Which taxes should Burnham put up?

[Toohotforwork]

It seems pretty clear that in the Autumn we are in for another massive tax rising budget. Starmer has done of the ground work to show what we need to spend and how there isn't any money, I'm sure the "blackholes" were co-ordinated with the new team for messaging. Labour don't have it in them to cut the welfare bill and to be fair the Tories didn't either - so I can't see that changing.

Which taxes would up increase to fund the country properly?

Personally I'd go the easy route and put 1 or 2p on the basic rate of income tax. It would break the manifesto but one short sharp initiative has got to be better than death by a thousand small increases.

I think the care proposals of getting rid of inheritance tax and replacing it with a 10% charge on everyone is very sensible.

Equalising income tax and capital gains tax seems an easy win as well.

You are comparing apples and oranges there. Being in council housing does not mean, and never has meant, you were paid housing benefit or any other benefit.. A lot of people were moved into council housing following the Second World War due to bombing.

Also saying the cost is paid of does not mean that the cost has no ongoing impact today. Without paying for council housing the money could have been invested in other ways like infrastructure or lower national debt.

We probably need to transition away from the state pension, and just keep ‘pension credits’ for those destitute and feckless as a basic pension income. I believe Australia made such a transition. This would result in individuals actually building up their own pension pot, with some tax incentives. The transition would be complex and lengthy. But ultimately could result in greater fairness, and self reliance. Unfortunately Reeves is planning to smash the salary sacrifice tax incentive in 2029. This will reduce self reliance and independence. But that is what Labour is all about. State control, little choice, big government.

I agree with all that. The proposed changes to private pensions is straight out of their "politics of hate, spite and envy" handbook! And yes to the transitioning away of the state pension - I'd suggest means testing it at a very high level, say £100k of income, and then let inflation (fiscal drag) over 2-3 decades drag more people into losing eligibility for it. Virtually no impact on the vast majority of today's pensioners, nor current workers - it would really only start to impact "average" workers who havn't even joined the workforce yet, so they'd have lots of time to plan for not getting the state pension. Anyone on £100k of income (today) doesn't need the state pension and the tiny number it affects today won't make sad face headlines as they'd get no sympathy from the vast majority who have incomes far less. It's probably the least "painful" and least harmful in terms of bad publicity to deal with the state pension problem - it barely affects anyone today but gives the markets a clear path as to how the country is dealing with the demographic timebomb.

Chart of the day!

I am more than aware people in council housing aren't and never have been paid housing benefit but I was replying to the PP who asked why we now have so many more people taking more than what they put in compared to the 1970s (more "net takers" in their words). Council housing was state subsidised housing, at one point any way, meaning technically, those making use of it would be considered net takers to some. I don't think it's a bad thing that people get the help they need at all - I'm just pointing out that there were a great many people who had a leg up from the state back in the 70s, but because we count things in different ways you have to consider these differences to make a meaningful comparison. And yes, of course the money could have been invested in other things - I think investing in council housing was a solid strategy that had benefits for the entire population, probably more so than these other things although I haven't looked at any sort of cost benefit analysis so it's just going on instinct. Open to considering I might be wrong but that's probably going way off topic.

Good point about social/council housing. It’s not included as a direct/indirect benefit - perhaps because it is a local benefit not a national one - it certainly would help make things more affordable.

www.ons.gov.uk/file?uri=/peoplepopulationandcommunity/personalandhouseholdfinances/incomeandwealth/datasets/theeffectsoftaxesandbenefitsonhouseholdincomefinancialyearending2014/financialyearending2024/etbreferencetablesfye202324final.xlsx