April 2008 Income Tax and NI Changes: How will they affect you?

Paul_Herring

Lets get shot of this lying cheating government and get people in who really do care!!

Truism: Well no matter who you vote for, the government always get elected.

What makes you think one lot are really going to be better than another lot?

And one other option you don't appear to know about is to actually turn up to vote but to actually spoil it - it's still counted. There was a campaign last general election about this to try and get a significant number of spoilt votes to try and make the point, but I don't think it got enough publicity.

alastairq

wow...by my calculations, with help from http://listentotaxman.com/
I'll be a whole £26 a year better off.

Since I work for the government anyway, and they are aiming at a meager 1.5% pay rise, I'll be worse off after the higher-than-inflation local government tax rises......

I STRONGLY BELIEVE....all local and national taxation should be limited in rise, to NO MORE % than the national and local government projected wage rises!

Ignoring, that is, MP's, & heads of sheds wage/allowance rises!

Meltdown_2

MPH80 wrote: »

Really? I ran my profile through, except changed the earnings to £15k and I was told I'd get housing benefit and council tax benefit.

It might not apply to you if you pay less rent/council tax than me - but have a look:
www.entitledto.co.uk

Many benefits don't apply if you have a (relatively) small amount in the bank (for emergencies, etc).

Yet you can own a £15M mansion in the UK, with 'old masters' on the walls, and a Ferrari/Maserati/McLaren on the driveway (or all 3), with houses in all the major capitals of the world ... AND STILL get money from the UK benefits system (if you arrange things correctly) - Go figure! :rolleyes:

oldagetraveller

Typically of this government, they are again robbing the "grass roots" to subsidise their rich paymasters. I will be about £200/annum worse off. Thanks Gordon.
I am, and always have been a Socialist but New Labour (like the country we live in) have lost the plot and forget what the Labour Party originally stood for.

earthmother

Well, hubby receives long term IB, and yesterdays payment (the first under the new figures) is lower than last fortnights (old figures).

We won't know exactly until the next payment in two weeks time, but it looks like we've lost about £3 a week on what we were getting last year. It might not sound much, but it's a days worth of bread, spuds and milk - and over £150 a year, when the figure should have actually risen with the annual rate increase.

As I said earlier on this thread, because of our situation there are no other benefits that will balance this loss out for us (that we are aware of), so yet another example of the lower incomed/vulnerable being hit.

Welsh_Adey

I think they should have a new level at 50% for anyone who earns more than £100k a year.

vicshippers

Welsh_Adey wrote: »

I think they should have a new level at 50% for anyone who earns more than £100k a year.

:rotfl: I'm going to take a stab in the dark that you have never done any economics!

littlekitty_2

MSE_Wendy wrote: »

Updated 8 April 2008

In last year's budget, the Government announced the new income tax thresholds. This doesn't just impact what you earn, but also the rate of tax on savings and pensions too.

The main changes.

• The 10% starting rate has gone. The 10% income tax ‘starting rate’ will be removed for pensions and salaries, but will stay for savings.

• Basic rate of income tax drops to 20%. Now the main level of income tax that most people pay has been cut from 22% to 20% (the cost this change is clawed back by the ending of the 10% band).

• The ‘higher rate’ of income tax stays at 40%.

The idea behind these changes was a simplification of the tax system and now (barring savings) there are only two bands. Sadly while this was meant to be a tax boost, those who were only paying the 10% level have lost out, meaning its some of the poorest people who will pay more tax.

[threadbanner]box[/threadbanner]

I don't know where you got your tax bands from, but they are incorrect.

From the HM Revenue and Customs Site:



Would be nice if higher rate was really over £41K, but it just isn't true!!

boldaslove

on my last salary (currently jobless at the mo) which was just above the minimum wage, i would've been over £50 worse off this year i'm actually looking for part time work now as i want to study but i really think i'm going to struggle. and i'm fortunate enough to still live at home and not have student debts (yet!) so i don't have that much of a financial burdon. i'm under 25 so i can't claim working tax credits, i have absolutely no intention of having a child. why is this government always fleecing the normal hardworking people of this country? it just seems like they want a rich elite class and the rest of us to shut up and pay for their luxuries. i'm so fed up of it. i can't wait to leave, i fully intend to emigrate once i get an education and don't have any commitments. there is a ranch somewhere in mexico with my name on it

one thing's for sure, i'm not voting labour in the general elections and i'm certainly not voting tory, so lib dems are gonna have to pull something pretty special out of the hat!!!

Meltdown_2

littlekitty,
the 2 tables aren't covering the same thing ...
The MSE table is looking at your "earnings"; thus you don't pay any tax on the first £5,435 (the single person's allowance).
The HMRC table is simply looking at "taxable income", i.e. what you are left with after discounting the single person's allowance.
(In essence, add £5,435 on to the HMRC figures, and you get the MSE ones. Similar thing for last year.)