Pensioners losing out due to Osborne budget

teajug

Yes, I agree it is better than it is today, but it is women that will be paying for that as they have put up the retirement age for women. Women that stayed at home in the 60’s, 70’s, 80’ and 90’s to bring up a family and were told by the government that it was not necessary to pay a full NI, just to rely on their husbands NI, they lost out big time.

zygurat789

teajug wrote: »

Yes, I agree it is better than it is today, but it is women that will be paying for that as they have put up the retirement age for women. Women that stayed at home in the 60’s, 70’s, 80’ and 90’s to bring up a family and were told by the government that it was not necessary to pay a full NI, just to rely on their husbands NI, they lost out big time.

It is, however, highly unlikely that women who paid the
"reduced stamp" will not be affected by this because it won't come into effect until they have all retired

Mikeyorks

zygurat789 wrote: »

It wasn't a hugely above indexation rise, it was an increase to compensate for the loss of the 10% tax rate,
.

Not the case. The reduction from 22% to 20% was the miscalculated compensation for the loss of the 10% band. Otherwise there was no rationale in increasing the age related bands disproportionately to the basic PA. There are 'poorer paid' equally on the basic rate.

This 'compensation' argument is something that's been dreamed up. It was never a feature of the rationale when the Budget was presented. The 10% abolition was linked only to the 22% ---> 20% reduction :

........... removing the starting rate and cutting the basic rate of income tax from 22 pence to 20 pence in April 2008, creating a simpler structure of two rates: a 20 pence basic rate and a 40 pence higher rate

The £1180 above indexation of the age bands was solely attributed to the longer term aim of increasing the PA to £10k by this year :

......... increasing the higher personal allowances for those aged 65 or over by £1,180 above indexation in April 2008, removing 580,000 pensioners from paying tax. By April 2011, no pensioner aged 75 or over will pay any tax until their income reaches £10,000;

teajug

The Labour bunch left pensioners trapped in a boat lost and adrift on the high seas, with the Lib/Con you'll be over the side.

How can this be justified when we are all suppose to be in it together

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1371530/Staggering-signing-fee-Lloyds-new-CEO-Antoionia-Horta-Osorio.html

Britanniasbest

No, it's an actual increase in personal tax allowance

Still, good luck with your quest. Had your statements been more factually correct, you'd have probably made a bigger impact.[/QUOTE]

I have spent a good part of the day researching and reading information regarding the Budget and the Deloitte Budget-measures-March-2011.pdf explains them in some detail and has comments, some of which are useful, but not particularly on this subject. This document explains in a little more detail the facts that were omitted from the Chancellor's statement and the governent website.

The Age Related Personal Allowance will increase annually from next year by RPI. The Personal Allowance will be increased by an unstated amount from 2013 but will be uplifted to a minimum of £10,000, in accordance with the Chancellor's statement in last year's budget, but the time frame is unstated. This will soften the blow, somewhat.

I appreciate your input to this forum discussion point, while not necessarily agreeing with all your earlier comments.

catfish50

davetrousers wrote: »

Losing out, not loosing.

This current trend is getting beyond a joke.

Don't you mean currant?

jem16

teajug wrote: »

You obviously got no grandparents.

They would be the oldest living people in the UK if I had.

If you have then I would hate to someone like you to visit with your attitude.

I take it that was a yes then.

jem16

catfish50 wrote: »

Don't you mean currant?

Blackcurrant or redcuarrant?

catfish50

jem16 wrote: »

Blackcurrant or redcuarrant?

Undercurrants.

jem16

catfish50 wrote: »

Undercurrants.

What's an undercurrant?