Thoughts on the Budget?

wessy53

Eric_the_half_a_bee wrote: »

Hmmm... your use of the name "Gideon" makes me suspect you would have come to the same conclusion regardless of what anybody said

Hmmm Eric well spotted.

atush

Guess if you dont care about the deficit and the economy, you like running in the red?

We used to run our HH budget in the red many decades ago. I am very glad we haven't for a while now.

Can anyone remember the last time we had a balanced budget. Last time the US did was in Clinton's day.

gemscot1

agree its disappointing re keeping dropping the lifetime allowance - its forcing people overseas now to avoid this charge - silly policy - what can you but with 1m at current annuity rates!

redbuzzard

haf63 wrote: »

Hope so.. I'll have to do some sums as I suspect the protection will be for people already over the 1m threshold at time of new LTA and could be snookered if I am at say 900k. Will wait for details

The way I understand it works the SIPP impact will be the value when it crystallises so that will include future investment income even without further contributions. So if the intention is to protect savers based on what they have done already we miht expect some protection for that (in effect commitments and contributions you have already made even if it stymies further ones.

Happy to be corrected - well happy isn't the right word really, as I have some DC that might grow and some deferred DB that has 3 years to index up.

redux

It seems odd to me that it's still possible to hear or read people ranting about Gordon Brown wrecking pension schemes forever, yet these measures may have more effect in the long run, and are being introduced because government apparently still thinks pensions are doing too well at the expense of the taxpayer.

Maybe fairer modifications might have involved restricting tax relief to basic rate for everyone, given that it's been said two-thirds of relief has been used at higher rate.

redbuzzard

redux wrote: »

Maybe fairer modifications might have involved restricting tax relief to basic rate for everyone, given that it's been said two-thirds of relief has been used at higher rate.

That would be hard to disagree with to be honest, on grounds of fairness. It never seemed right to me that those already better off got more benefit.

And I say that as somebody who was on the winning end of it.

Would hardly have been a vote winner though.

Thinks like this should really be cross party. A bit like the NHS. Speaking the truth and doing what needs to be done would be political suicide so nobody is going anywhere near it.

tigerspill

mgdavid wrote: »

Disappointed there's no new tax on 2nd home and BTL owners.

Why?
Owners have already paid tax on the money spent in buying these assets.

kidmugsy

atush wrote: »

Can anyone remember the last time we had a balanced budget. Last time the US did was in Clinton's day.

And that was an accident. When did the US last have a balanced budget that was intended?