile your career still be on mim wage because “there isn’t any money to pay any extra”. I want see where billions are going into care system and how they can make it a career. I’ve followed snazzy links Facebook about carer in care all still start mim wage.

Then top it off people look at me, look at their increased tax bill and think grrr I’m paying for her have “free care”. Same way Council tax’s have amounts and then single out social care as debt and what’s it costing you. Just remind people what a drain we are. Cheers me up no end!

@2020isnotbehaving

It’s still not going help people like me. I’m disabled no assets or house or savings. My entire benefits are classed as income. There is no cap on what you pay on your income only assets. I live in my own home mim care in 14 years time I will have paid £86,000 that’s 6k a year I will keep paying that till I die I’m only 40!

Once you have used your savings but have pension of say £400 they will still charge you huge amount as it’s income. So totals will keep on going up and up and up. I presumed someone like me after I had paid £86k (not counting what I have paid last 20y of course) would then get free care.

All money will go into letting richer people keep all assess after £86k meanwhile your career still be on mim wage because “there isn’t any money to pay any extra”. I want see where billions are going into care system and how they can make it a career. I’ve followed snazzy links Facebook about carer in care all still start mim wage.

Then top it off people look at me, look at their increased tax bill and think grrr I’m paying for her have “free care”. Same way Council tax’s have amounts and then single out social care as debt and what’s it costing you. Just remind people what a drain we are. Cheers me up no end!

Can you explain your post? Sorry, I just don't get what you are saying. My understanding was that nobody will pay more than £86k so if you reach that threshold in a few years as you've said you will, after that your care will be funded?

I am sorry for your situation.

I meant the cap is on assets not income. So if you go into a care home you pay for it via house plus the home take your pensions and benefits.

When you have home carer on paper it should be “free” I have no savings or assets. But when you get assessed for council funding they look into your income so benefits and pensions. Each council then can take most of that back. My council let me keep £90 week plus mobility part of pip. The rest has go for my care so that’s £6000 a year

All the chat about the cap of £86k applies for big assets or savings. It’s not been made clear that for younger adults in community once they have made that level that it will be free. No one is talking about your income just what level of savings you can leave behind. I will be delighted if in my mid 50s my care becomes free but not read anything to assume it will be.

I work in the system and I’m confused!

Even after the cap is reached is it still going to be means tested like it is now when people are under the ‘threshold’ (£24000)?

Sort of the same point as the person above
I can’t imagine they’re taking away the means tested bit,
Some people have massive private pensions so can be self funding effectively even without huge savings

I think this from the BBC website just answered my question -

“ ■ those with assets of less than £20,000 will not have to pay anything from these towards care fees - although they might have to pay from their income”

So yes, @2020isnotbehaving sounds like they will still ‘take back’ your benefits income as they do now.

And those payments you make won’t count towards the cap. I think that’s the bit some tories rebelled on.

@User2638483

Sort of the same point as the person above I can’t imagine they’re taking away the means tested bit, Some people have massive private pensions so can be self funding effectively even without huge savings

Thanks yes this is exactly what I mean. You could have a disabled 18 y old paying out their entire life. Say live till 75 at £6k a year thats £324,000 in a life time. Probable double that time include inflation.

I can see it being a two tier system so that your income will always have be used as means testing and savings tier.

If you have savings you may be able leave small to massive sum for your kids and just use pensions or benefits. But your main capital will not be touched after the cap.

It not going level up many people and if you are unluckily enough to be disabled no change at to your quality of life at all as can’t keep more of your income. Not that you can save much as soon as have £8000 any benefits will be reduced!

Plus reasons it so unfair now is that Scotland home care is free and wales max you pay is £65 a week. That’s lot extra income and quality of life for people. The green paper on care supposed improve things but seems only very wealthy will gain. Not that with Tories expect much else.

@worriedmum20000

...I can't find a thread about it, have I missed it? Staggered really that anyone earning over £10k will be expected to pay, that someone earning £20k will pay £130 extra yet someone on £100k just £1,130pa which of course and the cap is only £86k yet stamp duty has recently been increased on transactions over £125k

And how the fuck is it that NI on incomes over £50k gets to be a smaller and smaller proportion of your salary

It seems you are confusing a whole bunch of things.

The National Insurance/New Health and Social Care Tax (NI in all but name) which kicks in next year.

The new Social Care bill.

Stamp Duty.

It might be clearer if you break down what your issue is with each of them and what you would propose as a viable alternative.

@2020isnotbehaving

I meant the cap is on assets not income. So if you go into a care home you pay for it via house plus the home take your pensions and benefits.

