What’s not to like about free money….

DrP, being antagonistic…. 😉

A_A, please elaborate/explain for our benefit.

What about those without children ?

Worth noting how much of the tax collected by PAYE comes from a small number of individuals.
On £50k a year you pay nearly 15k in tax!

Do you think that’s a lot or a little?

you’ve not really grasped how the state is funded have you,

Probably not, i’d thought it was in part by taxation.

or what the tax is/ should be used for.

I rhink i’ve grasped that those might be two different things.

What about those without children ?

They get a raw deal. I can see that.

Why do they get a raw deal? Because they don’t benefit? They will once other people’s children start paying for their retirement – and, all else being equal, they had more disposable income. TBH, I thought this was the point, those with more disposable income should pay more tax.

Worth noting how much of the tax collected by PAYE comes from a small number of individuals.
On £50k a year you pay nearly 15k in tax!

Do you think that’s a lot or a little?

Depends where you sit in the earnings table…

But it does highlight one thing, above the 40% threshold, comparing gross salaries is massively deceptive ( – until you get up towards 6 figure, perhaps?…) 50k sounds a hell of a lot if you are on 30k, but the difference is a lot less than the gross figures suggest – and not just from the net income, but also from loss of access to other state provision etc

….and what about the pacifists/conscientious objectors, those who opt out of the state provision of health or education etc?….when you start adopting the a la carte approaches to all this, it quickly becomes a little silly.

Depends where you sit in the earnings table…

What do you think?

“I think the government should be ensuring that families that earn less and get nothing aren’t subsidising families that get more. As has been pointed out, there are other benefits/breaks that are calculated in that way; why is this different?”

People with less money are not subsidising those with more money – at least in terms taxpayers using PAYE. People on higher salaries are already paying for their own and others child benefits. They are in fact (Correctly IMHO) subsidising low earners.

Anyone paying using PAYE and many small business’s, sole traders are however subsiding organisations that fail to pay reasonable levels of corporate taxation and the super rich who are both avoiding tax to a huge and highly immoral extent.

“you’ve not really grasped how the state is funded have you, or what the tax is/ should be used for.”

I do, but your grasp seems tenuous.

“But it does highlight one thing, above the 40% threshold, comparing gross salaries is massively deceptive ( – until you get up towards 6 figure, perhaps?…) 50k sounds a hell of a lot if you are on 30k, but the difference is a lot less than the gross figures suggest – and not just from the net income, but also from loss of access to other state provision etc”

From my perspective, bang on with statement RKK01.

“Overall, its hitting a fairly small number of people, and being honest, are these people swing voters? has GO got to worry about them deserting the party? I would suggest that people in this financial position have probably got more to lose by Labour getting back in, so perhaps its actually quite a ‘save’ move?”

It hits me and I have never voted Conservative in my life and never will. TBH Labour are not socialist enough.

It is one thing removing a benefit or increasing a tax for the right reason – to improve the situation for society in general and those with very little , it is another to do it because it is opportune as the Conservatives have.

I wonder would Labour reverse this change if/when they get in ? Assuming they do get in, my personal opinion is that much of what they say they oppose now, will largely stay in place, under “the previous Govt have got us into this and our hands are tied and cant afford to reverse it”

Labour have an excellent track record of reversing policies they objected to whilst in opposition. Trident, Rail Privatisation, Union laws etc etc etc.

You are not wrong DruidHbut the same goes for the tories – minimum wage – european Human rights, Social contract etc

Yes good examples – but this is an unravelling of the welfare state on quite a grand scale…I just dont see it returning, as Labour wont be able to afford it (you could argue it hasnt stopped them before…)…In 2015 they stand to inherit a deficit thats behind target, an economy reeling for a third dip and various (mega expensive) large govt projects halfway in place not yet starting make savings…ie universal credit. I just cant see them being able to afford to pay CHB again universally….

@ jamj1974

Have you tried using the “quote” button when quoting other posters?
It makes it a whole lot easier to read

Labour are already saying that they don’t believe in universal benefits. It’s not that they wouldn’t be able to afford a reversal – it’s that they wouldn’t want to.

TBH Labour are not socialist enough.

Yet you’re complaining about removing a benefit from higher earners?

Balls!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20928007

Personally I would stop CB and find better ways to fund folks who need it, be it taxation or other benefits. Something not to expensive to administer as well.

It would stop all the ‘wealthy elite’ (tm by TJ;-)) spending it on safari’s and ski holidays:

Boris

Balls!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20928007

Posted 18 minutes ago #Report-Post

He is a creepy creepy man

It hits me and I have never voted Conservative in my life and never will. TBH Labour are not socialist enough.

