Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
News
Original poster

Gordon Brown faces rebellion over axeing of 10p tax band

26 replies

fembear · 07/04/2008 11:47

Link here.
Irrespective of what one thinks of the financial aspects of this decision, I think that the main story here is the Labour party MPs' "rebellion". I agree with the comment,

"I am just amazed that the MPs (and the press) are such slow readers.
This change was announced - along with even more punitive changes to National Insurance - a twelvemonth ago. And yet it's only now that the dunces have caught up. What do they do for their money in the few days that they attend Parliament , apart from vote therough unworkable laws, give each other pay rises and increase the size of their pork laden trough.
Enough - away with them now!"

Are they
(1) so incredibly stupid that they did not understand the implications of the Budget when they voted to pass it, or
(2) making a pretend fuss now, to curry favour with the electorate (please tell me that you intelligent MNers are not going to fall for this!), safe in the knowledge that it won't make the slightest difference since it all came into effect yesterday and cannot be undone at this late stage?

OP posts:
evenhope · 07/04/2008 12:03

TBH I wondered why there wasn't more fuss when it was announced. Joe Public seemed to latch on to the "reducing the basic rate by 2p" and completely missed the bit about abolishing the 10p rate.

To answer your question, (b)

Remotew · 07/04/2008 12:12

(2)

I read that it will adversly affect people earning less than £18,500 per annum and only if they dont have children. How does the dont have children bit work? Are parents getting an increase in benefits?

Will have a good look at my next payslip.

Miggsie · 07/04/2008 12:14

...early retired people particularly women are the hardest hit as they don't get the over 65 increased allowances

Manictigger · 07/04/2008 12:55

abouteve - I assume that people with children will be able to claim more Child Tax Credit to make up for the loss of income (I think you can claim this if your income is below about £58 000 - but don't get me started on the whole fairness of the CTC system....)

Oh and I agree (2)

evenhope · 07/04/2008 13:20

Well I've just done a quick calc and taking into account the personal allowance has gone up a little bit someone on £12k a year will pay £90 more tax this year; someone on £20k will pay £69 less this year; and someone on £30k will pay £277 less this year.

So much for a labour govt then when the very lowest paid pay more tax so that the higher paid pay less. I will pay less but I can see that is blatantly unfair.

Don't believe for one second that the CTC will make it up. The "family" rate of £545 hasn't increased since it was brought in and this year sees the rate they take away increase from 37% to 39%. (Basically they work out how much you would be entitled to, take off a "disregard" amount of £6420 and then any income you get above that amount reduces the amount you are due by 39p for every £1 you earn).

Upwind · 07/04/2008 13:32

(2)

Labour are making more people dependent on their WTC and CTC handouts.

Why have they not been pressured to increase the tax free allowance?

minster · 07/04/2008 13:34

My PIL (77 & 62 - still working because they can't afford to retire) on a combined income of £10,000 are significantly worse of as a result of this.

It's an absolute scandal - go Labour! Tax the poorest more

ZoeC · 07/04/2008 13:37

I have just checked, I am on just under £7K and I will be a touch over £100 worse off with tax this year. Nice.

contentiouscat · 07/04/2008 13:41

So basically they are taking more money that people have genuinely earned out of their pay packets and replacing it with tax credits. How is that going to encourage people at the lower pay scales to work rather than just sit at home and claim benefits.

tiredemma · 07/04/2008 13:56

And there I was thinking that Labour was the party for the 'working class'.....

TwoIfBySea · 07/04/2008 14:27

Who was it who was asking if the UK was better under Labour?

Typical the way New Labour act though, stick the boot into the very poor while bleating on about how many people they want to get back into these low paid jobs. All the time they themselves are doing fine thank you very much with their nose-in-the-trough expenses.

More fuss should have been kicked up about it last year, it is a bit late now it has gone through and these so called "rebels" know that. They should be ashamed, totally ashamed as they have failed the people they are "supposed" to represent (yeah, like that was ever going to happen.)

This lot are, and always have been, Maggie's successors in every single way.

contentiouscat · 07/04/2008 14:52

TwoIfBySea I agree its really not doing anything to make pay at the bottom end of the scale any easier to live on and to say they will make it up with FTC after saying they want to get more people off of benefits is ridiculous.

