Share dividend tax increase

solidpro

p00hsticks said:

Yes - anyone earning between the Lower Earnings Limit and the Primary Threshold gets NI credits without actually paying any NI (as do people claiming certain benefits such as Child Benefit, Univeral Credit, ESA and JSA)

So are you saying that if your salary is between the Lower Earnings Limit of £6240 and the Primary Threshold of £9500 you still chalk up an NI year but pay nothing in NI?

Can you think of any reason our accountant suggests were pay salaries of £9999 per year (with the rest in dividends)? AFAIK this does incur a (small) NI charge each year.

Thanks

lozzy1965

solidpro said:

p00hsticks said:

Yes - anyone earning between the Lower Earnings Limit and the Primary Threshold gets NI credits without actually paying any NI (as do people claiming certain benefits such as Child Benefit, Univeral Credit, ESA and JSA)

So are you saying that if your salary is between the Lower Earnings Limit of £6240 and the Primary Threshold of £9500 you still chalk up an NI year but pay nothing in NI?

Can you think of any reason our accountant suggests were pay salaries of £9999 per year (with the rest in dividends)? AFAIK this does incur a (small) NI charge each year.

Thanks

To keep HMRC off your backs because you are not taking the pee by paying literally no NI.

Albermarle

sevenhills said:

Albermarle said:

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.

Surely that is desirable? I am sure patients would be suing the NHS if they were whizzed through A+E like on an Aldi conveyor belt.

It does seem that A&E is nearly always under pressure but it is not clear if that it is staffing/money issues, or just too many people going to A & E unnecessarily with minor issues.

Of course extra staff generally is desirable but its also expensive .

csgohan4

Albermarle said:

sevenhills said:

Albermarle said:

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.

Surely that is desirable? I am sure patients would be suing the NHS if they were whizzed through A+E like on an Aldi conveyor belt.

It does seem that A&E is nearly always under pressure but it is not clear if that it is staffing/money issues, or just too many people going to A & E unnecessarily with minor issues.

Of course extra staff generally is desirable but its also expensive .

Albermarle said:

sevenhills said:

Albermarle said:

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.

Surely that is desirable? I am sure patients would be suing the NHS if they were whizzed through A+E like on an Aldi conveyor belt.

It does seem that A&E is nearly always under pressure but it is not clear if that it is staffing/money issues, or just too many people going to A & E unnecessarily with minor issues.

Of course extra staff generally is desirable but its also expensive .

Albermarle said:

sevenhills said:

Albermarle said:

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.

Surely that is desirable? I am sure patients would be suing the NHS if they were whizzed through A+E like on an Aldi conveyor belt.

It does seem that A&E is nearly always under pressure but it is not clear if that it is staffing/money issues, or just too many people going to A & E unnecessarily with minor issues.

Of course extra staff generally is desirable but its also expensive .

Bed status also needs to be considered. AE could be a holding place before they can free up beds. A hospital cannot admit more than they have beds. 

Sadly cases are going up and hospitalized are going up with a large proportion of covid cases being un-vaccinated young. Although controversial, if one does not have a good medical reason to vaccinate, they should pay for their covid related admission to hospital

booneruk

talexuser said:

horrendous billions on Test and Trace which even the parliamentary committee said had negligible effect. 

I never understood this - are they saying if we hadn't built up testing capacity of over a million a day and instead did no testing that we'd have had the same outcome?

Why was it the WHO said Test, Test, Test?

Alexland

booneruk said:

talexuser said:

horrendous billions on Test and Trace which even the parliamentary committee said had negligible effect. 

I never understood this - are they saying if we hadn't built up testing capacity of over a million a day and instead did no testing that we'd have had the same outcome?

I guess we will never know. Around here the T&T sites are excessively over resourced for the occasional visit from someone who wanted to be tested. It was organised in a hurry on limited demand information so waste was inevitable but it seems to have continued longer than I would consider reasonable. NHS money being wasted in lots of people standing around doing nothing in car parks gives a poor impression when taxes are being raised.

csgohan4

Alexland said:

booneruk said:

talexuser said:

horrendous billions on Test and Trace which even the parliamentary committee said had negligible effect. 

I never understood this - are they saying if we hadn't built up testing capacity of over a million a day and instead did no testing that we'd have had the same outcome?

I guess we will never know. Around here the T&T sites are excessively over resourced for the occasional visit from someone who wanted to be tested. It was organised in a hurry on limited demand information so waste was inevitable but it seems to have continued longer than I would consider reasonable. NHS money being wasted in lots of people standing around doing nothing in car parks gives a poor impression when taxes are being raised.

it is easier to have flex in the system than to ramp up capacity. Government couldn't predict the amount of testing in a given day locally. So have more than you possibly need prepares for that. Labour will jump on the waste of this. But if the Government scaled it back down, the opposition will also complain you didn't have the capacity and wasting time/money. 

Look at the nightingale hospital, under used but gave capacity for the unknown. Some people actually called it a waste of money, but to have capacity in case of something bad is important in an unknown pandemic. If there wasn't those same people will jump on the bandwagon of not doing enough and useless rhetoric. 

solidpro

booneruk said:
I never understood this - are they saying if we hadn't built up testing capacity of over a million a day and instead did no testing that we'd have had the same outcome?

Why was it the WHO said Test, Test, Test?

Either way, £37bn is absolutely ludicrous.

Test test test with good equipment sure. That isn't what happened. If track and trace covered the cost of billions of home testing kits then that was also a total waste of money and plastic. We were being given dozens of test kits from both our children's schools (branded NHS) and even when lab-certified and checked PCR determined that 2 of us definitely had Coronavirus (corroborated with primary symptoms), the home tests never ever showed a positive.

And it was me personally taking all the tests (both home kits and lab-certified PCR), so I know I was taking good samples. 

A total waste of taxpayer's money.

Notepad_Phil

solidpro said:

booneruk said:
I never understood this - are they saying if we hadn't built up testing capacity of over a million a day and instead did no testing that we'd have had the same outcome?

Why was it the WHO said Test, Test, Test?

Either way, £37bn is absolutely ludicrous.

£37bn is the budget for the first two years up to April 2022, so still many months to go before we find out whether they've used the full £37bn - how much would you have budgeted?

solidpro said:
We were being given dozens of test kits from both our children's schools (branded NHS) and even when lab-certified and checked PCR determined that 2 of us definitely had Coronavirus (corroborated with primary symptoms), the home tests never ever showed a positive.

And it was me personally taking all the tests (both home kits and lab-certified PCR), so I know I was taking good samples. 

The use of LTFs is not a guaranteed way to determine that someone is clear of coronavirus, but it does at least catch a meaningful number and I'm not sure what your plan would be if they weren't used or what that cost would be.

NedS

solidpro said:

p00hsticks said:

Yes - anyone earning between the Lower Earnings Limit and the Primary Threshold gets NI credits without actually paying any NI (as do people claiming certain benefits such as Child Benefit, Univeral Credit, ESA and JSA)

So are you saying that if your salary is between the Lower Earnings Limit of £6240 and the Primary Threshold of £9500 you still chalk up an NI year but pay nothing in NI?

Can you think of any reason our accountant suggests were pay salaries of £9999 per year (with the rest in dividends)? AFAIK this does incur a (small) NI charge each year.

Thanks

To increase the amount of furlough you were able to claim? Seriously, you'd have to ask them. Standard practice seems to be to pay yourself the primary threshold each month, ensuring no NI or income tax is paid, and then take a dividend to utilise remaining allowances assuming profits permit.