MSE News: Budget 2012 - £3.3 billion tax blow for pensioners

amiehall

SandraScarlett wrote: »

Well I'm a bit sad that after giving you a detailed answer, to the best of my ability, you didn't feel it necessary to thank me!

xx

Sorry it was very much appreciated

Newly_retired

As an over 65 I am not grumbling about this Age related tax business, although it will affect me somewhat.
But it's only a small amount of money compared with the burden on so many other people.
I DO object to the lowering of the 50% rate to 45% for high earners, when the poor and vulnerable are bearing so much pain from the cuts.
If the government got rid of the pensioners' free bus pass or the winter fuel allowance there would be uproar and they would find themselves having to reconsider.
Personally I cannot complain about being a pensioner. I didn't pay enough contributions to get a full state pension, and I only managed to get half the occupational pension that my husband gets but I am well off compared with the struggle of those young people without a job and few/no benefits, or those trying to bring up a family.
When I was young I had free university education, but there was no Child Benefit for the first child, nor any such thing as Tax Credits. Mortgage interest was 15%. Apart form that we had no debts, as we did not live above our means. If we couldn't afford it we didn't buy it. We lived on next to nothing until I was able to go back to work, and in my last 10 years of work I earned a good salary which enabled me to save for retirement.
No, I don't feel any guilt for being a baby boomer. I did not cause this country to be in so much debt.
I would like to see the bankers suffer and the millionaires taking their fair share of the cuts, especially those in the front row of Cabinet Tories.

Ripoff_2

I have read your posts and thought you may need to be aware of this. It appears Osborne was not correct in his budget speech over Age Related allowances. Was this an error or deception or just a LIE? Reminds me of the CPI "Better measure of pensioner inflation" lie to me, they have form on this, they think we are fools.

"Chancellor in Budget speech: "Office of Tax Simplification recently highlighted [ARAs] as a particularly complicated feature of tax system" what the office really said http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/d/ots_review_of_pensioners_tax_060312.pdf

This is what the OTS actually said
4.8 We would stress again that the OTS has not reached any conclusions as to the best wayforward with age-related allowances, nor have we formulated detailed recommendations. However, we know that there is little support for leaving both the structure of the allowances and the way they are administered as they are.
4.9 Our recommendation at this stage is therefore that age-related allowances should be a high priority in the second stage of our review and that we would like to consider ways in which they could be simplified.

Would you TRUST this lot to use a CPI with housing even if the ONS said it's the correct one to use unless it was less than CPI or RPI, if it was more then would they ignore it, I believe they would. They have no morals and from what is being said about the Age Related Allowance which will cost anyone retiring at 65 after 7th April 2013 the sum of £259 per year in lost income (£10,500-£9205=£1295 which is now taxable at 20% gives the £295) which ever way you spin it.

This is worth a read http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/budget/9164107/Budget-2012-How-George-Osborne-fast-forwarded-his-granny-tax.html

also this from Faisal Islam Channel 4 news: http://blogs.channel4.com/faisal-islam-on-economics/osbornes-simple-granny-tax-alibi-gets-complicated/16444

Just discovered there is already an e-petition http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/31767 but they are now discredited after the RPI to CPI so called debate. Mind you can't do any harm signing it I suppose. I also understand Joan Bakewell has opened another e-petition on this.

FATBALLZ

Green_box wrote: »

1. The majority of public sector pensions are contributory.
2. The public sector pays tax too.

molley wrote: »

Thanks Green box for saving me having to reply to that load of misinformation !!!:T

Saying the government obtains its funds from taxing the private sector is misinformation, seriously??? So you think if the government took all the unemployed in the country and gave them public sector jobs digging holes and filling them in again the state would be better off because they'd pay a bit of 'tax' on their state-funded wages? Come on now, this isn't rocket science.

FATBALLZ

SandraScarlett wrote: »

I don't know your age Andy, but I am absolutely positive that you are correct and you'll probably be nearer 80, if and when you get a pension.

But why do you think this is the "fault" of today's pensioners? You make a lot of sweeping statements about the post war generation, but believe me, we're not all living off the fat of the land, and putting 2 fingers up to the rest of society.

