Protecting pensions from politicians - or preparing for a Labour coalition

steampowered

dunstonh wrote: »

I doubt many plumbers/builders (or anyone with a limited company) earning around £25k a year realise that the Labour proposals will see them immediately worse off by around £1400 a year in increased taxation. If you earn to the £45k basic rate tax band as a company director, you would be around £3,300 worse off a year.

The IFS conducted an independent analysis of the impact of the various parties' proposals on personal tax and benefits, here is a graph showing the outcome. It seems to show that people on the income ranges you describe seem to be better off under Labour plans?

dunstonh

steampowered wrote: »

The IFS conducted an independent analysis of the impact of the various parties' proposals on personal tax and benefits, here is a graph showing the outcome. It seems to show that people on the income ranges you describe seem to be better off under Labour plans?

The title on that bit says "personal tax and benefits". It doesnt include company taxation. It is company taxation that is going to rise.

A self-employed individual operating as self-employed sees all their profit treated under personal taxation. Whereas a person who uses a limited company as their structure sees the business profit taxed under corporation tax. After that their salary/dividends are taxed personally. The personal side will see no difference but the increase in corporation tax will hit them.

steampowered

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

I was not even considering tax avoidance. It was savings I was thinking of putting into the IoM, not salary - mainly because I forsee a Corbyn Administration taking them off me in diverse ways.

You can't live your life paralysed by fear and hysteria about what might happen. Tax rises could happen under any party, that's life - and indeed have happened several times under the Conservatives. If tax rises which are not in the manifestos did happen they would be unlikely to be extreme.

If you try too hard to evade tax, you can get yourself in a right pickle - the disaster of recent tax avoidance schemes in the film industry being a case in point (https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3711659/sun-investigation-super-rich-tax-relief-scheme/).

le_loup

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

convinced that a Corbyn administration would find some way to take them off me and give them to an Albanian economic migrant or a one-legged lesbian gender-fluid transsexual.

Oh dear. You really must stop buying that newspaper, it's destroying you.

seven-day-weekend

le_loup wrote: »

Oh dear. You really must stop buying that newspaper, it's destroying you.

Why? JC's cronies do not care about people like me. White, English, retired, home-owner, north-of-London Christian. The only slight advantage I have is being female.

thepurplepixie

Linton wrote: »

Your figures are a little OTT. A reasonable cost for most of the country could be perhaps £15/visit: 4X£15X365=£22000/year. So that's about a quarter of what you thought.

Again it isn't one size fits all. I based my figures on what a friend is paying. She has chosen a good agency that doesn't pay minimum wage and consequently doesn't have high turnover of staff and their staff are excellent. She needs two carers per visit and can't manage on a 15 minute visit. So yes my figures are based on real figures for a real person receiving care. Of course she might need care for alot longer.

thepurplepixie

dunstonh wrote: »

And who should pay for that then?

We weren't discussing who should pay for it. You quoted some information which put a particular spin on the Conservative plans and I pointed out that you hadn't considered all of the changes and that many, many older people were well aware of the negatives in the plan. Were you aware that the changes were negative for many people.

thepurplepixie

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

I'm not, as I've said repeatedly in these discussions, talking particularly about tax. I just want to keep my savings intact.

At the time I wrote the original post I was feeling pretty dispirited and was convinced that a Corbyn administration would find some way to take them off me and give them to an Albanian economic migrant or a one-legged lesbian gender-fluid transexual. I feel slightly better now.

That sounds pretty paranoid to me. Have you got any reason to feel that a Corbyn administration would particularly favour an Albanian economic migrant or a one-legged lesbian gender-fluid transexual?

le_loup

thepurplepixie wrote: »

That sounds pretty paranoid to me. Have you got any reason to feel that a Corbyn administration would particularly favour an Albanian economic migrant or a one-legged lesbian gender-fluid transexual?

Not paranoid; she's just read about it in the Daily Mail, so it must be true.

kidmugsy

thepurplepixie wrote: »

That sounds pretty paranoid to me. Have you got any reason to feel that a Corbyn administration would particularly favour an Albanian economic migrant or a one-legged lesbian gender-fluid transexual?

Quite. They'd only favour him/her if he/she were a terrorist.