How to increase the 20% tax band dramatically

Thrugelmir

antrobus wrote: »

What?

More tax revenues simply means that the government has more money and taxpayers have less. It would not increase activity.

Better than the wealthy simply paying cash for holiday homes in Europe as a very basic example........ Which benefits absolutely no one but themselves. The act of buying a pint regularly in your local micro brewery creates a chain of activity. Tax is inbuilt into the economy. Spending money within the economy is the key. Not sending it abroad.

caronoel

Clifford_Pope wrote: »

Having just, with great difficulty, educated the public to taking an interest in accumulating sufficient NI contributions to secure the full rate of state pension, is suddenly moving the goal posts and telling them "Sorry, we lied, actually you need to go on paying for ever", really going to be an election- winner?

Probably not politically palatable, but it doesn't make it wrong.

As the population ages, so the burden of the state pension will increase.

Those who benefit most pay a little more towards it rather than placing the burden on thr young

SkyeKnight

caronoel wrote: »

1) Apply National Insurance to income post State Pension Age.

I've already paid NI on my personal pension contributions - I'd be pretty annoyed to pay it twice. And the state pension would just have to go up to keep the net value the same.

Plus it means it would be better value to contribute to an ISA and there's lots of good reasons for encouraging people to pay into a pension, like stopping them spending it all whenever they feel like it.

michaels

NI has nothing to do with pension entitlement, I am mid 40s but will not gain any more state pension entitlement from all the ni I pay going forward.

Given this perhaps it actually pays towards social care including in old age - and thus should still be paid even after retirement by those who earn enough to do so. Why should I pay ni and get no pension benefit but someone earning more than me who has retired pay none?

antrobus

michaels wrote: »

NI has nothing to do with pension entitlement, I am mid 40s but will not gain any more state pension entitlement from all the ni I pay going forward.

Yes it does.

You need 35 years of NI credits to get the full New State Pension. If you are in your mid 40s I don't see how you've managed it.

michaels wrote: »

...
Given this perhaps it actually pays towards social care including in old age - and thus should still be paid even after retirement by those who earn enough to do so.

No, a small slice goes to the NHS, most of it goes into the NI fund and pays for contributory benefits, mainly state pensions.

michaels wrote: »

..
Why should I pay ni and get no pension benefit but someone earning more than me who has retired pay none?

Employee NI contributions on earnings after the state pension age are zero. Employer contributions continue.

antrobus

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Better than the wealthy simply paying cash for holiday homes in Europe as a very basic example........ Which benefits absolutely no one but themselves. The act of buying a pint regularly in your local micro brewery creates a chain of activity. Tax is inbuilt into the economy. Spending money within the economy is the key. Not sending it abroad.

The people who live in Europe are not "no one".

And, following your argument, we should be encouraging rich foreigners to buy holiday homes here and spend money in the UK.

Buying anything creates a chain of activity. Therefore when the government takes money away from people in the form of taxes, all that happens is that the money gets spent on buying different things, and there are different chains of activity.

It might mean fewer pints being bought in local micro brewery, and more drugs being bought from a foreign pharmaceutical company.

michaels

antrobus wrote: »

Yes it does.

You need 35 years of NI credits to get the full New State Pension. If you are in your mid 40s I don't see how you've managed it.




No, a small slice goes to the NHS, most of it goes into the NI fund and pays for contributory benefits, mainly state pensions.



Employee NI contributions on earnings after the state pension age are zero. Employer contributions continue.

Easy, didn't opt out of serps/s2p.

Thus if it is possible for me to earn no pension from my ni, why exempt pensioners from it for unearned income.

NI paying for contributions based benefits is all a mirage anyway, there is no hypothacation and never can be. 1% on income tax to pay for the nus just means that the govt doesn't need to find nhs money from somewhere else so other spending also increases. Given it is meaningless I am pretty certain it will happen.

Tom99

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]If you bought a 4 bed house 20 years ago that has now doubled in value, when you sell it you can't use that money to buy two 4 bed houses.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]After 20 years you still only have one 4 bed house so you have not gained a brick.[/FONT]

chucknorris

Tom99 wrote: »

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]If you bought a 4 bed house 20 years ago that has now doubled in value, when you sell it you can't use that money to buy two 4 bed houses.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]After 20 years you still only have one 4 bed house so you have not gained a brick.[/FONT]

But presumably most people that buy a 4 bed house, already have a family, and they would be grown up 20 years later, and the couple could then downsize to something like a 2 bed flat or cottage. At the very least, the house would be near being paid off, and already have a low deflated mortgage payment, whereas renting goes on forever.

Thrugelmir

AFF8879 wrote: »

I.e. why are Austrian companies not as globally reknowned as British/American etc...

Not companies but economics. Keynesian economic policy has dominated thinking post WW2.