Well done George Osborne - stonking budget

[claig]

Tax free Allowance rising to £11000
40% tax threshold rising to £43000
Corporation Tax falling to 19% and then 18%
National Living Wage will reach £9 by 2020, will start at £7.20

If they carry on like this, Labour are finished and poor old UKIP and Farage won't stand a chance of getting a look in. But credit where credit is due - well done Osborne!

This budget will affect the working poor. So fuck off with your free money bollocks.

Crazy idea but how about taking a look at tax evasion and avoidance?

I'm always amazed how these threads, and any where people are genuinely scared for their future, are allowed to stand when people are coming on to have a go at 'freeloaders', who are parents like the gloating, nasty posters.

How can calling poor people 'freeloaders' ever be in the spirit of this site?

Any comment HQ? Why do you allow this to go on?

I'm am so fucking angry that people can get happy about this budget. where is the compassion. Ah yeah its fuck everyone who cant do as well as you.

'Claig
Are you pleased about the raids on Dividends and small Limited Companies?'

Yes I am. I don't think it is fair and I much prefer to see the national living wage take the low paid out of taxation completely. I used to have a Ltd company and pay some salalry as dividends etc. It meant, I paid less than the 40% etc and I don't think it is right.

"BBC stops using personal service companies

Some BBC presenters are facing pay cuts of up to 25% as the broadcaster makes them go onto the payroll after employing them through personal service companies.

BBC is telling some of its most famous faces that they will have to accept a reduced salary in return for staff benefits such as holiday pay and pension contributions, the Telegraph reported.

The corporation was criticised by MPs and the media in 2013 for letting some of its staff to be paid through personal services companies, a legal way to reduce tax."

www.accountingweb.co.uk/article/bbc-stars-go-back-payroll/552744

The country is going through tough times because of the bankers and their mates, so everybody has to help get us out of this, and Osborne has helped the low paid and incentivised work and business which i think is correct and people with private service companies will have to contribute more and I think that is right.

Ken Livingstone had a private service company too. I think it is right to stop this dividend payment mechanism of lowering the tax paid.

blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/andrewgilligan/100149607/ken-livingstone-tax-avoidance-what-has-he-actually-paid/

At what point did IDS punch the air, I didn't see it?

Claig
And you don't mind that those with savings portfolios that pay dividends will get hit too?

And you also do not mind that Offshore LLPs have been left to avoid and evade tax on a massive scale while the poor get hit?

I actually need to look at the offshore LLP stuff later on, bit confused all round!

'Claig
And you don't mind that those with savings portfolios that pay dividends will get hit too?'

No, I think they will have to pay more tax on their dividends. I think in bad times like these, helping the the working poor and restructuring our welfare state to incentivise work is a necessary thing to do. The money has to come from somewhere and everybody is taking a hit in different ways.

From BBC:

"New claimants will see child tax credits and Universal Credit limited to the first two children.
Here is some context: at present about 870,000 families claiming tax credits have three or more children - about one in five families receiving tax credit. However, it will only be those larger families making a claim from April 2017 that will be affected."

What I want to know is, will those of us who transfer to UC from TC be counted as 'new claimants'? Does that mean that we'll all be affected by this, even if we have 3+ children already?

'And you also do not mind that Offshore LLPs have been left to avoid and evade tax on a massive scale while the poor get hit?'

That is always the way. The elite want to attract money into the country so they bend over backwards to make things attractive for the rich. Nothing will ever change that.

For those with dividends from savings portfolios, they will only be hit I think if they get more than 5k of dividends (and if that is the only income I think the also have the normal personal allowance on top of that but not sure), Anything in an ISA or pension still exempt.

I think scrapping the student grant is fair, as long as those who need it can still get it on top of the maximum loan available. I hope in a way that the loan amounts are not going to be raised because university accomodation will just increase to grab it . It is crucifying at the moment already! Yes, Unite, I'm looking at you.

Regards a student paying back £50k in loans, that won't be any different, dd2 going into her third year will pay back over £49k in tuition fees and maintenance fees c. £16k+ pa.

