Restoration of the age related allowance

chris_m

teajug wrote: »

I do not understand this as I pay tax on my small income and it is no where like 30K it is more like 13K where am I going wrong.

You will pay tax since your income is over the tax-free allowance threshold - £8105 for under-65s, £10,500 for 65-74 year olds, £10660 for 75 and over. You will pay tax on the part of your income that is above whichever is your threshold.

The £30K is the point at which everyone has a tax allowance of £8105, irrespective of age.
It's actually a sliding scale for pensioners with incomes between £24K and £29K, those on £24K will lose a little of the age-related allowance above £8105, those on £26.5K will, presumably lose half of it, those on £29K+ will lose all of it.

margaretclare

chris_m wrote: »

You will pay tax since your income is over the tax-free allowance threshold - £8105 for under-65s, £10,500 for 65-74 year olds, £10660 for 75 and over. You will pay tax on the part of your income that is above whichever is your threshold.

The £30K is the point at which everyone has a tax allowance of £8105, irrespective of age.
It's actually a sliding scale for pensioners with incomes between £24K and £29K, those on £24K will lose a little of the age-related allowance above £8105, those on £26.5K will, presumably lose half of it, those on £29K+ will lose all of it.

Ooops! But if there are 2 of you, each with own pension provision, you could have up to £29K each and not fall into this trap.

teajug

hugheskevi wrote: »

Universal benefits cost very little to administer, means-tested benefits cost a lot more - unless you want to cut corners as has been done for the means-testing of Child Benefit, then you create a whole lot more issues about fairness.

There are so few pensioners with an income over £50,000 that means-testing it at that level would create administrative expenses that would eat up most of the savings from not paying it.

That is a significant consideration at a time when all Govt. Depts. are cutting back staff - either Depts have to reallocate resources, or negotiate extra from Treasury, incurring a whole new set of negotiating costs

Surely with the current tax system they should know what peoples income is, just like the child benefits how are they doing that, or how is the government cutting corners with child benefits.

margaretclare wrote: »

Ooops! But if there are 2 of you, each with own pension provision, you could have up to £29K each and not fall into this trap.

Two people lives nearly as cheaply as one, one person living alone pays 75% of their council tax, not 50%. It cost the same to heat one home whether there is 1,2 or more living in it. Even if one person is able to afford to go for a holiday, they have to pay a supplement, so unfair.

Rupert_Bear wrote: »

I have a bus pass because it does not cost anything to issue and I never used it because i have a car, byke and legs. I will continue to take the fuel allowance and it does not go towards somones Christmas presents but keeps us in coal for the winter.

I am talking about retired pensions with a large income such as TV personalities or MP’s and lots more not retired pensioners with a low modest income.

hugheskevi

Surely with the current tax system they should know what peoples income is, just like the child benefits how are they doing that, or how is the government cutting corners with child benefits.

At the individual level income is known and easily available (although only if they pay income tax - many pensioners are below that level, but not relevant in this case) albeit on a rather dated basis (all data in about a year after the end of the tax year, following Self Assessment deadlines).

But there is no particular reason to know household income at the higher end of incomes - if a household doesn't receive Tax Credits, or other household based means-tested benefits. Of course, records can be matched, or created, but that is all administrative expense.

Corners were cut on the child benefit means-test by means-testing at the individual level rather than household level.

zygurat789

margaretclare wrote: »

Re mince: just been to the local monthly farmers' market and bought a pound of best steak mince for £2.96. Lots of older people there. It's convenient for them, they don't have to walk far, they like being able to buy things by the pound, they like the individuality and the personal approach of small local entrepreneurs and producers. Why go to Tesco - too big, too impersonal and not particularly good quality.

AND
Older people need quality more than quantity, given that we're no longer rushing about, running for a bus to work and then doing an energetic job all day. We therefore need less of the energy-giving foods but we do need high-quality nutrients.

But how much fat is in that, tesco's is only 5% fat. You must compare like with like.

zygurat789

teajug wrote: »

Two people lives nearly as cheaply as one, one person living alone pays 75% of their council tax, not 50%. It cost the same to heat one home whether there is 1,2 or more living in it. Even if one person is able to afford to go for a holiday, they have to pay a supplement, so unfair.

.

I think that is absolute nonsense. I did some projections when we were taking our pensions and I came to the conclusion that it costs one person 67% of a couples expenses

teajug

If a couple lives in one house/flat etc., there are 2 incomes or two lots of incomes and their income/pensions will pay for the maintenance of their homes such as heating, council tax, mortgage if one exists or they could be renting and that would be shared as well.


If a single pensioner live in similar home that person with one income be solely responsible for all the maintenance of s/he home and 75% of the council tax all of the mortgage or rent and all of the heating of the home and also if that person is lucky enough to be able to go on holiday s/he will have to pay a supplement for accommodation.

spenderdave

margaretclare wrote: »

Re mince: just been to the local monthly farmers' market and bought a pound of best steak mince for £2.96. Lots of older people there. It's convenient for them, they don't have to walk far, they like being able to buy things by the pound, they like the individuality and the personal approach of small local entrepreneurs and producers. Why go to Tesco - too big, too impersonal and not particularly good quality.

Fine if you have a farmers market within walking distance. For me Tesco is the 'corner shop', just 5 minutes walk away - and I usually get a smile from the girl on the checkout, it is not that impersonal.

Straying off topic, but yes food is the biggest item of my expenditure that has gone up enormously lately.

harz99

SallyG wrote: »

"Trending e-petitions
Most active e-petitions in the last hour.
Page last updated 16:22 BST.
Restoration of Age Related Tax Allowances
57,480 total signatures
40 signed in the last hour"

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/31778

Wife and I have just signed the e-petition, so thats two more. 59014 now.

Please people, if you know anyone who is going to be/will be affected by the age related tax allowance removal, encourage them to sign. If they are not computer literate, get their permission and do it for them - the email address used to sign doesn't really matter, only the person's details.

There was a good piece in the "Money" section of last Saturday's Daily Telegraph on this subject.

harz99

margaretclare wrote: »

Re mince: ...........................Why go to Tesco - ...................not particularly good quality.

And your research to back up that statement is?

Knocking supermarkets is surely not what this thread is for, come to that neither is it for discussions about mince!

Please try to stick to the (very serious) point of the OP everyone.