......"In the 350 interviews that took place on Sunday and Monday after the disclosures, Labour was 17 points ahead. Labour was on 47 per cent, the Tories on 30 per cent and the Lib Dems 11 per cent".
-
......"In the 350 interviews that took place on Sunday and Monday after the disclosures, Labour was 17 points ahead. Labour was on 47 per cent, the Tories on 30 per cent and the Lib Dems 11 per cent".Last edited by Guest; 27-03-12, 01:52. -
Sorry to harp on (note the music connection on Plat 3, folks!) about this, but the 'granny tax' is surely the most obvious factor in the budget which glaringly exposes its very WRONGNESS!Originally posted by aka Calum Da Jazbo View Post
I do agree, however, that the term 'granny tax' is an outrageously cheap political slogan which has little substance in itself ... it is neither an extra tax nor solely confined to dear old grannies.
As if granddads, childless great uncles and aunts, and confirmed old bachelors/elderly spinsters are not affected by the age-related personal allowance freeze as well ...
Comment
-
I suppose the reason I think there are far more important issues in the budget than this is the actual amount involved. Why no protests over the winter fuel allowance which actually went down last year (by £50 for the over 60s, by £100 for the over 80s)? Or what about the £10 Christmas bonus? When it was introduced in 1972, by Ted Heath, the basic pension itself was only £6.75 p.w. By my reckoning the Christmas bonus last year should therefore have been about £150, not £10. (Winter fuel allowance is slightly more difficult to calculate because the temperature has been a factor and this winter hasn't been all that cold).Originally posted by scottycelt View PostAs if granddads, childless great uncles and aunts, and confirmed old bachelors/elderly spinsters are not affected by the age-related personal allowance freeze as well ...
Granny (with a basic pension, plus the extra income to push her into the income tax bracket) will have an extra £5.30 (at least) in a couple of weeks' time, or £275.60 p.a (at least). Plus her personal allowance will go up by £560, saving her the £112 in tax that she would have had to pay. By comparison, assuming a 4% price rise in the coming autumn, the £10,500 ARA would have risen by £420 next year, giving a tax saving of £84 p.a.
However, it's the level of basic pension which is also an issue. Has its value been eroded over the years? If one goes back to 1972, when the basic pension was £6.75 p.w., and feed in the CPI/RPI indexation, the equivalent would be £63.69. In fact the basic pension is currently £102.15, but rising again next month to 107.45. Price rises, though, are only half the story: views on poverty are relative, not absolute, and standard of living expectations rise along with prices.
Nevertheless, the 'loss' in monetary terms for granny is not great and means that her increase in income each year will be smaller for probably three years, but it will be an increase in line with price rises, not a loss, and this is unusual for a 'tax'.
All that said, it could still be the 'granny tax' that remains the 'big story' of the 2012 budget ... But grannies will be affected, almost certainly more, by other coalition proposals, including cutbacks in services.
E&OE - I'm not a tax expert
. Nor very good at arithmetic 
It isn't given us to know those rare moments when people are wide open and the lightest touch can wither or heal. A moment too late and we can never reach them any more in this world.Comment
-
>>>>'
All that said, it could still be the 'granny tax' that remains the 'big story' of the 2012 budget ... But grannies will be affected, almost certainly more, by other coalition proposals, including cutbacks in services.'<<<<
....so very true ff....
....and the fact that it seems to have little to help business, small business, or youth / general unemployment....bong chingComment
-
will granny be sending any Christmas cards ?
Comment
-
Thank goodness for e-mailOriginally posted by mercia View Postwill granny be sending any Christmas cards ?
Comment
-
One or two perhaps, using up her £10 Christmas bonusOriginally posted by mercia View Postwill granny be sending any Christmas cards ?
It isn't given us to know those rare moments when people are wide open and the lightest touch can wither or heal. A moment too late and we can never reach them any more in this world.Comment
-
Well, there were a few muted protests over the reduced winter fuel allowance, but those were misplaced. The government of the day made it perfectly clear that the increased rate was a 'one-off', though I suppose many considered the Chancellor at the time was probably just being sensibly cautious. The £10 Xmas bonus is now a derisory joke and is neither here nor there as regards the issue of pensioner taxOriginally posted by french frank View Post
Freezing a personal tax allowance for any group is of a quite different order for those affected as it means a tax hike in real terms ... that's precisely why the government introduced it. It cannot be considered a 'bonus' to receive this annual allowance, unlike the winter fuel arrangement.
