HMRC refusing NI refund despite total earnings below threshold

Grumpy_chap

[Deleted User] said:

Does anyone really think it will remain at 1.25%?

I think it is astonishing how one party has campaigned for many elections with a "1% on income tax for the NHS" flag-ship policy and now, when the next nearest thing is being introduced (at a total of 2.5% for workers), that same party are calling for the levy to be scrapped / delayed to show heart in the middle of the cost of living challenge.  How else is this funding for the NHS to be raised?

af1963

Grumpy_chap said:

 How else is this funding for the NHS to be raised?

Possibly by a tax that doesn't exempt large numbers of (often better off) people from paying it ?   ( Landlords, higher-income pensioners, people living off investments, company owners who can pay themselves in dividends ). 

Or maybe by waiting to raise taxes a bit later, once the surge in inflation has passed ? The current timing is all to do with electoral cycles, raising tax now to allow a "tax cut" just before the next General Election.

kinger101

purdyoaten2 said:

In 2002/03 employees paid NIC at a rate of 10% between £89 and £585 - that was it! The following year an upper rate of 1% was introduced. This increased to 2%. The 10% became 11% and then 12%.  Later the upper limit was increased to the higher rate threshold and, therefore, more was charged at the higher rate. Now everyone will pay an extra 1.25% ‘levy’ (although NIC starts at a higher level of earnings). 

Does anyone really think it will remain at 1.25%?

It's because Chancellors love to say they're not raising income tax.  Far better to raise NI instead, which is paid by both employer and employee.  And if that doesn't raise enough, just freeze allowances instead.

Their other favourite is "simplifying the tax system".  Bad news for trees.  Good news for Tolleys who publish the tax manuals.  

[Deleted User]

kinger101 said:

purdyoaten2 said:

In 2002/03 employees paid NIC at a rate of 10% between £89 and £585 - that was it! The following year an upper rate of 1% was introduced. This increased to 2%. The 10% became 11% and then 12%.  Later the upper limit was increased to the higher rate threshold and, therefore, more was charged at the higher rate. Now everyone will pay an extra 1.25% ‘levy’ (although NIC starts at a higher level of earnings). 

Does anyone really think it will remain at 1.25%?

It's because Chancellors love to say they're not raising income tax.  Far better to raise NI instead, which is paid by both employer and employee.  And if that doesn't raise enough, just freeze allowances instead.

Their other favourite is "simplifying the tax system".  Bad news for trees.  Good news for Tolleys who publish the tax manuals.  

If you think Tolleys are bad for trees try Butterworths!

DoctorStrange

kinger101 said:

Far better to raise NI instead, which is paid by both employer and employee. 

In reality, of course, both are paid by the employee as the employer only focuses on the top line when deciding salaries.

Why reduce margins to fund ENIC when you can just reduce/scrap wage increases instead...

Grumpy_chap

DoctorStrange said:

In reality, of course, both are paid by the employee as the employer only focuses on the top line when deciding salaries.

Why reduce margins to fund ENIC when you can just reduce/scrap wage increases instead...

You are correct in referencing the employer's focus on the "top line" but in many sectors right now it is an employees market and simply scrapping rises is the fast route to no staff.