General Election 2015 – Tax Implications?

antrobus

michaels wrote: »

I am not suggested they are exempted, merely that their employer will decide to increase their contributions to make up for the loss incurred by the employee through the extra taxation. There is nothing stopping private sector employers from doing the same if they so choose, although f course for the priate sector doing so is not revenue neutral.....

I don't think you quite get it.

Public sector schemes are defined benefit schemes. Increasing the level of employer contributions would not change anything except increase the amount of extra tax that employees would have to pay.

michaels

Which the employee could be compensated for via an increase in salary?

chucknorris

michaels wrote: »

Which the employee could be compensated for via an increase in salary?

I wouldn't hold my breath, I can’t see pay raises happening in the public sector when the whole purpose of the exercise would be to save money. Personally I don't think that this is all going to happen anyway, but if it does, it is going to be chaotic. I will be well out of it if it does happen, my job would no longer represent value, so retiring would be a ‘no brainier’.

antrobus

michaels wrote: »

Which the employee could be compensated for via an increase in salary?

I see, Plan B.:)

I refer you to my original point about p1ssing off the the 80% of employees who are in the private sector. Or indeed, everybody else for that matter.

theEnd

In reality, I expect they'll do something similar to what the Tories are suggesting, which is capping the annual and total amount going into a pension without being taxed.

chucknorris

theEnd wrote: »

In reality, I expect they'll do something similar to what the Tories are suggesting, which is capping the annual and total amount going into a pension without being taxed.

If it needs changing then that is the sensible way to do it, IMO.

michaels

antrobus wrote: »

I see, Plan B.:)

I refer you to my original point about p1ssing off the the 80% of employees who are in the private sector. Or indeed, everybody else for that matter.

As I say though, everyone will only receive tax relief on pension contributions at standard rate, only some employers will decide to make up the loss to their employees. IN particular one employer for whom the extra tax paid is counterbalanced by the extra revenue received and thus suffers no net cost in doing so.....If other employers choose not to do so how is that unfair?

antrobus

michaels wrote: »

As I say though, everyonwe will only receive tax releif on pension contributions at standard rate, only some employers will decide to make up the los to their employees. IN particular one employer for whom the extra tax paid is counterbalanced by the extra revenue received and thus suffers no net cost in doing so.....If other employers choose not to do so how is that unfair?

I am simply putting forward the opinion that it would p1ss off the the 80% of employees who are in the private sector. And thus be electoral suicide.

lisyloo

If other employers choose not to do so how is that unfair?

I haven't seen anyone saying it's unfair, but it might not be a smart idea.
My employer has employees in 3 different countries.
Currently the UK is expensive AND has employee friendly labour laws.
If it becomes more expensive to employ staff in the UK then I could see my employer pulling out of the UK altogether rather than paying higher wages. That would deprive the UK of some decent jobs.

A better way might be to bring down the limit and then you would only hit people who are taking advantage of large amounts of tax avoidance (quite legally and fairly - but needs must).

michaels

antrobus wrote: »

I am simply putting forward the opinion that it would p1ss off the the 80% of employees who are in the private sector. And thus be electoral suicide.

But only higher rate taxpayers would be affected which is still only a small proportion. There wasn't much sympathy for those on 50k who lost their child benefit.