Are U1of 3million+ #ExcludedUK Getting NO Govt Support? Join us!

gary83

boyleminer said:

MadMattUK said:

boyleminer said:

The people being negative towards the excluded, there are a lot of ex military people in our group. Your saying people who put their lives on the line for your country are not worthy of your support or the countries support. Remember that the next time you’re saying ‘least we forget’ 

Nice bit of trolling there. Someone can agree that the "Excluded" campaign is fundamentally and critically flawed and still support current and ex-Servicemen. The problem with the "Excluded" campaign is that it is factually inaccurate in many areas, makes vast misrepresentations on issues, double counts people, includes people in it's figures who do not need or want help and is ultimately so incoherent that it does not have a solid message, cause or goal ("Give a vast, imprecise group of people" is not an goal).

Specific targeted change campaigns have worked very well, examples relating to the military could be that that reserves returning from deployment are eligible for furlough even after the scheme was open to new entrants, that many military personnel due to leave the armed forces were allowed to delay their departures, the changes to maternity and furlough, Rashford's school mean voucher extension etc. 

There are major issues with the way the armed forces fails to help ex-servicemen to adapt to and integrate into civilian life, that should be addressed, Covid-19 has no bearing on that, the military covenant needs to be strengthened. Just because people support greater help for ex-forces personnel does not mean that they have to support "Excluded", the two have no connection. 

I am not a troll. I’ll give you whatever details about myself you want. What I said is 100% true. There are many ex military personnel in excluded who have missed out in any financial support due to the 50% rule or being new starters. 

Please show me examples of the misrepresentations and inaccuracies being made my excluded 

5 pages back somebody posted the list below of those that were excluded that was produced by the excluded campaign. as a piece of propaganda it is worse than useless, the blatant untruths and farcical scenarios they included is ridiculous. I thought that was a low point, now we’ve had people being told not to post on this thread as they weren’t contributing (their only crime was not agreeing with every figure posted & questioning how much should be given to everyone as Universal income) now we’re not supportive of the military as some ex military personnel have found themselves on excludeduks long list of people it portrays to help.

 If this thread has shown those hoping that the change will come anything then hopefully it’s shown them that excluded is too large a campaign, it’s unwieldy and at the heart of their own official claims there’s far too much that can easily and quickly be proven to be untrue. it’d be better off if this campaign was abolished and campaigns focusing on individual issues was produced instead and the organisers could stick to facts, rather than try and sensationalise everything in the hope of headlines.

gary83 said:

ExcludedUK_NoSupport said:

Grumpy_chap said:

Who are the 3 million getting NO government support?

This is the list 

These are the trade body & ONS stats collated 

It is unprecedented support though isn’t it? that list seems pretty flawed to me;

“IF YOU DONT HAVE PREMISES NO £10k GRANT”

you don’t have the cost of the premises that have been stood empty.

IF YOU DIDNT EMPLOY STAFF NO 80% OF WAGES TO CLAIM FOR
That money goes straight out of the companies bank account to the employee, the employee still accrues holiday, the company isn’t being penalised as it would be no better off financially if it had staff to furlough.

IF YOU’RE A LIMITED COMPANY DIRECTOR PAID PAYE ANNUALLY - YOU CANT EVEN FURLOUGH YOURSELF
Thats not strictly true is it? If you haven’t declared your RTI by the cutoff date then you’re ineligible.

IF YOU'RE ON PARENTAL LEAVE YOU RECEIVE NOTHING
SEISS disregards the first 12 months You were on parental leave receiving nothing. you’re in the same situation as you would have been without a pandemic, you just haven’t profited from it.

IF YOU APPLY FOR UC & YOU HAVE SAVINGS TO PAY FOR TAX - YOU RECEIVE NOTHING
Again not true, money saved to pay tax can be disregarded when it comes to applying for UC

https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/2020/04/self-employed-with-cash-saved-to-pay-tax--it-won-t-be-counted-as/


IF YOU APPLY FOR UC BUT LIVE WITH A PARTNER WHOS LUCKY ENOUGH TO RECEIVE A WAGE - YOU RECEIVE NOTHING.
thats the same as UC always has been, you don’t necessarily receive nothing it might be reduced. UC is effectively triaged to those that need it most by asking about your savings and household income. if you want to protest about that now then why have you not raised your voice about the “unfairness” of the system when it was affecting so many other people in the past?

finally if that’s the kind of lack of attention to detail or creative writing that excludeduk is producing then it’s not surprising some people are sceptical of any figures or statistics they produce.

dunstonh

  I am one of the three million hard working tax payers excluded from any financial support whatsoever during this pandemic. 

