National insurance to come down...

If they freeze the income tax threshold again, it makes the NI cut irreverent anyway. The Income tax threshold should go up each year at least in line with inflation
 
SNICKERED said:
BBC expert this AM " the government has to balance the books like a household budget" Jesus wept....!
Wheeling out the Cameron /Osborne trope again.
Click to expand...
That's old school. Thatcher loved that mumsy shtick, partly because it justified her rapacious spending policies, and partly because it gave her the appearance of a human being.
 
CG85 said:
If they freeze the income tax threshold again, it makes the NI cut irreverent anyway. The Income tax threshold should go up each year at least in line with inflation
Click to expand...
I think the tax thresholds are fixed until 2029.
I was thinking of a scenario where people drawing a state pension without any other form of income might actually get pulled into paying income tax!
 
LessoftheLip said:
I think the tax thresholds are fixed until 2029.
I was thinking of a scenario where people drawing a state pension without any other form of income might actually get pulled into paying income tax!
Click to expand...
The new state pension is £10600 so still a bit to go to reach the tax threshold.
 
Not raising the income threshold is really a tax on people with low incomes. It also must cost a lot to administer as collecting it at the bottom margin will affect people who are only working part time, gig working, living off small pensions i.e people say receiving £13k a year. Won't it start affecting those on benefit too.
 
I do hope we all realise what is going on here.
A national insurance cut makes no economic sense whatsoever at this time.

It has one purpose only - to stuff us by putting the next government in a position where they will either have to increase or cut public spending even more.

it is a political decision to hurt those who need public services the most - not your heartland Tory.
 
Laughing said:
I did see something last week that Labour think the tories may get rid of non dom status to fund the ni tax cut. This, essentially just removes that as an income stream for labour, unless Labour want to remove the ni cut.

The answer is a simple one really. Close all tax loopholes and use that for civic funding. The problem is that isn't a quick fix.
Click to expand...
There's other options. Go back to the progressive taxation policies of the late 60's and early 70's perhaps. Lifting the threshold at which you start paying tax.

That will give a boost to those NEEDING to spend, supported by those wealthy enough to afford to help out. They are, after all, the biggest beneficiaries in society.

Central government can perhaps then look at paying to help those in need and not leave it to the local authorities who can then put money back into areas they once could afford. And give local authorities the autonomy to set their own level of taxation, as the more advanced nations do.
 
Corcaigh_the_Cat said:
There's other options. Go back to the progressive taxation policies of the late 60's and early 70's perhaps. Lifting the threshold at which you start paying tax.

That will give a boost to those NEEDING to spend, supported by those wealthy enough to afford to help out. They are, after all, the biggest beneficiaries in society.

Central government can perhaps then look at paying to help those in need and not leave it to the local authorities who can then put money back into areas they once could afford. And give local authorities the autonomy to set their own level of taxation, as the more advanced nations do.
Click to expand...
You are right that a more progressive tax system would work. I don't see Starmer adopting that anytime soon though, despite the fact that I agree with it in principle.

He, Starmer, has been vocal in closing tax loopholes, but leaving the basic structure in place. I don't know enough about tax law to know whether it is fairly straightforward to change the basic structure. I suspect it's quite complex and there is a lot of other things that will take precedence, I imagine.
 
Laughing said:
You are right that a more progressive tax system would work. I don't see Starmer adopting that anytime soon though, despite the fact that I agree with it in principle.

He, Starmer, has been vocal in closing tax loopholes, but leaving the basic structure in place. I don't know enough about tax law to know whether it is fairly straightforward to change the basic structure. I suspect it's quite complex and there is a lot of other things that will take precedence, I imagine.
Click to expand...
The UK tax code is over 10 million words long.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top