Post your questions for Rachel Reeves, Chancellor of the Exchequer

[JustineMumsnet]

Hi all,
Next week we’ll be back in Westminster to put your questions to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Rachel Reeves MP.
If there’s something you’d like me to ask her - from the big economic picture to how the cost of living is affecting families (or anything else) - then please post your question below.

As ever, one question per user please, and keep it civil. We’ll be tight on time, so short, focused questions will help us get through as many as possible.

We’ll close the thread early on Sunday evening, so please do get your questions in before then. We’ll be back soon with her responses.

Thanks,
Justine

Dear Rachel,

Mumsnet has seen minister after minister over the years come on to this site and say that they will do something about absent parents (predominantly fathers) who evade paying child support for their children.

For decades now this inadequate system has put a huge burden of the resident parent (predominantly women), and frequently the tax payer. Sanctions are NOT being used against these irresponsible men.

When will the missing billions owed to children be properly addressed?

Thank you.

UPF rubbish don't buy them.

Why are earnings/income taxed at highest ever levels but capital is not?

You say those with broadest shoulders pay more but that is not true.

Why are means tested benefits paid to those who own their home outright and who can have £1m or more of equity yet renters can only have £16k savings?

How is £50k classed as a high earner these days after years of fiscal drag and fact net it’s not much at all, especially with council tax, utility bills and the rest.

Great Q.

Why is the amount Carers in receipt of Carers Allowance are allowed to earn before they lose CA so low? More would like to do more paid work as well as caring which be great for tax receipts.

My children have left this country permanently due to the absolute undermining of small businesses, particularly in hospitality.
The only people thriving in my town are the money launderers and car thieves.
They seem to be carrying on with impunity while people trying to run a pub or a restaurant are being driven out by soaring government imposed costs.
How is this going to help people find jobs?

I assume it is low as you are required to provide 35 hours of care to qualify for CA. Presumably they don't think there's enough hours available to care for someone whilst also holding a full time job. It is indicative of how very little the powers that be understand what unpaid carers actually do. The whole care system is broken. If unpaid carers didn't do what they do, there would be a huge crisis and the impact on the NHS and Social Services would be massive. I wonder if anyone has ever worked it out?

Agreed. Yes limit is £196 a week after tax. Locks a whole section of society into either low earnings or working more with the carer role given zero support.

Working should never be penalised.

Having worked in welfare for over 40 years the system is far too generous. It wasn't unusual to come across families in receipt of huge benefit incomes, the largest was 80k per annum! As staff members on average earnings alot of us were worse off than these families. I was disappointed when 2 child cap lifted as very few families are in genuine hardship and the DHP scheme is there to protect them. Most of these families manage their money poorly and spend it on takeaways and rubbish, not giving their children a better life. The whole system needs a reset.

When will you tackle public pensions? Unaffordable and unfair to third and private sector workers especially for the highest earners.

Chief Executive (unimpressive) at our local Council on more than the Prime Minister. How can running a local authority be worth more than running the whole country? Over £200k and will retire with public subsidised pension and state pension.

Maybe anyone who will get Pensions of £75k or over shouldn’t be entitled to state pension. They don’t need it.

Can you see that a family would need to earn £70,000 to match a family with three children on Benefits, now that the two child cap has been lifted ? 😳

Can things for small busineeses be reviewed? The increase in paye, ni, minimum wage, tax and business rates are killing small businesses.
Its already hard due to rising delivery and stock costs without the above.
3 friends have had to close established businesses this year alone

This 💯

There’s a lot of discussion around ending the Lifetime ISA and replacing it with another product. What is the intention for those who have funds currently in a S&S LISA who already own a home? Can you consider converting it to a regular ISA. Or giving access early, if the intention is not to run this to retirement as originally was the positioning.

You do know this is disinformation that has been thoroughly discredited?😳

Does she understand how the £100k income tax threshold is impacting productivity and what is she going to do about it? I'm an accountant and I see time and again people working less to avoid going over £100k income, seen as the dead zone. The marginal rate of tax is 62% plus pension contributions and potentially the loss of child care. The threshold has been the same for a long time now, it is one of the number of examples of stealth tax increases

How come the Labour government is allowing the NHS to spend hundreds of thousands of pounds of taxpayers’ money on defending its unfair and unjust actions against women such as the Darlington nurses rather than following the law, protecting female single sex spaces and investing the money in staff and services? Do you have plans to put a stop to this egregious waste of public funds?