Personally I would rather pay LESS tax and not need the FTC at least I feel I have earnt it...OK so I know I earn it they take the tax then they give it back to me as FTC but what REALLY is the POINT in that?

Upwind · 07/04/2008 15:03

conentiouscat - the point of it is that it allows beaurocrats to justify their existence and the Sir Humphreys of this world can build bigger empires than ever

It makes people feel dependent on Labour's largesse so they are more likely to vote for them.

Bouncingturtle · 07/04/2008 15:07

The problem is as well, that many people don't claim the tax credits they're entitled to, because the application process is daunting or they are just not clued up enough to find out whether they can claim - i.e. not enough info about it.
Is it just me or does anyone else find the adverts with the jingly music for TCs telling you if your circumstances change you must inform them really annoying, especially they way they emphasise you may be claiming more than you entitled to?? Perhaps they should be stressing what entitlements you could miss out on rather than focusing on overpayments.

Cappuccino · 07/04/2008 15:09

I'm not sure how it does help with tax credits

I am worse off because of the 10p tax; but my earnings aren't the only ones taken into account as dh earns more than I do

I can't say it has made any difference to my tax credits on the predictions they are giving me for next year

ScienceTeacher · 07/04/2008 15:16

Are we assuming that every single year, things should get better for low earners, and we should continue to squeeze the higher earners?

Surely every once in a while we should correct the status quo?

The CTC is absolutely rubbish in that it does not take into account your family size when applying cut-offs. It makes you wonder if the government are bothered about nurturing future leaders of the nation. As soon as we can get rid of this hopeless and reactionary government, the better.

madamez · 07/04/2008 15:21

Science Teacher, what on earth are you talking about? 'Correct the status quo' = do you mean that it would be a good thing once in a while to penalise the poor for the benefit of the rich?

I have noticed you on other threads proclaiming yourself a Christian - aren't Christians supposed to condemn the rich and bless the poor? or is there not time in between having hysterics at the prospect of other people enjoying sex?

Upwind · 07/04/2008 15:23

ScienceTeacher - Are you assuming that every single year things should get worse for low earners, as their tax free allowance gets diminshed through inflation? And council tax and transport increases have a disproportionate effect?

Agree re. CTC and hopeless and reactionary govt. Just not sure were decent replacements could be found.

Islamum · 07/04/2008 15:24

Eveery year since 1979 the richest have got richer and the poor poorer - Labour feel that the wc, left wing vote is a given, and so court the richer right of centre electorate because all they are interested in is power, not principle. I never thought I'd vote tory..

ScienceTeacher · 07/04/2008 15:35

There is only so much pip squeaking that a government can do, and I think we have reached that point.

What message does it give to our young people about working and improving their lives if they end up with less than those who do not contribute to the public coffers.

It can't always be a one way street. You need to have a critical mass of wealth cretors to keep everything running.

It woud be a differnt story if the government could provide decent public services - like schools - but they are failing in even the most basic provisions.

Remotew · 07/04/2008 15:59

Its penalising low income earners, not people who dont work and contribute.

Islamum · 07/04/2008 16:26

Scienceteacher surely yhe real prob is that people are better off on benefits than on a low income and this only makes the problem worse. The tax system should take more from those who can better afford it. Also there are lots of good schools (i'm a teacher) The amount of money going to GPs and consultants is crazy but thats a whole different thread...

madamez · 07/04/2008 19:48

Scienceteacher: given the huge bonuses paid to directors who have wrecked their companies and cost other people their jobs or pensions, I think there is a long way to go before the rich are excessively penalised.
Also, as abouteve points out: perhaps you have missed the point, abolishing the 10p tax level penalises people who are in work (albeit badly paid work).

Christywhisty · 07/04/2008 22:38

I work with 2 ladies who will lose out. One is a widow of 69 who still works full time as she can't afford to retire.

The other one is a married lady of 71 who works a couple of days a week so she can afford some extra treats.
I only work part time but because I have children hopefully i won't be affected.

Cappuccino · 08/04/2008 00:05

"What message does it give to our young people about working and improving their lives if they end up with less than those who do not contribute to the public coffers."

way to support part-time workers, most of which are women, and probably parents, ScienceTeacher

thanks for that