Government scraps cap on care costs to help tackle spending ‘black hole’

[FiddlyDiddlyDee]

"The social care plan would have introduced an £86,000 cap on the amount an older or disabled person would have to pay towards their support at home or in care homes from next October.

After spending £86,000 on their care, people with a high level of need would have had their care costs paid for by local authorities."

My take on scrapping this is that it looks like another move that's punitive to the lower middle class. Many of the lower middle will burn through everything they've got in short order and leave nothing to their struggling children that need it.

I think the disconnect is that the top 1% are likely to educate their children privately, use a private GP, have private health insurance, etc. so despite paying vast amounts they take little from public services.

presumably (if that’s true which I doubt) it’s because (in the first case) you got tax relief as it was your only residence and (in the second case) you got entrepreneurs relief. I wouldn’t be adverse to getting rid of either but not so we can pay for care of rich people.

But we’ll pay a lot less tax. We were in Dubai at Easter and our British friends who have relocated there were roaring with laughter about how little tax they pay and adamant they’ll won’t return.

@Teentaxidriver well that was the luck I was referring too but it’s wrong to say no one has achieved a comfortable life through merit.

Thank you for putting that poster is their place. Made up no doubt. Hilariously trying to expose two major tax fiddles.

why would i make it up, am i trying to impress random people?

I got a lot more tax relief than that from dividends and direct pension payments

It’s true that high earners and wealthy people can be better off in places with low taxes (and low rates of public services). I used to live in one and I had a good life (and better health care etc which I had to pay for). But I was young and healthy then - it would be more precarious as I got older.

It’s a choice I suppose depending on what sort of society you want. But not relevant to the discussion that taxpayers should pay for wealthy people’s care.

You keep going on about this wealthy person nonsense.

Here's some maths for you.

I have 200 grand aged 75. and I've just got a dementia diagnosis. I probably am going to have to spend 200k on care for myself.

So as soon as I get the diagnosis, I go and put my 200k on a roulette wheel.

I lose the taxpayer pays for my care, nobody is going to put me on the streets.

I win I get 200 grand to leave to my children

Either way it's a no lose free taxpayer bet.

Alternatively a cap of 86k means the taxpayer is going to save 86k

It's really not difficult to get your head around

Pension payments are restricted to £60,000 per year (previously £40,000). Dividends don’t attract any particular relief but are taxed differently to employment income.

It’s strange to make up things like this on the internet but you do seem to have very little understanding of it which suggests you are. If you’re not, all the more reason the rest of us shouldn’t pay for your care!

That’s fine isn’t it? They’re not saying they’ll be back to live in state funded care home. I have no objection to people emigrating.

So how about a multimillionaire fund manager managing a fund that includes millions for public sector workers. He is amazing at his job and returns are 20% one year, does that have a societal value despite him being paid a seven figure sum annually.

Or is it only road cleaners and toilet cleaners who have value in your (comedy) socialist Utopia.

if I were you, I’d spend some time researching the recent political history of Venezuela. It is an indictment of socialism: a crashed economy, 25% of the population have left the country, etc etc.You only had to have a cursory flick through the weekend papers to know the headline details.

NB you use the term paper wealth. Why? House value is paper wealth - notional until the asset is sold and therefore impossible to tax.

Even people who paid a couple of hundred grand annually in tax?? That is a lot of lost tax revenue.

Dividends do attract relief if you pay yourself 12k a year salary 40k a year (now 60 but my business is sold) pension, 37k dividend and dump the rest of your profits in EIS schemes then sell your company with a 10% ep relief once you've accumilated a huge amount of profit.

No, you didn’t graft for years to establish a business did you? The jealousy shines through you language, besides as has been noted before, you could have written a large cheque to HMRC and not used an EIS.

Socialism isn't a capitalist system which is rebalanced for automation. Do you actually think a fund manager can actually do better than machine these days and has any value? No he's just extracting paper wealth.

Seriously, no brains whatsoever.

Tbf it has to be done. I’m no fan of Labour and would definitely be impacted by the policy but the cost of care is going to get larger and larger. The choice will be to tax current working tax payers on their income which they need because they are working people with mortgages and kids etc or collect it off people when they die when they don’t need it.

Yes I did your own jealousy is shining through. How come you're so angry?

Written a large cheque to HMRC, why would I do that? Who the f doesn't get their tax collected automatically after their accountant's minimised the tax they're due?

Pointless really working hard, building up a pension pot, some modest savings. Don't bother buying a house, especially if you need a care home.
How about redirecting the 8 million quid a day spent on illegal immigrants. That would fill the black hole several times over

The global Covid pandemic that required a global response and led to a huge transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich leads the way in what is possible. (Spoiler - it's always been possible - see labour theory of value).

It highlights that is is also possible to orchestrate a global response that transfers wealth from the already rich to the poor, but hard working, and eradicate child poverty, support the sick and disabled and still have enough room to reward those to that have gone above and beyond regardless of their inherited cultural capital.

So if we have a wealth tax the already rich who want to stay rich and will run away. But who will buy their assets? This is not a tax on income but assets which are are geographically bound - like a house on Cheney walk - you can't register it as a company asset to a Panamanian company. Close off loopholes to the riich.

There are so many ways the rich stay rich and the poor squabble for the crumbs.

No dividends do not attract tax relief in that scenario. And profits of a company are subject to corporation tax on a yearly basis.

oh dear! Back to the drawing board for you.

Didn't answer this eh

tax collected automatically??? How does that happen!

It's another completely unaffordable vote winner policy the last government announced, in a desperate attempt to keep the middle class vote. There's no way it was ever going to happen.

that's a highly tax efficient way to pay yourself, low salary + 20% corp tax + dividend is better than the same in salary against corp tax

just annoyed because im a wealthy person telling you we really not the amazing wealth creators you've been conned into believing

you can setupi direct collection on hmrc business site goes to shipley ffs, don't know much do you