So, not a swing voter then, perfect, no problem for GO as he’s not losing your vote is he! Sorry, that’s Realpolitik

It is one thing removing a benefit or increasing a tax for the right reason – to improve the situation for society in general and those with very little , it is another to do it because it is opportune as the Conservatives have.

Like Labour leaving the 50p tax rate to come into power after they left office, knowing it would not raise any money but allowed them to harp on about ‘tax cuts for the richest’?

Fact remains, there is no good reason whatsoever that anyone with an income in the top echelon needs handouts from the state.

Is it fair that some still get it? No – but thats not a reason to continue paying it, its a reason to find a way to stop it going to them as well.

“Fact remains, there is no good reason whatsoever that anyone with an income in the top echelon needs handouts from the state.
Is it fair that some still get it? No – but thats not a reason to continue paying it, its a reason to find a way to stop it going to them as well.”

That’s where we disagree – they pay tax to pay for the benefits of others and receive a small tax rebate compared to significant tax paid in the form of a universal benefit. The universal benefit adds fairness to the taxation system.

It would stop all the ‘wealthy elite’ (tm by TJ;-)) spending it on safari’s and ski holidays

Yeah but TJ’s wealthy elite included rather more people than can afford treats like those.

Fact remains, there is no good reason whatsoever that anyone with an income in the top echelon needs handouts from the state.

Keeping TJ’s memory alive!

“So, not a swing voter then, perfect, no problem for GO as he’s not losing your vote is he! Sorry, that’s Realpolitik”

Bang on with that one.

That’s where we disagree – they pay tax to pay for the benefits of others and receive a small tax rebate

If you’ve got money to spare, how about just not charging the tax in the first place, rather than taking it off you and giving it back?

Personally, I’d rather see either:

i) money concentrated on those who need it
ii) lower taxes for all

Slightly OT but I hate this triple dip nonesense. Look at the graph, it is nothing of the sort it is merely flat lining with slight micro variation of a fraction of a percent.

So a couple who decides that the Mum stays at home to look after the her 4 kids, and the Dad does fall into those affected but only just goes onto have what equates to around a 9% cut to household income.

Yet a couple that choose to both go to work and put childcare in the hands of others could earn up to £99k is hardly fair. Sure the only a few families are affected, but those that are it has the potential to hit them hard.

Maybe levy for 10% cut to the PM’s pay – how quickly would he agree to that?

Hi Jota – never been successful using quote button on iPhone. Do you know if it can work with iOS?

And the other thing i hate is I’m now forced to do self assessment along with many others. What a royal PITA. For a person on PAYE this is sheer lunacy.

What a royal PITA. For a person on PAYE this is sheer lunacy.

Sigh, no it’s not. There are many reasons why, as a higher rate tax payer, doing a self assessment is a good thing. If you have a private pension or make charity donations using gift aid then you can claim the additional correct tax, you can also ensure that your savings are taxed at the correct rate.

I’m PAYE and been doing a tax return for years and it is a pretty good thing as far as I’m concnerned. I even got a huge rebate last year as a consequence. Granted I’d have preferred that the tax be correct in the first place but this is the next best thing.

Contrary to what you might expect from a government website, the online form is actually pretty good and doesn’t take long to fill in, especially if your only source of income is PAYE.

I thought you only had to do PAYE if you took the benefit rather than just stopped claiming it

is that incorrect?

never been successful using quote button on iPhone. Do you know if it can work with iOS?

it works OK from my iPad, no idea about an iPhone though.

Ok, well may be it is not so bad. Still not looking forward to it. Cheers for the information though.

you can also just type

and then again with bracket/quote]

bracket missed or it will quote

Contrary to what you might expect from a government website, the online form is actually pretty good and doesn’t take long to fill in, especially if your only source of income is PAYE.

+1

I’ve been doing self assessment for years and once you’ve gathered all the information, it takes 15 minutes max for PAYE & Property sections.

It really is very easy – just make sure you register in enough time because the password has to come through the mail – or at least it used to do.

So this information you have to collect, do they take your word or do you have to provide evidence? For example, interest earned on bank accounts and donating to charities. I sense a whole other thread closer to the time.

Well you can lie if you want but they do investigate some people and then you have to supply proof. Fail and you die. Possibly.

I discovered when I phoned to ensure I was being allowed for the 40% on my pension contributions, HMRC could see exactly how much tax on the interest my banks were paying them.

Watch out.

I wasn’t suggesting I’d falsify but wondered how onerous the process was. As it happens, i bet my interest earned is less than a whole pound.