Can we talk about March 2016 Budget
Discussion
Well if the rumours are anything to go by (and there's a separate thread running on this already) it'll be pensions tax relief.
Options are:
- Removing higher-rate relief, so higher/additional rate taxpayers only get 20% relief on contributions (instead of marginal income tax rate)
- Changing pensions tax relief to a flat rate of either 33% or 28%
- Further lowering the threshold for the withdrawal of the annual contribution allowance (e.g. lowering the £150k staring allowance to £120k, tapering all the way to £0 instead of stopping at £10k)
In particular, it'll ding all the people currently earning in the £100-120k bracket who stick everything over £100k into pension, effectively claiming 60% relief in the process.
Options are:
- Removing higher-rate relief, so higher/additional rate taxpayers only get 20% relief on contributions (instead of marginal income tax rate)
- Changing pensions tax relief to a flat rate of either 33% or 28%
- Further lowering the threshold for the withdrawal of the annual contribution allowance (e.g. lowering the £150k staring allowance to £120k, tapering all the way to £0 instead of stopping at £10k)
In particular, it'll ding all the people currently earning in the £100-120k bracket who stick everything over £100k into pension, effectively claiming 60% relief in the process.
"Remove the 0% Capital Gains tax on principle primary residence - why is it free it's a massive driver of house price inflation."
Great idea given the booming housing industry is the only thing keeping the f
king country afloat! Every other sector is still fked and has been since 2008.
TX.
Great idea given the booming housing industry is the only thing keeping the f
king country afloat! Every other sector is still fked and has been since 2008.TX.
Mr_B said:
Some kinda tax on people who start threads with 'can we talk about...' might raise some serious cash.
. I know what you mean I've been doing this on two threads so far after seeing countless of them ditto "Meanwhile in X" also seems heavily used. And previously to that a "Bo Selecta" phrase was used in some way or another. Unfortunately we know that none of these 'tough decisions' will actually be made, and we'll just get more fudging and fiddling, and carry on getting further into debt. The Tories will carry on blaming Labour, and Labour will carry on blaming Thatcher.
It seems to me that it's not more taxes we need but more taxpayers. How about getting rid of this stupid idea of everyone going to university until they're 25? Offer a limited number of fully funded scholarships for the most academically able to do useful degrees, and get the rest into employment when they're 18. Or even 16.
Reform 'social housing' so it's not a way of keeping people on sink estates miles from useful employment but a way of giving people a leg up if they move for a new job. Reform welfare so it's not a lifestyle choice but a fallback in case of a dire emergency where family can't help. Scrap the notion of the NHS and offer assistance with insurance and medical bills for those who genuinely can't afford it.
Those would be some genuinely tough choices and possibly election losers, but they might actually go some way to putting a hole in the massive budget deficit which I don't see turning into a surplus in the next decade barring some miracle of north sea oil magnitude.
It seems to me that it's not more taxes we need but more taxpayers. How about getting rid of this stupid idea of everyone going to university until they're 25? Offer a limited number of fully funded scholarships for the most academically able to do useful degrees, and get the rest into employment when they're 18. Or even 16.
Reform 'social housing' so it's not a way of keeping people on sink estates miles from useful employment but a way of giving people a leg up if they move for a new job. Reform welfare so it's not a lifestyle choice but a fallback in case of a dire emergency where family can't help. Scrap the notion of the NHS and offer assistance with insurance and medical bills for those who genuinely can't afford it.
Those would be some genuinely tough choices and possibly election losers, but they might actually go some way to putting a hole in the massive budget deficit which I don't see turning into a surplus in the next decade barring some miracle of north sea oil magnitude.
Whatever decisions are made between now and end of parliament if labour won they will have such vast debts most of their ideas would be prosperous. That's the real nub of it as they know that.
Annoyingly reforms George has tried to get through to make his plan work have been blocked so against the settled will of the electorate
Annoyingly reforms George has tried to get through to make his plan work have been blocked so against the settled will of the electorate
Because they pledged not to increase income tax, NI and VAT for the duration of their parliament they are left with fringe increases or clawbacks, affecting a relatively small number of people, often considerably for the individual, but overall not particularly lucrative to the Government.
What they really need to do is be fair and honest; yes I know almost impossible for politicians. They need to hold their hand up and admit the deficit can only seriously addressed by personal tax increases affecting most people.
I like neatness so would have income tax rates of 25% above £12,000pa and 50% above £60,000 pa, NI should be 10% up to £60,000 only. I would get rid of the clawbacks of child benefit and the personal allowance.
I would hasten to add that I have no idea if this would actually bring in more or less for the government. I suspect more, but in a fairer way.