The elite want to attract money into the country so they bend over backwards to make things attractive for the rich.
By making it much easier to keep the money offshore and untaxed

1.144 From April 2016, the government will reduce the level of earnings at which a household’s tax credits and Universal Credit award starts to be withdrawn for every extra pound earned. In tax credits, this point (known as the income threshold) will be reduced from £6,420 to £3,850. The equivalents in Universal Credit (work allowances) will be reduced to £4,764 for those without housing costs, £2,304 for those with housing costs, and removed altogether for non?disabled claimants without children. The government will also increase the rate at which a person’s or household’s tax credit award is reduced as they progress in work, by increasing the taper rate in tax credits from 41% to 48%.
1.145 The Budget will also reform tax credits to make them fairer and more affordable. On top of Child Benefit for every child, an out of work family with 5 children can currently claim over £14,000 a year in tax credits alone. The government believes that those in receipt of tax credits should face the same financial choices about having children as those supporting themselves solely through work. 1.146 The Budget will therefore limit support provided to families through tax credits to 2 children, so that any subsequent children born after April 2017 will not be eligible for further support. An equivalent change will be made in Housing Benefit to ensure consistency between both benefits. This will also apply in Universal Credit to families who make a new claim from April 2017. 1.147 In addition, those starting a family after April 2017 will no longer be eligible for the Family Element in tax credits. The equivalent in Universal Credit, known as the first child premium, will also not be available for new claims after April 2017. In Housing Benefit, the family premium will be withdrawn for new claims from April 2016, to ensure fairness between those who receive Housing Benefit and those who do not. 1.148 Child Benefit will continue to be paid at the same level for all children. The existing entitlement of families who remain in receipt of tax credits and Universal Credit will be unaffected by the reforms to limit support to 2 children and the abolition of the family premium. This will mean that those who already have larger families and have made plans on the basis of the current system will not lose out. The disabled child premia in tax credits and UC will also continue to be paid to all children with a disability. 1.149 These changes will see expenditure on tax credits return to 2007?08 levels in real terms. In 2016?17, 5 in 10 families with children will be supported through tax credits, down from 6 in 10 today and 9 out of 10 in 2010.59 Chart 1.15 compares past and forecast expenditure on tax credits and predecessor benefits as a proportion of GDP, and illustrates the impact of these reforms.

So they've almost halved the threshold, and increasing the taper to 48%.

Wages make no sense

Min wage to rise to £9

Public sector capped to 1%

So what happen to public sector workers who currently earn under £9 per hour? Does the 1% cap not apply to them? Will public sector workers current on £9 per hour see their wages stagnate while their colleagues in lower pay bands end up getting paid the same?

NHS bottom of band 5 is something like £10.50-£11 so are band 4s going to be paid that so band 3s can get paid more? Whats the point in slogging for a degree if you don't get paid more than band 3/4?

No idea, lougle. I guess that's the sort of question they are unlikely to answer with a straight answer. UC is a good idea in theory but scares me. It's quite difficult to get answer about anything.

There are lots of documents saying that you won't lose money but I think there's a lot of small print that means that isn't true for people. And treating you as a new claimant is exactly the sort of thing that might appear in small print.

I've got a feeling I might have to try and claim PiP in order keep my tax credits precisely to avoid that situation put I can't get an exact answer. And I'd rather not because I don't need the extra money and it'll be a long fight I don't have the energy for. After today I might need to do that anyway.

Super sensitive thread to start while people are in bits on another thread as we speak, about losing thousands a year

Holt I mentioned that earlier. I don't get it. I'm at the top of band 2 and on £9.10. So they are essentially saying that from 2020 bottom of band 2 is going to be paid what the top is earning now. More than that if you take band 1 needing to be paid £9 an hour. That's one hell of a pay rise across every single point on every band. Or a complete restructuring of pay...

"By making it much easier to keep the money offshore and untaxed"

I agree it is not good, but no government ever changes that stuff.

'Super sensitive thread to start while people are in bits on another thread as we speak, about losing thousands a year'

So are those of us who think it is a good budget not allowed to discuss it? If you disagree with it being a good budget, you can say so just like many on this thread have done but don't expect everyone to agree.

It just wasn't necessary or sensitive

The tories can fuck right off with their attack on the working poor.