The 3 million figure is made up.  It also double, triple, quadruple counts the same people (as some can fall in multiple categories). 

 I am amazed at how badly these people are being treated and even more amazed at the negativity towards people trying to help them. 

Read the posts again.  You will see it is not negativity to the campaign. It is pointing out issues that the campaign has with its wide spread which includes people not affected financially.  

Excluded are simply try to get financial support for those who missed out.

And for people who did not lose out and were not excluded.     That is where it is going wrong.

. If you consider me a troll I will gladly give you my details and you can tell me in person 

How mature of you to resort to threats of violence.

Your post was pathetic as you tried to turn it into an anti-armed forces issue when it has absolutely nothing to do with the armed forces.

boyleminer

dunstonh said:

  I am one of the three million hard working tax payers excluded from any financial support whatsoever during this pandemic. 

The 3 million figure is made up.  It also double, triple, quadruple counts the same people (as some can fall in multiple categories). 

 I am amazed at how badly these people are being treated and even more amazed at the negativity towards people trying to help them. 

Read the posts again.  You will see it is not negativity to the campaign. It is pointing out issues that the campaign has with its wide spread which includes people not affected financially.  

Excluded are simply try to get financial support for those who missed out.

And for people who did not lose out and were not excluded.     That is where it is going wrong.

. If you consider me a troll I will gladly give you my details and you can tell me in person 

How mature of you to resort to threats of violence.

Your post was pathetic as you tried to turn it into an anti-armed forces issue when it has absolutely nothing to do with the armed forces.

I am not threatening anyone. In fact due to a work related injury I am unable to fight. Trolls hide behind false profiles. I’m simply letting you know who I am and giving you the opportunity to see that. 

You dispute the 3 million figure but where is your proof? The figure shouldn’t matter anyway as no one should have been left out and that’s what excluded are fighting for. There are ex military personnel in this group and while excluded are campaigning for them, your negativity towards excluded is not only unhelpful but is an insult to everyone involved including those military personnel 

Jonesy1977

MadMattUK said:

Jonesy1977 said:

amykirk1996 said:

"What HMRC's ‘pay-now clawback later’ contractor dividends policy might look like"
https://www.contractoruk.com/coronavirus/covid19_what_hmrcs_pay_now_clawback_later_contractor_dividends_policy_might_look.html

This would be an absolute nightmare to administer and fraud would be rife, the ability to claw back would be limited to those “contractors” who continue to trade under ltd companies as many would simply cease trading and under company law avail themselves of limited liability.  

That scheme looks like it would require tens or even perhaps hundreds of thousands of man hours to administer and as you say fraud would be rife, perhaps even outstripping genuine claims. 

It is also clear that the government will not do anything involving dividend. The CJRS made sense in that it maintains the employment chain, stops mass unemployment and keeps companies viable to recover in the rebound, it was paid to benefit a group (employees), who also pay the highest tax rate and have that taxation closely regulated.

The SEISS makes slightly less sense from an economic perspective, those people will not become "unemployed", they will lose income, but they will resume their normal work when industry reopens, although it does have the benefit of not dampening economic activity, some of this this group, perhaps even the majority, may actually end up being better off as they are allowed to continue to work and earn, so if they make more than 20% of normal profit (or upwards, depending on exact income level), then they will be better off net, they also pay less tax (largely due to no er's NI), but it is fairly obvious that this will be changed in the next budget, with the self employed paying the same, or very similar income taxation to the employed.