This too, why are those that work taxed more than those who are well off enough to invest. The tax system has got too complicated and very hard to navigate, speaking as and accountant. I think the system should be rebuilt from the ground up with one tax for all personal tax for income/gains. This eliminates the need for so many thresholds and rates - income tax, nic, dividend tax, interest tax, capital gains tax etc, then you add vat, council tax, fuel duty etc to this too, it is totally bonkers

Why did you bow down to the hatred of Reform and the right wing press about Motabitly? Tax payers absolutely were not paying for “luxury cars”. The BMW I had on the scheme cost a lot less than the Skoda I have now, but no one cares about that.

The addition of VAT on advanced payments, which are already incredibly expensive, is really hurting disabled people. These cars are our life lines. I need, not want, a large SUV type car that has to be automatic so I can get in and out if it easily, and so it has enough room for a hoist for my powerchair. No car has a low AP for this. I have already written to my MP (front bench) and Stephen Timms but neither cares. This is going cause many to become housebound because they simply won’t be able to afford it. Not to mention we’re all on pins about the upcoming Timms review.

We get the country is in a state, and needs fixing, but disabled people didn’t cause it.

I’m not talking about them though I’m talking about people who sit at home CHOOSING not to work not disabled people either I’m talking about the lazy bastards ok. I’m sure Rachel understands this too.

The chancellor is (allegedly) employed to manage the finances of the country,
The Chancellor isn't just there to do the sums; they are part of the Government. All of the Cabinet are jointly responsible for Government decisions so RR is just as culpable as the rest of them in allowing this to continue.
For many years Stonewall convinced many organisations to misinterpret the law and this is how we ended up with rapists in women's prisons, men in women's sports, men taking jobs/prizes/etc designated for women, etc. The FWS case clarified the law. The Govt should be issuing guidelines to correct this - i.e. show people how to properly balance women's and trans' rights - but instead have kicked it into the long grass.
The implication is obvious: that the Labour Party think that women and the Supreme Court can and should be ignored.

not to indulge your weird obsession with people's genitals.
So you don't care about the safeguarding of children or the vulnerable? You don't care about women's rights? Shame on you.

Read the post again, maybe?
It didn't say Treasury-only questions. Any member of the Cabinet is jointly responsible for any/all Govt decisions.

Do you intend to do about care home costs? The current system is grossly unfair, especially for people with dementia who need 24:/7 care but may be otherwise healthy. These people will loose their home and a vast majority of their savings. This is especially painful for those in the middle who stand to to loose their largest percentage of their assets. Why should people loose all they worked for due to a disease they have no control over developing. You also have to consider inheritance. We sadly are living in a time where even a modest inheritance can help people get on the property ladder. Care home charges take away prosperity for future generations too.

yes, and that family would quality for no or very little child benifits if they were in a single income as their salarybis over £70k. How is this fair?

If I was to have a 3rd or 4th child I wouldn't expect my boss to give me a wage rise. So why should I be paying tax to benefit those who chose not to work or work part-time because they receive more in benefits? (Please don't use the term child poverty in your response).

Given that pp’s have already addressed the issues of lack of jobs, ridiculous costs for training (aka student loans), lack of prospects for youngsters and inequality with the number of billionaires, I’d like to focus on nationalisation of utilities, starting with water.

You know this would be popular, many actively desire nationalisation given the scandals, and we all know few other countries were ever stupid enough to privatise their water industry in the first place. Privatisation is well known amongst ordinary citizens as being code for corruption that causes private profit and public debt. There are those, eg Ewen McGoughey who believe it could be done very cheaply as many companies have produced scandals that have already put them in breach of their licence obligations and the amount of debt loaded into the industry with nothing to show for it is phenomenal.

I know the government ‘doesn’t think it’s necessary’ to renationalise. When exactly, or under what conditions, would the thresholds of licence agreements be considered to have been breached by private companies and therefore to renationalise? When will you believe things have got bad enough to consider nationalisation?

You've been in power for nearly two years - can you please list groups of people who are feeling better now apart from benefits claimants and unions? who have more money in their pockets?