As I've said numerous times, I'm not interested in whose 'fault' the current situation is. Maybe it's the fault of the old, maybe it isn't. I'm interested in solutions, not blame. What does anger me is when the old sit there and despite having the facts laid out in front of them completely deny the current situation for what it is - although there are a small minority who do accept the truth.

Whatever went before, things have turned out pretty damn well for the old, and are looking pretty damn !!!!! for the young. The serious generational imbalance is not good for the country, and needs correcting. The old should be expected to use some of their good fortune to support themselves, not expect constant handouts and perks from the government while the young get shafted time and again.

SandraScarlett

FATBALLZ wrote: »

As I've said numerous times, I'm not interested in whose 'fault' the current situation is. Maybe it's the fault of the old, maybe it isn't. I'm interested in solutions, not blame. What does anger me is when the old sit there and despite having the facts laid out in front of them completely deny the current situation for what it is - although there are a small minority who do accept the truth.

Whatever went before, things have turned out pretty damn well for the old, and are looking pretty damn !!!!! for the young. The serious generational imbalance is not good for the country, and needs correcting. The old should be expected to use some of their good fortune to support themselves, not expect constant handouts and perks from the government while the young get shafted time and again.

Unfortunately, as in all age groups, you will find those who expect more and more for doing less and less. Nobody I know in my age group "deny the current situation for what it is". We are all very much aware of the current situation, and know why we're in the poo.

You say we should use some of our good fortune to support ourselves, and that's what we try to do. When we paid 30% tax, and, in 1986 the Bank Rate was 14%, it was damned hard to save anything, but we did. We saved what we could even though the mortgages took huge slices of our wages, due to the high interest rate.

Now, the income we receive is laughable, but we're glad for our children and grandchildren, and all those with a mortgage, because it means they have lower mortgage repayments, due to the interest rates.

I too am interested in solutions, not blame. My mobile phone is 12 years old, doesn't take photos, make cakes, or read emails, but I can receive and make a call, which is all I'm interested in. Lots of younger people with money worries, consider the latest phone a necessity and then complain that they're hard done by.

My pension pot, both state and private is about £7K a year. My savings are modest. DH also has a pension, so together we have too much income and savings for Pension Credit.

Please don't think all pensioners are having a nightly knees-up, quaffing champagne, due to our income, the same way as I accept that not all people who are knocking pensioners are idle layabouts, who think they are entitled to have everything handed to them on a plate. Someone on one of the other threads suggested we have all benefits, including those in kind, removed for pensioners, and us all given a one way ticket to Switzerland.

To think that our taxes went towards educating this charming person.

xx

typistretired

patchwork_cat wrote: »

What have todays' pensioners done that will help us get out of the economic mess we are in? Pensioner's are complaining about not receiving an increase in tax free allowance that will cost them potential pennies. Public sector workers have not had a pay rise for 2 and 3 years, not even a with inflation one. That means they are down more than 10% in real terms of income. Not insignificant. Take the potential pain, the rest of us won't even be able to retire for a good 2 or 3 years later than you in any case, that is ofcourse assuming that you didn't take early retirement in your mid fifties.

GROW UP

Politicians cause the mess because they are stupid! They rely on civil servants like you, and daft advisors because they are not intelligent enough. David Cameron would not survive a week in the real world as a PR Guy.

Eco_Miser

Ripoff wrote: »

... the Age Related Allowance which will cost anyone retiring at 65 after 7th April 2013 the sum of £259 per year in lost income (£10,500-£9205=£1295 which is now taxable at 20% gives the £295) which ever way you spin it.

No. I wouldn't trust this or any other government.
However, not everyone retiring at 65 after 7th April 2013 will lose the sum of £259 per year because of the changes to ARA.
Those poor enough to get less than £9205(outside ISAs) will continue to pay no tax.
Those getting over £28,000 would not have benefitted from ARA anyway, and will pay the same tax, or less because of the accelerated increase of the standard Personal Allowance.
Those getting between £9205 and £10,500 will pay 20% of the excess over £9205, which will be less than £259.

SandraScarlett

Eco_Miser wrote: »

Those getting between £9205 and £10,500 will pay 20% of the excess over £9205, which will be less than £259.

Pardon? The difference is £1,295, and 20% of that is £259 - I don't understand your post.

xx

SandraScarlett

Anyone calculated anything different?

xx