Bailing out dividend makes very little sense, regardless of how some people have been using dividend it is classed and largely remains a return on investment. Any scheme to bail out dividend would be rife with complications (have people already received CJRS funds being just the first, the linked article make claim that PAYE and dividend should be taken as one for the purposes of a dividend grant), hugely bureaucratic to administer, open to fraud and frankly unlikely to gain much public sympathy. In terms of tax it attracts a considerably lower rate of taxation, resulting in savings from 20-40% depending on how much you receive, with people earning <£50k pa making a saving of nearly 40% (even when accounting for Corporation Tax paid before dividend can be distributed). That makes it not only politically nonviable to do as there would be complaints of people getting handed far more than they contribute (especially when they do not pay NI on dividend). It would also add a lot of pressure to increase taxation on dividend, something which this government especially would not want to do, but also which would be bad for the economy overall.

For context, I am a limited company owner/director, who is largely remunerated through dividend, it makes no sense to furlough myself as the amount would be so small as to be negligible. I do not support the "Excluded" movement because it is a convoluted mess of statements which vary from inaccurate to complete lies, one only has to look at the info-graphics it produces to be able to instantly discredit it.

There are elements of it that I agree with, support for people who started self-employment in the 19/20 tax year being one, people who operate on short term PAYE contracts being another, but I cannot support the "Excluded" campaign. If those groups were to run separate public campaigns they may well have considerable traction by now and perhaps even gained concessions from the government, but because they chose to ally themselves with a group which discredits itself by it's own proclamations then they may have already fatally doomed their cause. 

I agree with everything you say, and for context I am also a ltd co Director and remunerated mainly through dividend, my contribution to keep my business going (and my staff in jobs) will obviously be to not pay myself dividend which is as it should be. I do feel for those Contractors who are in this mess, but to take no responsibility and simply demand will likely be ignored.

dunstonh

I am not threatening anyone. In fact due to a work related injury I am unable to fight. Trolls hide behind false profiles. I’m simply letting you know who I am and giving you the opportunity to see that. 

Nobody knows who you are.  Stop talking rubbish.

You dispute the 3 million figure but where is your proof?

Proof is easy.  £3million is the estimated number that fall into each of the categories assuming that every single person in those categories is unique (i.e. they dont fall into any other category) and that each of those people (and their multiple personalities) is unable to claim support despite many of them not requiring support.

If you had actually read the responses you would understand that.

The figure shouldn’t matter anyway as no one should have been left out and that’s what excluded are fighting for. 

excluded are also fighting for people that are not excluded and include groups that looks like greed.

There are ex military personnel in this group and while excluded are campaigning for them, your negativity towards excluded is not only unhelpful but is an insult to everyone involved including those military personnel 

That is just pathetic.   You are not doing those who served in the military any favours.

gary83

boyleminer said:

You dispute the 3 million figure but where is your proof? The figure shouldn’t matter anyway as no one should have been left out and that’s what excluded are fighting for. There are ex military personnel in this group and while excluded are campaigning for them, your negativity towards excluded is not only unhelpful but is an insult to everyone involved including those military personnel 

Oh get a grip, anybody’s negativity towards excluded on here is based on their poor campaign, terrible communication, their blatant twisting of the truth to try & grab headlines along with very few of their supporters on here being able to confidently & rationally defend their points.

Not agreeing with that message, is not an insult to anyone & certainly isn’t an insult to former military personnel, who clearly don’t represent the majority of the excluded cohort.

Jonesy1977

boyleminer said:

Uxb1 said:

Grumpy_chap said:

To get NO support, you have to fall into ALL of those groups.  I do not believe that is 3 million people.
The coronavirus support schemes are unbelievably generous.  I have yet to meet any individual anywhere who is getting NO support, except for if they don't chose to claim the support that is available.

I'm one of those excluded and I full agree that I should NOT be getting any support.
I'm semi- early-retired doing part time self employed work such that my income from self employment is on average just less than half my full income from all sources. So I'm excluded by that reason - and to be honest quite right too. 
The Chancellor woudl probably describe my self employment as almost a hobby time employment.

  I am one of the three million hard working tax payers excluded from any financial support whatsoever during this pandemic. Just because you don’t know any, that doesn’t mean we don’t exist. I worked on the northern line extension as a miner, digging tunnels by hand. On that project I was paid payee. When the tunnels  were finished I was laid off and went on to work on the bank station capacity upgrades doing similar work were I was paid as a self employed sub contractor. How I am paid is not my choice, it’s down to the main contractor. Please tell me why that is so wrong that me and my family should suffer financial hardship 

If you took the time to read the posts made by those querying the validity of #Excluded claims you will see with clarity that there is not 3 million hard working tax payers excluded.  That is not to say you are not hard working it is also not to say that you personally have not been excluded, it is merely pointing out the factual and moral reality of some individuals circumstances including the OP.  I should also point out that you ability (or inability) to have a "fight" as you have stated on this board is not useful discourse.  It did make me chuckle though.