When you have home carer on paper it should be “free” I have no savings or assets. But when you get assessed for council funding they look into your income so benefits and pensions. Each council then can take most of that back. My council let me keep £90 week plus mobility part of pip. The rest has go for my care so that’s £6000 a year

All the chat about the cap of £86k applies for big assets or savings. It’s not been made clear that for younger adults in community once they have made that level that it will be free. No one is talking about your income just what level of savings you can leave behind. I will be delighted if in my mid 50s my care becomes free but not read anything to assume it will be.

I still don't get what you mean. The £86k is a cap on personal contributions to costs. Yes, the purpose is so that people with assets don't lose them all, and that everyone has the same maximum personal contribution.

But the £86k obviously is paid out of money, over time. From income or from selling assets, that makes no difference. So once you reach that £86k cap - even if you have no assets - you'll pay no more and you'll have more of your income left over for yourself.

@User2638483

I think this from the BBC website just answered my question -

“ ■ those with assets of less than £20,000 will not have to pay anything from these towards care fees - although they might have to pay from their income”

See quote from BBC the “although my pay from income” is what applies now though. I’ve not seen any disability groups raising this a major victory which if it applied to us it would been life changing win

@Mischance

Here are the sums: A simple graphic on the BBC today explained the impact of the new social care bill: How much will I be left with under the government's new (social care) proposal: starting assets:£100, 000 > left with £20,000 starting assets:£270, 000 > left with £184,000 starting assets:£500, 000 > left with £414,000 (assets primarily being one's home)

And if you add in the travesty that is continuing health care funding, this is hardly a reform of social care.

Many thousands of those who will fall under these new financial rules should simply not be paying anything at all, as they have sufficient health care needs to qualify for funding from the health authority. In the main they do not know this; and everyone conspires to keep it that way.

Or, if you look at it the other way around: Starting assets £100k = £80k paid towards care Starting assets £270k = £86k paid towards care Starting assets £500k = £86k paid towards care

Many thousands of those who will fall under these new financial rules should simply not be paying anything at all, as they have sufficient health care needs to qualify for funding from the health authority.
If we want to fund social care that way and not charge costs against people's assets then we will need to raise taxes significantly, a rough example would be the need to lower the tax free allowance to around £5k (still one of the highest in the EU) and put 2-3% on every income tax band.

User2638483
I think this from the BBC website just answered my question -

“ ■ those with assets of less than £20,000 will not have to pay anything from these towards care fees - although they might have to pay from their income”
See quote from BBC the “although my pay from income” is what applies now though. I’ve not seen any disability groups raising this a major victory which if it applied to us it would been life changing win

Yes, they will pay from their own income until they've personally contributed £86k, the same as everyone else, and then nothing further. I still don't understand your point.

I read paper now still unclear but Hopefully after I pay £86k I pay no more but system will still stand as

£100k pays £86k
£250k pays £86k
£500 pays £86k
Has no savings or home lives on benefits, Exists in poverty until pay £86k then able
Use income for daily expenses.

It’s a reform it’s not good enough

But this is a contribution by each individual towards their individual care costs, so it makes sense that they would pay the same no matter what their situation. They are all buying the same service. Someone's care costs aren't somehow more expensive and requiring more personal funding because they happen to live in a house in a more expensive part of the country. I thought the whole idea was to make it fair so that a maximum cap applies to everyone equally so that people can plan for this.

The issue is though it is unfair if you are disabled and can’t work you already live on very low income and can’t improve your situation. You still have pay huge sum of £86k but if you have a million you pay the same. How can that be remotely fair?

I’m not saying it should be free but why can’t I pay half? Or two thirds? Is this only solution at all?

It’s all well saying but but but people need save for old age and have provision but if you are disabled child or adult at no point can you do that. My daily quality life is extremely affect by care fees now, the cap starts in 2y and then another 14y to go. Which point I may be to incapacity appreciate the small things in life’s that money could be sent on now. Don’t accept anyone else understand but you only get one life and one chance live it

Isn't this a bit like private schooling - the kind of care home you get under state funding is suboptimal so if you were loaded you would pay to go to a better one anyway, presumably from your own pocket?

Yes of course I doubt a millionaire would want end up in cheapest council home going. Someone like me has no choice as at all. The difference is though if you need care end of your life day for 2years, even if high cost a week it’s not same paying for it over your whole adult life time. Which is what disabled people have been doing now.

I thought that people in your situation also still get extra funding to supplement the payments though, so you'd only pay towards the personal contributions cap in very small increments?

I agree that it'd be great if we could afford to fund free care for everyone. With an ageing population, sky high inflation and an economy that's 4% small due to Brexit though, it doesn't seem feasible.