Restoration of the age related allowance

opinions4u

Cutting to the chase.

The freezing of age related allowances is logical and begins to undo an inequality within tax system that I've never understood.

I would hope that our older population recognise that they are not immune from these economic times and this change is a reasonable way for them to contribute towards fixing things without seeing their actual income reduce.

MoneySaverLog

Yes I don't quite see why one section of the population should have higher tax allowances based on age, the same with the old marriage allowance. It's not a fair system everyone should have the same allowance. I won't be encouraging anyone to sign this petition.

hugheskevi

Yes I don't quite see why one section of the population should have higher tax allowances based on age, the same with the old marriage allowance.

I thought it might be helpful to summarise the key points in favour, from the first 40 posts in this thread:

(1) History - allowance for older people has always been higher
(2) Extra allowance allows a better lifestyle
(3) Another perk removed, sneaked through in Budget
(4) Working age families with income £10-£30K may well get help from State

Not sure there are any killer arguments there, aside from the normal pensioner lobbying for ever more to be spent on them - real expenditure on pensioners was £76bn in 2000/01 and this year is forecast to be £110bn.

MoneySaverLog

hugheskevi wrote: »

I thought it might be helpful to summarise the key points in favour, from the first 40 posts in this thread:

(1) History - allowance for older people has always been higher
(2) Extra allowance allows a better lifestyle
(3) Another perk removed, sneaked through in Budget
(4) Working age families with income £10-£30K may well get help from State

1) Does that mean it always has to be so?
2) Yes for some, but why should it not be the same for everyone.
3) Indeed a perk that should be stopped to help everyone, not just based on how old you are.
4) The budget was set as a working persons budget and rightly so. I'm against this family help too, if you want a family you should be able to afford it yourself instead of taking handouts like this. Everyone thinks it's their right to have kids and get council accommodation and benefits thrown in. It annoys the f*** out of me to see the system being abused like that. Have kids when you can afford and support them, not as a means to get benefits.

zygurat789

THE RED BOOK

Budget 2011

Page 35

1.128 As announced in the June Budget 2010, the Government has reviewed how the CPI can
be used for the indexation of taxes and duties while protecting revenues. Consistent with this,
the default indexation assumption for direct taxes will be the CPI from April 2012. To
ensure employers and older people do not lose out, for the duration of this Parliament the
annual increases in the employer NICs threshold, and the age related allowance and
other thresholds for older people, will be over-indexed compared to the CPI, and will
increase by the equivalent of the RPI. The Government will review the use of the CPI
for indirect taxes once its fiscal consolidation plans have been implemented and the
duty increases it inherited from the previous Government have come to an end.

Ainsley1

Hugheskevi, good to summarise and get this thread back on topic.
However you had missed:
5. the point of the governments 'promise',
6. the fact that pensioners are already helping out the economy through higher state pension retirement age (often the same people who will now be affected by the so called 'granny tax'),
7. moving from RPI to CPI (generally a lot lower)
8. rich pensioners will not benefit
9 social needs of the community (this depends upon your politics, I guess) whereby some sections should have greater support to support their greater need and also social conscience to support (rather than penalise) those who the younger generation now ought to thank.
10. lack of time for those whom the change affects to make alternative arrangements, save more or possibly find work to compensate.
11. It was announced in the budget as a simplification not (effectively) a relative tax increase on those affected
12 Cost of living for people getting more elderly is substantially higher than average and there are few if any welfare benefits for those who exceed only a fraction of the national average wage unlike those in work.

tocsin

Thanks, Zygurat789! It sounds like George has memory issues, or was telling porkies last year...

harz99

59683 signed now.

Come on those in MSE towers - how about a bit of a push?

Thrugelmir

harz99 wrote: »

59683 signed now.

Come on those in MSE towers - how about a bit of a push?

I take the view we are all in this together. Rather than join any of the various self interest groups that have sprung up. That solve nothing.

The budget deficit is far from being been solved yet. So times may well get far more challenging yet.

zygurat789

Thrugelmir wrote: »

I take the view we are all in this together. Rather than join any of the various self interest groups that have sprung up. That solve nothing.

The budget deficit is far from being been solved yet. So times may well get far more challenging yet.

The rich get a tax cut and the poor get a tax increase, remember. We are obviously not all in this together, that's the whole point.