Jonesy1977

jimkelly said:

Three possible solutions previously mentioned.
For new starters, if they can prove they had an offer of employment from new employer and they show their P45 from previous employer, why not give them support based on 80% of their wage from last year or the last 3 years?  That could be one solution for them.
I agree, this is a genuine systemic issue and could be resolved, however who would pay them? How is it policed?
For micro limited companies who require support, so that the government can avoid the dividend issue, why not introduce some form of grant for those with a turnover of less than £100k or £300k or £500k, something like that?  It could be similar to the Discretionary grant in that you wouldn't be eligible if you've had support through the other schemes.  Easy to administer based on company returns.
That makes no sense at all.  Micro Limited Companies can already avail themselves of support in the form of BBLS and CBILS loans.  If this is not an option then they are not a viable business, they are most likely contractors using limited companies as an umbrella for personal income and paying dividends in lieu of income, If a micro business has no viability it will not be able to take a loan (the bar is low so this should be an option) and therefore is not a "genuine" business in the enterprise sense.  Grants are obviously not an option, that would mean Micro business's would be given money not lent money and even if it was in the form of a loan the inability for them to pay it back would be a prohibitive.  Such "businesses" will need to fall back on cash reserves, in the same way that all other businesses do and are now doing to save jobs, pay for fixed costs and survive .  If they have no reserves they have been badly managed and will not survive to pay tax in the future to "grant" such businesses money whilst encouraging genuine businesses to go in to debt is a non starter.
For newly self employed, it's more difficult but something akin to the 0% starting rate could be reintroduced here alongside the first option above re new starters.  If they were previously employed, proof of wages from previous employer.
Or they look to re-enter the workforce if they predict there is no chance of generating income.  Agreed re previous employer proof although it will be a very very small minority of the quoted 3 million  

boyleminer

dunstonh said:

I am not threatening anyone. In fact due to a work related injury I am unable to fight. Trolls hide behind false profiles. I’m simply letting you know who I am and giving you the opportunity to see that. 

Nobody knows who you are.  Stop talking rubbish.

You dispute the 3 million figure but where is your proof?

Proof is easy.  £3million is the estimated number that fall into each of the categories assuming that every single person in those categories is unique (i.e. they dont fall into any other category) and that each of those people (and their multiple personalities) is unable to claim support despite many of them not requiring support.

If you had actually read the responses you would understand that.

The figure shouldn’t matter anyway as no one should have been left out and that’s what excluded are fighting for. 

excluded are also fighting for people that are not excluded and include groups that looks like greed.

There are ex military personnel in this group and while excluded are campaigning for them, your negativity towards excluded is not only unhelpful but is an insult to everyone involved including those military personnel 

That is just pathetic.   You are not doing those who served in the military any favours.

My name is Connell Boyle. I live in south London. I’m 34 years old and I dig tunnels for a living. Now you know who I am so you can stop calling me a troll. Some people may be counted twice but it’s impossible to tell. There are also many people who did receive some form of support but very little who aren’t included in these figures so it probably balances itself out. I really don’t understand why you have such an issue with a group campaigning for those who need help

boyleminer

gary83 said:

boyleminer said:

You dispute the 3 million figure but where is your proof? The figure shouldn’t matter anyway as no one should have been left out and that’s what excluded are fighting for. There are ex military personnel in this group and while excluded are campaigning for them, your negativity towards excluded is not only unhelpful but is an insult to everyone involved including those military personnel 

Oh get a grip, anybody’s negativity towards excluded on here is based on their poor campaign, terrible communication, their blatant twisting of the truth to try & grab headlines along with very few of their supporters on here being able to confidently & rationally defend their points.

Not agreeing with that message, is not an insult to anyone & certainly isn’t an insult to former military personnel, who clearly don’t represent the majority of the excluded cohort.

How would you conduct the campaign and what are you doing to help those who need it?