Restoration of the age related allowance

teajug

MonkeyMad wrote: »

Shock, horror. The PM plays computer games and like to sing karaoke. He appears to share that interest with a large proportion of the population - so what?

The poorest cannot afford to do the things that the millionaire government are saying that they can do in their spare time, to me it is just rubbing the poorest peoples noses in it. Perhaps you can do these things as well that is why you do not care about the poorer people.

MonkeyMad wrote: »

The French income tax system is indeed different to ours and tends to favour couples (which may tend to harm pensioners more). They also have a system of social charges on income which is relatively high, and high contributions for welfare, as well as higher rates of capital gains tax. Pensioners may well be better off but they pay for it whilst they are working. Which elements would you like to cherry pick for your comparison?

How can the French system harm pensioners here more than it is already. Indeed Cameron used to be all for couple and there was talk of him giving them a tax break.

Can you give us a link to your statement you make or is it just your opinion.

also, have you seen panorama last night on BBC where the big drug and other companies are laundering their money through Luxembourg dodging the tax man of millions if not billions where is the fairness in that, or is tax avoidance OK by you.


:T

MonkeyMad

I don't have an Ipad but I know people poorer than me that do. I know a lot of people poorer than me that spend a lot of money on enjoying themselves whilst moaning about how poor they are. You will find that in the real world these activities are not that unusual.

I do care about the poorest actually which I why I care more about the basic allowance being lifted to take more pensioners out of taxation than keeping the anachronistic age allowance which benefits those richer pensioners more than the poorest.

You can do your own research on the French tax system being based on the number of the household income and the number of occupants. Typing 'French Income Tax' into Google would be a start.

Aside from the tax affairs of large businesses, would you like to introduce any more random facts into the discussion? How about old people have a disproportionate amount spent on them through the health system, far more than they contributed as workers. How about pensioner groups have been the most shielded from years of recession by succesive governments taxation and benefit systems? How about the whole world and economy does not revolve around pensioners? What does the shuffling of accounts by business have to do with the relative fairness to all groups in an income tax system. If you increases the business take, we should all benefit, not just one group.

Regarding the tax break for the rich perhaps HMRC cottoned on to the idea that 50% tax is psychologically just too much and people would rather shift their income and avoid it rather than pay it, and that 45% may just be the limit at which people would not go to much effort to avoid.

margaretclare

Thanks for the link, MM. Very interesting.

The poorest cannot afford to do the things that the millionaire government are saying that they can do in their spare time, to me it is just rubbing the poorest peoples noses in it. Perhaps you can do these things as well that is why you do not care about the poorer people.

Yes, but those of us who are retired and have enough income on which to pay tax are not 'the poorest'! The really poorest are the ones who fall into the means-tested category. So the discussion about income tax allowances will not affect them at all. They're not paying tax, they're claiming a benefit i.e. pension credit.

I have been poor. I don't class myself as poor now. I really resent the way *all* pensioners are put into the 'poor' category when many of us are not.

I don't know about doing the things the 'millionaire government' likes to do in spare time. There are certain things I like to do and that's my business and no one else's. I do know of a lot of older people who *say* they're poor but they wouldn't give up their bingo session or their cigarettes. Both fairly costly pastimes.

About having a disproportionate amount spent on us via the health system, that has certainly proved true for DH and me. Since we got together in 1997 there has not been one year when one or the other of us hasn't required major surgery, most of which wasn't even available a decade or so ago. DH is recovering from spinal surgery on the 10th of May. This wouldn't have been possible even a few years ago - the technical skill, knowledge and technology was just not there. Not since having children have I had so much contact with NHS services as recently.

jamesd

zygurat789 wrote: »

I don't know your personal circumstances but they could include the following
Free heating from 9 to 5

I pay for the heating and lighting. That's an expense, not a benefit.

zygurat789 wrote: »

Free parking near town centre
Subsidised canteen
free use of office. Postage etc

None of those and I provide the space for the office. Someone who had a work parking place near the office would have to pay to get to it so that'd probably be a net loss for them anyway. Postage would typically be classed as theft, gross misconduct and grounds for firing.

Want to try some more before accepting that "would be happy" applies?

