Share dividend tax increase

Albermarle

The whole point of an inheritance is that it's the money leftover that wasn't needed to be spent during life. Care home charges are a life expense and if there are assets available to pay then it never seemed unreasonable that they would be usefully deployed for that purpose. I never had a problem with the idea that I would receive less inheritance if my parents had care fees or would give less inheritance if I needed care.

I think if the family is fairly well off, then I agree a smaller inheritance is not a problem.

However if  a £100K house in a cheaper part of the country is the only asset, then nearly all potential inheritance could be gone within a couple of years . The new rules will not really change this as far as I can see.

Albermarle

The tax rise money goes to the NHS backlog not social care.

This does seem to be the case , in the early years anyway . Waiting lists have to be got down before the next election I guess.

Also although the focus is on the cost of care , selling houses etc . Social care depts are themselves very short of cash to fund those who have no assets ( or less than £23K) and there is a shortage of social workers . Hence the long waits just to get an assessment or see an OT . Probably the only thing keeping them going is that council tax keeps going up .

pip895

solidpro said:

pip895 said:

As it happens, I probably won’t be much affected by this tax, but I would have been happy to pay if I was.  The problem with paying for your own care and particularly residential care is that’s it’s a lottery.  Most of us won’t need it and most who do, will only need it for a short period.  For some - particularly those with Dementia or their partners the costs can be astronomical and are likely to get even higher when we start paying carers better.  For most similar risks (house burning down might be in the same ballpark financially) we have insurance but not for this.  

I think people on here may be underestimating the desperation felt by people who loose out on this lottery.  Some of the cases on the news last night were heartbreaking.  My elderly neighbour, whose wife had dementia, unfortunately took the extreme  way out of shooting his wife and then himself at the point when his health meant that he wasn’t going to be able to carry on caring for her…

And this 'plan' doesn't tackle any of those issues. The cap doesn't cover rent, energy, food, or day to day expenses so the lottery continues.
The tax rise money goes to the NHS backlog not social care.

So why would you be happy to pay it?

1. It’s a start, and once the NHS is in a better place I expect the majority of it will go to social care. Apart from anything else the two are inextricably linked - the NHS can not operate without a functioning care system.  2. By capping the costs it is also hopped that it will kick start the insurance industry into offering policies to cover this risk.  

dunstonh

pip895 said:

solidpro said:

pip895 said:

As it happens, I probably won’t be much affected by this tax, but I would have been happy to pay if I was.  The problem with paying for your own care and particularly residential care is that’s it’s a lottery.  Most of us won’t need it and most who do, will only need it for a short period.  For some - particularly those with Dementia or their partners the costs can be astronomical and are likely to get even higher when we start paying carers better.  For most similar risks (house burning down might be in the same ballpark financially) we have insurance but not for this.  

I think people on here may be underestimating the desperation felt by people who loose out on this lottery.  Some of the cases on the news last night were heartbreaking.  My elderly neighbour, whose wife had dementia, unfortunately took the extreme  way out of shooting his wife and then himself at the point when his health meant that he wasn’t going to be able to carry on caring for her…

And this 'plan' doesn't tackle any of those issues. The cap doesn't cover rent, energy, food, or day to day expenses so the lottery continues.
The tax rise money goes to the NHS backlog not social care.

So why would you be happy to pay it?

1. It’s a start, and once the NHS is in a better place I expect the majority of it will go to social care. Apart from anything else the two are inextricably linked - the NHS can not operate without a functioning care system.  2. By capping the costs it is also hopped that it will kick start the insurance industry into offering policies to cover this risk.  

The NHS will never get to a better place.  It will just suck up the funds and increase the waste.      The NHS needs a good seeing to.  An efficiency drive with the extra money would have been better.

solidpro

pip895 said:

1. It’s a start, and once the NHS is in a better place I expect the majority of it will go to social care. Apart from anything else the two are inextricably linked - the NHS can not operate without a functioning care system.  2. By capping the costs it is also hopped that it will kick start the insurance industry into offering policies to cover this risk.  

It was just established that as long as you have £86,000 you won't need to sell your house.

How many people in their 60s who require public social care, do you think have £86,000 laying around without selling their house?

I agree, private companies may start to offer policies to fund that shortfall, but that's guessing....hoping someone else will help solve a problem. a bit like asking for £12bn without telling us how it 'fixes' social care. And anyway how does an additional outgoing for our entire lives (in the form of an insurance policy) help the poorest people in the UK?

SlimPlodder

With all this money going into the NHS and social care I hope that the Government has enough left over for the 40% increase in nuclear weapons announced in April. Perhaps Universal Credit should be further reduced to be on the safe side?

Sea_Shell

I can't see the cap working in the real world TBH.

Scenario...elderly parent is self funding in a nice place, close to family.   They hit the "cap", and family say "that's it, it's the LA's responsibility now".

LA say "OK, but we're going to have to move them from here, as it's too expensive...but you can pay "top-up" fees if you'd prefer".

Family think "what now?".   Continue to pay from parents money (house sale/whatever) or if the money has genuinely run out, from their own pocket!!?!

Basically, nothing will change, unless people (and their families) genuinely have nothing left to pay with!!!

Bobziz

dunstonh said:

The NHS will never get to a better place.  It will just suck up the funds and increase the waste.      The NHS needs a good seeing to.  An efficiency drive with the extra money would have been better.

Sarcasm surely ?

Thrugelmir

solidpro said:

pip895 said:

1. It’s a start, and once the NHS is in a better place I expect the majority of it will go to social care. Apart from anything else the two are inextricably linked - the NHS can not operate without a functioning care system.  2. By capping the costs it is also hopped that it will kick start the insurance industry into offering policies to cover this risk.  

It was just established that as long as you have £86,000 you won't need to sell your house.

How many people in their 60s who require public social care, do you think have £86,000 laying around without selling their house?

I agree, private companies may start to offer policies to fund that shortfall, but that's guessing....hoping someone else will help solve a problem. a bit like asking for £12bn without telling us how it 'fixes' social care. And anyway how does an additional outgoing for our entire lives (in the form of an insurance policy) help the poorest people in the UK?

Majority of social care expenditure isn't even spent on the elderly.  

Albermarle

Bobziz said:

dunstonh said:

The NHS will never get to a better place.  It will just suck up the funds and increase the waste.      The NHS needs a good seeing to.  An efficiency drive with the extra money would have been better.

Sarcasm surely ?

Perhaps a bit strong, but in an organisation the size of the NHS, there must be areas where waste can be reduced and then more money cab be spent in areas where resources are short.
In my intermittent visits to NHS hospitals ( mainly with family for outpatients/day surgery) there seems to be an excess of staff rather than a shortage .
Clearly in some areas that is not the case though.