Restoration of the age related allowance

jamesd

zygurat789 wrote: »

And you claim tax relief on it.

Which means you're still paying most of the cost yourself, because that only saves the tax part.

zygurat789 wrote: »

If I enjoyed the same tax free benefits you do at work then I would be happy but I have to pay for most of it myself.

It's well past time for you to say that you're happy or recant.

zygurat789

jamesd wrote: »

Which means you're still paying most of the cost yourself, because that only saves the tax part.It's well past time for you to say that you're happy or recant.

That's at least 20% and maybe 40% yes I'd be happy with that

harz99

harz99 wrote: »

Very few things are ever a "complete and utter waste of time", and as someone said "its not over until the fat lady sings".

So please sign the e-petition at

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

thanks.

66314 now signed.

jamesd

zygurat789 wrote: »

That's at least 20% and maybe 40% yes I'd be happy with that

Where should your employer send you the bill for the other 60% to 80% of their office costs? Deduct it direct from your pay, perhaps?

that's a reduction in the cost for the employee. It's still the employee paying the office costs.

mystic_trev

harz99 wrote: »

66314 now signed.

So at the current rate it'll take another two years to reach 100,000. :rotfl:

zygurat789

jamesd wrote: »

Where should your employer send you the bill for the other 60% to 80% of their office costs? Deduct it direct from your pay, perhaps?

that's a reduction in the cost for the employee. It's still the employee paying the office costs.

If I had an employer I would be benefitting but I really don't understand what you are trying to say.

jamesd

You were writing about the tax relief as if it was some sort of benefit for an employee, when all it does is reduce how much they are paying to subsidise their employer.

zygurat789

I certainly see tax relief as a benefit but I really do not understand you argument

rpc

zygurat789 wrote: »

I certainly see tax relief as a benefit but I really do not understand you argument

and we don't really understand yours...

zygurat789

rpc wrote: »

and we don't really understand yours...

Yes it was all rather a long time ago, but the point is pensioners are disadvantaged against younger people in all sorts of ways
Higher cost of living
having to pay costs personally that others have paid for them
extra necessary expenses because the machinery of the body is wearing out
All these costs are relative to the costs of younger people and it was for this reason that they initially received an additional age allowance, however, all this changed when GB abolished the 10% rate of tax.
This resulted in lower incomes paying more tax and, to compensate an
an additional £600 was added to the basic PA and £1200 ish was added to the age allowance. This only compensated under 65s who earned more than £13,500 and over 65s who earned more than £10,000. the rest paid more tax, thank you Gordon.
Now that the age allowances has been frozen, this compensation will wither on the vine and the over 65s will be hit with a double whammy.
The pensioner generation have been suffering for longer than most in this economic climate having not had a decent return on their pensions and their savings due to QE and to cap it all after they get a tax rise the rich get a tax reduction.