StevieJ

MonkeyMad wrote: »

I do care about the poorest actually which I why I care more about the basic allowance being lifted to take more pensioners out of taxation than keeping the anachronistic age allowance which benefits those richer pensioners more than the poorest.

What do you actually mean there, it doesn't seem to make sense?

jamesd

teajug wrote: »

Cameron used to be all for couple and there was talk of him giving them a tax break.

Why should single pensioners have to pay more tax than married pensioners when single pensioners still have higher heating costs and higher per-person costs for cooking, TV license and power use and a range of other things as well? It'd be a negative change when it comes to helping the worst-off pensioners, notably some of the very worst off, many single females who outlive their spouse without adequate continuing pension income. A reduction in the personal allowances for a couple would be more sensible, increasing the allowance for singles and hence helping more of the worst off.

teajug wrote: »

also, have you seen panorama last night on BBC where the big drug and other companies are laundering their money through Luxembourg dodging the tax man of millions if not billions where is the fairness in that, or is tax avoidance OK by you.

Tax avoidance is in general seen as a duty by many people and is very popular among those who use ISAs or other tax provisions that avoid payment of tax.

Whether it's fair for a company to structure its business to minimise tax is an interesting question but it is clear that a company's directors and managers have a legal duty to their shareholders to maximise profit. "their shareholders" includes those of us with pension savings who own the companies as part of our retirement pots.

One remedy would be a tax on sales at the location of delivery of the product.

MonkeyMad

StevieJ wrote: »

What do you actually mean there, it doesn't seem to make sense?

I do care about all of the poorest in society actually which I why I care more about the basic allowance being lifted to take more pensioners and younger poor out of taxation than keeping the anachronistic age allowance which benefits those richer pensioners more than the poorest pensioners. I do not see middle income pensioners as a special needs minority group to be given exemption from the economic situation around them

zygurat789

jamesd wrote: »

I pay for the heating and lighting. That's an expense, not a benefit.
None of those and I provide the space for the office. Someone who had a work parking place near the office would have to pay to get to it so that'd probably be a net loss for them anyway. Postage would typically be classed as theft, gross misconduct and grounds for firing.

Want to try some more before accepting that "would be happy" applies?

You pay for heating at work, now there's a first

zygurat789

MonkeyMad wrote: »

Does your grasp of English not comprehend that my statement covers all the people in my office-this is an office that is very modern and meets the latest requirements ie is warmer than most. You also have no idea how old I am or any health issues I may have that affect my ability to generate or maintain heat. I am aware that the body generates less internal heat which is why people tend to wear more clothes as space heating is a phenomenally poor way of keeping warm. Perhaps you should try moving about instead of watching TV which is something I seem to recall you suggest is the number one pastime of pensioners.

Perhaps you could provide evidence on the generalisation that pensioners are suffering because the price of extra lean mince is going up, suffering to the extent their life is threatened, not things are a little tighter, and there is less to give to the grand-children when they visit? You keep trying to trot out the idea that this allowance is all that is keeping pensioners alive and it is just not true is it?

Free postage - Er, no
Free parking - Employers being charged per parking space
Subsidised canteen - Er, no
Free use of office etc. - Yes I am allowed to attend my workplace for free. And have to wear more clothes when it is cold.

It's not the 1970s now you know, or whatever sheltered industry it was you may worked in. Have you been to an office of a large multi-national lately? You seem to think it is some utopian existance largely designed for the workers comfort. And you talk about generalisation!

You clearly have no clue about what life is like for anyone other than yourself, and have no interest in the welfare of anyone except yourself which is why you are so focussed on loosing the band. It doesn't matter to you that the lower rate allowance is being over-indexed to raise more out of taxation completely, you just want to maintain your differential because basically you are grasping all you can get as long as someone else is paying for it.

And you still haven't told us how, at time of retirement, new pensioners will be suffering by not receiving an allowance that they never had in their working lives.

And if you want equivalence with my salary, do my job.

And I bet you shout louder than anybody else.

margaretclare

....and by the way, Tesco lean beef steak mince is now £2.15 for 250g.

This discussion has now reached ridiculous levels.