I suspect this whole argument depends on where our gut sympathies lie in the current economic climate, and therefore our priorities.
I'm not sure my own would be to take extra money from one group of comparatively modestly-paid citizens (£10500-£24000) to help out another similar group, whilst also giving more to the 'super-rich' who, we are told, will somehow miraculously end up paying the tax-man even more of its wealth.
We shall see ...Comment
-
Yes, but while some choose to see the 45 p reduction for the super-rich as a "mistake", I really don't believe Osborne and Cameron, or even Clegg care one jot. At least Brown and Blair always squirmed - it was writ all over their body language. This lot have all the airs and graces of privilege that emblazon their Eton- (or wherever)-ingrained, self-proclaimed confidence in their superiority. The likes of which I in my 66 years have not seen, only portrayed in the arrogance of the ruling orders in flims such as "Ghandi".Originally posted by scottycelt View PostComment
-
But everyone has to downsize.Originally posted by Serial_Apologist View Post
The £35,000 mentioned in the article was claimed from the taxpayer within the rules. Simultaneously he personally changed the rules on compensation for job loss and then instigated cuts. He could have paid that to me, as was previously an entitlement, or to someone like me. It is not the money per se. It is what it does to health and the quality of life. The difference between having security and relatively little of it. Others would be even more worthy recipients of course. The good news is that he is 58. Osborne is 40. We could have him for 30 odd years, on and off. Some say Cameron would step down for him in 2018.Comment
-
Actually I think it would have been a much better move if GO had removed the winter fuel allowance for everyone with an income over, say, £22,000 (together with a review of some of the other pensioner allowances). This would surely have been a much more acceptable move, especially as many relatively wealthy pensioners have already advocated something similar. (However, I read in the press that Cameron vetoed a proposal on the WFA.)Originally posted by french frank View Post
Also, I think it is a nonsense that people start receiving the allowance from the age of 60. Surely it should begin when people reach (state) pensionable age.
(PS Conflating the pension increase, etc due to take place this April with the changes that GO has proposed for next April doesn't strike me as totally fair, even if it is politically effective.)Comment
-
I agree with you about the income cut-off for relatively well-off pensioners, johnb but since when has one's ability to pay for a raised fuel bill been related to your age? Surely it would be more appropriate to relate it to income ,e.g., to those on benefits like JobSeekers' Allowance, Incapacity Benefit, Disabled Living Allowance, Attendance Allowance, etc.Originally posted by johnb View Post
The age-related benefits approach harks back to the different (lower) benefits rates that Thatcher introduced for 16/17 year olds and 18-25 year olds in the early '80s. Since when did Tesco look at your weekly shop and then say "Age 17? Oh well of course we'll give you a discount to suit your reduced means" ?
Other supermarkets are available
Comment
-
I was not conflating this year's pension increase with next year's ARA freeze: I was saying that both pension and ARA are increased this year, whereas next year only the pension will rise, leaving the pensioner with £84 less than they would have had without the freezeOriginally posted by johnb View Post. How else can you work out how much the freeze will cost other than making a comparison with this year when the freeze doesn't apply?
It isn't given us to know those rare moments when people are wide open and the lightest touch can wither or heal. A moment too late and we can never reach them any more in this world.Comment
-
The problem is, johnb, that means-tested benefits are not only very unpopular but much more difficult to implement. Look at the awful mess Osborne has created for HMRC with his child benefit upper-end cutoff with a taper system and the incomes of the household (not just the individual) being taken into account. I date the start of the decline of HMRC from the time that they were landed with the implementation of tax credits (on income tax they had always seemed to me to be reasonably competent). Pension credit is another poorly implemented age-related means-tested benefit, disliked and misunderstood by pensioners and widely underclaimed. However much more equitable means-testing is for benefits, it creates all kinds of implementation difficulties and extra bureaucracy as well as underclaims and overpayments (massively in the case of tax credits, which was an utterly misconceived system).Actually I think it would have been a much better move if GO had removed the winter fuel allowance for everyone with an income over, say, £22,000 (together with a review of some of the other pensioner allowances).Comment
-
Surely those wealthy older people who are the public spirited members of the tory party who are always moaning on about how people today have no sense of community or respect could simply donate the benefits that they don't need to people who do ?
or did I miss something ?Comment
Comment