Breaking News: £1000 married tax allowance

lostinrates

Jennifer_Jane wrote: »

[/COLOR]

I am for anything that promotes marriage: if this is heterosexuals or homosexuals, then that's fine.

I believe that marriage encourages stability (I am also for easy divorce, having lived through the 50's and 60's when it was a farce). I hope that David Cameron's extension of the same-sex civil partnership to marriage will encourage people of all types to make that commitment to each other.




TruckerT - I think most people would disagree with your last paragraph. I can't understand why you wouldn't be able to call a man forcing his penis (or an implement) into someone else's body anything but rape. So what words would you use for this?

Agree, on both points.

stinktankcynic

If your single you won't get it.
If your older, over 80, you won't get it.
If your a higher rate tax payer you won't get it.
If both partners earn over £10k, you won't get it.
If you cannot apply online, you won't get it??

Basically, a lot of married couples won't get it.

It's basically allowing a smaller number of couples who are married, where one earns less than £10k to pass part of the tax allowance to the higher earner to use up.

Think of all the unmarried couples who won't get it too.

Headline catching, perhaps yes, but it's limited to who it will help. Some unfairly excluded.

Loughton_Monkey

stinktankcynic wrote: »

If your single you won't get it.
If your older, over 80, you won't get it.
If your a higher rate tax payer you won't get it.
If both partners earn over £10k, you won't get it.
If you cannot apply online, you won't get it??

Basically, a lot of married couples won't get it.

It's basically allowing a smaller number of couples who are married, where one earns less than £10k to pass part of the tax allowance to the higher earner to use up.

Think of all the unmarried couples who won't get it too.

Headline catching, perhaps yes, but it's limited to who it will help. Some unfairly excluded.

Yes, I shall pray tonight for all the single people who don't get married couples allowance....

.... along with under 60's who don't get the over 60's free bus pass, the people who don't get unemployment benefit because they are... er.. employed, and most especially for all us able bodied people who don't get disability benefit.

Then, tomorrow, a stiff letter will be in the post complaining why I didn't get any child allowance even though I have had no children. But I will start off by complaining of the lack of business rates relief when I don't run a business. Then there's the higher rate pension tax relief owed to me for all those years I wasn't in the higher tax band, and for good measure, I will demand legal aid for all those legal cases I didn't take any part in.

But Osborne will be quaking in his boots when I demand my help to buy subsidy, even though I'm not moving house.

CC-Warrior

Obviously single people aren't worthy in society! If anything, those of us who live alone and have to pay out for everything need the help, but nothing is offered apart from a lousy 25% council tax discount.

zagfles

CC-Warrior wrote: »

Obviously single people aren't worthy in society! If anything, those of us who live alone and have to pay out for everything need the help, but nothing is offered apart from a lousy 25% council tax discount.

Single parents on low-mid incomes do very well out of the system, for instance getting the same tax credits as a couple but with one less person to feed, and childcare subsidies etc. Whereas a couple get no subsidy for the "childcare cost" of one parent staying at home to look after the children. Even this new scheme will only give them £200.

Also single parents on IS have a higher equivalised income than a couple on IS (using most equivilisation methods inc the one used for UK child poverty measures).

On higher incomes the scales start tipping the other way and single parents suffer from independant taxation, and the new child benefit rules. Single parents on high incomes really get screwed by the system and those with 3-4 kids could have massive effective marginal tax rates sometimes over 70% up to incomes over £70k!

CC-Warrior

zagfles wrote: »

Single parents on low-mid incomes do very well out of the system, for instance getting the same tax credits as a couple but with one less person to feed, and childcare subsidies etc. Whereas a couple get no subsidy for the "childcare cost" of one parent staying at home to look after the children. Even this new scheme will only give them £200.

Also single parents on IS have a higher equivalised income than a couple on IS (using most equivilisation methods inc the one used for UK child poverty measures).

On higher incomes the scales start tipping the other way and single parents suffer from independant taxation, and the new child benefit rules. Single parents on high incomes really get screwed by the system and those with 3-4 kids could have massive effective marginal tax rates sometimes over 70% up to incomes over £70k!

Where is the help for single, non-parents?

Percy1983

CC-Warrior wrote: »

Where is the help for single, non-parents?

The job centre.

zagfles

CC-Warrior wrote: »

Where is the help for single, non-parents?

They get a tax allowance just to themselves.

CC-Warrior

The £9.940? I was hoping for something more substantial to help me pay everything as I have no-one to split the costs with. A 50% reduction in council tax sounds fairer.

Loughton_Monkey

CC-Warrior wrote: »

Obviously single people aren't worthy in society! If anything, those of us who live alone and have to pay out for everything need the help, but nothing is offered apart from a lousy 25% council tax discount.

I can think of no more "worthy" thing to do that what you're doing. You're subsidising all those other singles with children, and then you're subsidising all the couples with children who quite clearly cannot afford them without all the handouts.

Logically, I feel, it should almost be the other way around.

Single people should work, earn money, and pay a certain % of it in tax above a tax free allowance. If they get married, then both people could arguably have slightly lower tax allowances (per head) since to some extent, two can live as cheaply as one.

Once the first, second, and third children start arriving, then tax rates should ramp up in order to extract a partial contribution to the education and health burden up to adulthood.

Finally, everyone should have another X% 'tax' which is taken, accrued, RPI+linked, and then re-presented to the individual at age 65 (or somesuch agreed age) to form their pension income for the rest of their life.

Such fund as is not used due to death before retirement, or emigration should be used for a very basic safety net for circumstances beyond control, and a more substantial amount for disability.

To me, that would be a much fairer society.