What they really need to do is be fair and honest; yes I know almost impossible for politicians. They need to hold their hand up and admit the deficit can only seriously addressed by personal tax increases affecting most people.
I like neatness so would have income tax rates of 25% above £12,000pa and 50% above £60,000 pa, NI should be 10% up to £60,000 only. I would get rid of the clawbacks of child benefit and the personal allowance.
I would hasten to add that I have no idea if this would actually bring in more or less for the government. I suspect more, but in a fairer way.
rovermorris999 said:
Instead of more tax how about spending less?
This The mass migration of lowly paid workers into this country is at least useful in highlighting that we cannot go on with a system of millions of people working the expected 16 hours a week in low paid jobs (hardworking families in Labour terminology) having their earnings massively subsidised by the state.
How about putting a proper cap on Housing Benefit so that the government is no longer subsidising private landlords renting out houses to HB tenants in the centres of some of our most expensive towns and cities?. Some proper restrictions on child tax credit to stop encouraging people who cant afford them to have more children for the benefits.
Restricting the benefits of new EU migrants looks to be a no goer so how about everyone needing three years residence as an adult before they are entitled to any benefits, with some sort of hostels for those who cant stay with family.
Terminator X said:
Great idea given the booming housing industry is the only thing keeping the fking country afloat! Every other sector is still fked and has been since 2008.
TX.
Selling houses to one another at ever inflated prices only gives the illusion of economic growth rather than the reality. king country afloat! Every other sector is still fked and has been since 2008.TX.
JagLover said:
Terminator X said:
Great idea given the booming housing industry is the only thing keeping the fking country afloat! Every other sector is still fked and has been since 2008.
TX.
Selling houses to one another at ever inflated prices only gives the illusion of economic growth rather than the reality. king country afloat! Every other sector is still fked and has been since 2008.TX.
1. Those downsizing in the area
2. Those with greater than one property so they leverage the growth and clearly do not have to sleep on he streets selling their own pad
3. Moving to a much cheaper location with the objective of never returning. Ie SE to for instance North Wales - you can get mansions with many acres for the prices of bog standard semi detached or heck even terraced houses
If your on the ladder it's utterly meaningless apart from if you want to step up the gap is more so your taking on more debt.
If you don't own it's stupid deposit levels for the young to find which results in some parents feeding in deposits
JagLover said:
This
The mass migration of lowly paid workers into this country is at least useful in highlighting that we cannot go on with a system of millions of people working the expected 16 hours a week in low paid jobs (hardworking families in Labour terminology) having their earnings massively subsidised by the state.
How about putting a proper cap on Housing Benefit so that the government is no longer subsidising private landlords renting out houses to HB tenants in the centres of some of our most expensive towns and cities?. Some proper restrictions on child tax credit to stop encouraging people who cant afford them to have more children for the benefits.
Restricting the benefits of new EU migrants looks to be a no goer so how about everyone needing three years residence as an adult before they are entitled to any benefits, with some sort of hostels for those who cant stay with family.
Well said, please stand for election next time.The mass migration of lowly paid workers into this country is at least useful in highlighting that we cannot go on with a system of millions of people working the expected 16 hours a week in low paid jobs (hardworking families in Labour terminology) having their earnings massively subsidised by the state.
How about putting a proper cap on Housing Benefit so that the government is no longer subsidising private landlords renting out houses to HB tenants in the centres of some of our most expensive towns and cities?. Some proper restrictions on child tax credit to stop encouraging people who cant afford them to have more children for the benefits.
Restricting the benefits of new EU migrants looks to be a no goer so how about everyone needing three years residence as an adult before they are entitled to any benefits, with some sort of hostels for those who cant stay with family.
Terminator X said:
"Remove the 0% Capital Gains tax on principle primary residence - why is it free it's a massive driver of house price inflation."
Great idea given the booming housing industry is the only thing keeping the fking country afloat! Every other sector is still fked and has been since 2008.
TX.
Great, try moving to a similar house in a similar area and you can no longer afford it. The value is already taxed on every transaction.Great idea given the booming housing industry is the only thing keeping the f
king country afloat! Every other sector is still fked and has been since 2008.TX.
House price inflation is caused by a lack of supply.
It's time for a tax on net worth rather than just on income.
As a nation we're £1.5trn in debt yet many times that amount is tied up in wealth of varying types.
An annual 0.5% charge on net wealth would raise billions and yet still be affordable (for 99% of the country they'd pay less than £500 a year).
Would also have the added benefit of releasing some of the £trillions squirreled away by the baby boomers.
As a nation we're £1.5trn in debt yet many times that amount is tied up in wealth of varying types.
An annual 0.5% charge on net wealth would raise billions and yet still be affordable (for 99% of the country they'd pay less than £500 a year).
Would also have the added benefit of releasing some of the £trillions squirreled away by the baby boomers.
oyster said:
It's time for a tax on net worth rather than just on income.
As a nation we're £1.5trn in debt yet many times that amount is tied up in wealth of varying types.
An annual 0.5% charge on net wealth would raise billions and yet still be affordable (for 99% of the country they'd pay less than £500 a year).
Would also have the added benefit of releasing some of the £trillions squirreled away by the baby boomers.
Correct. Asset tax would work on money in banks, Isas and everything but it would also have to include property.its a big issue to deal with though but a 0.2% asset tax would help. Include yachts, cars over £50k and so on.As a nation we're £1.5trn in debt yet many times that amount is tied up in wealth of varying types.
An annual 0.5% charge on net wealth would raise billions and yet still be affordable (for 99% of the country they'd pay less than £500 a year).
Would also have the added benefit of releasing some of the £trillions squirreled away by the baby boomers.
But, again, I'd personally like no tax and no benefits or, ideally very low tax and only minimal benefits for those who simply cannot work.
oyster said:
It's time for a tax on net worth rather than just on income.
As a nation we're £1.5trn in debt yet many times that amount is tied up in wealth of varying types.
An annual 0.5% charge on net wealth would raise billions and yet still be affordable (for 99% of the country they'd pay less than £500 a year).
Would also have the added benefit of releasing some of the £trillions squirreled away by the baby boomers.
Probably not raise much but end up penalizing the prudent who look after themselves. As a nation we're £1.5trn in debt yet many times that amount is tied up in wealth of varying types.
An annual 0.5% charge on net wealth would raise billions and yet still be affordable (for 99% of the country they'd pay less than £500 a year).
Would also have the added benefit of releasing some of the £trillions squirreled away by the baby boomers.
I've got a better idea put VAT on interest for all borrowing except mortgages on primary residences.
oyster said:
It's time for a tax on net worth rather than just on income.
As a nation we're £1.5trn in debt yet many times that amount is tied up in wealth of varying types.
An annual 0.5% charge on net wealth would raise billions and yet still be affordable (for 99% of the country they'd pay less than £500 a year).
Would also have the added benefit of releasing some of the £trillions squirreled away by the baby boomers.
Unless you are excluding a bunch of things, your numbers are way out. As a nation we're £1.5trn in debt yet many times that amount is tied up in wealth of varying types.
An annual 0.5% charge on net wealth would raise billions and yet still be affordable (for 99% of the country they'd pay less than £500 a year).
Would also have the added benefit of releasing some of the £trillions squirreled away by the baby boomers.
Household wealth of 100k, which would equate to your £500pa figure, starts a little above the 30th percentile of the population. So nearly 70% would pay at least £500.
GT03ROB said:
oyster said:
It's time for a tax on net worth rather than just on income.
As a nation we're £1.5trn in debt yet many times that amount is tied up in wealth of varying types.
An annual 0.5% charge on net wealth would raise billions and yet still be affordable (for 99% of the country they'd pay less than £500 a year).
Would also have the added benefit of releasing some of the £trillions squirreled away by the baby boomers.
Probably not raise much but end up penalizing the prudent who look after themselves. As a nation we're £1.5trn in debt yet many times that amount is tied up in wealth of varying types.
An annual 0.5% charge on net wealth would raise billions and yet still be affordable (for 99% of the country they'd pay less than £500 a year).
Would also have the added benefit of releasing some of the £trillions squirreled away by the baby boomers.
I've got a better idea put VAT on interest for all borrowing except mortgages on primary residences.
oyster said:
GT03ROB said:
oyster said:
It's time for a tax on net worth rather than just on income.
As a nation we're £1.5trn in debt yet many times that amount is tied up in wealth of varying types.
An annual 0.5% charge on net wealth would raise billions and yet still be affordable (for 99% of the country they'd pay less than £500 a year).
Would also have the added benefit of releasing some of the £trillions squirreled away by the baby boomers.
Probably not raise much but end up penalizing the prudent who look after themselves. As a nation we're £1.5trn in debt yet many times that amount is tied up in wealth of varying types.
An annual 0.5% charge on net wealth would raise billions and yet still be affordable (for 99% of the country they'd pay less than £500 a year).
Would also have the added benefit of releasing some of the £trillions squirreled away by the baby boomers.
I've got a better idea put VAT on interest for all borrowing except mortgages on primary residences.
I,m missing something here, how is it that the prudent have benefited the least during the past 20 years?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff