Hunt the Budget

[JohnD]

"Pensioners and higher-income Britons will end up being the big losers from tax and benefit changes pushed through in the current parliament, pointing to a striking shift in political strategy by the governing Conservative party.

Analysis in the wake of chancellor Jeremy Hunt’s pre-election Budget shows that of the more than 60 per cent of pensioners who pay income tax, the majority will be £650 a year worse off by 2027 as a result of policy changes in recent years. Higher-rate pensioner taxpayers will lose more than £3,000 a year, according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies think-tank.

Separate research from the Resolution Foundation think-tank shows that across the board wealthy taxpayers are the biggest losers from the Conservative government’s tax changes. It found that the top fifth of the income distribution will lose out by an average of £1,500 by 2027-28, while the typical household will gain £420."

FT.com

 

[Notch7]

Public services will also be losers

 

[ajohn]

Why on earth start a new thread? You appear to like doing this when there is another that can be used,

 

[Brigadier]

Why on earth start a new thread? You appear to like doing this when there is another that can be used,

So that the point is not lost in the waffle.

An alien concept, to some

 

[Murdochcat]

Public services will also be losers

Bottom line is that if we want better services, we all have to pay more.

But Notch7 never admits this

 

[JohnD]

We have crumbling schools, hospitals beyond repair, potholed roads, and aircraft carriers that can't get beyond the Isle of Wight. We have Councils going bust due to central government cuts. We have insufficient dentists, nurses and midwives. We have insufficient housing for those in need.

Can we afford to repair the damage?

No, but we can afford to sling a bit of money to try and buy some votes. Even if some of it has to be borrowed, and we end up even poorer.


"On the eve of World Book Day, it is perhaps fitting that Jeremy Hunt, Britain’s chancellor, was forced into writing a bit of fiscal fiction. Caught between political pressures to boost his party’s popularity and the country’s fragile public finances, he managed to confect a spring Budget that cuts taxes, meets his fiscal rule and makes a start on some sensible reforms. The problem is that he has had to stretch economic reality in order to get there.

The chancellor’s headline measure — and intended vote-grabber — was a 2 percentage point cut to national insurance, at a cost of £10bn per year. Beside a few small tax rises elsewhere, the giveaway is funded in part by higher borrowing. But to make the numbers add up Hunt is also relying on unrealistic spending plans, which could involve unspecified future cuts to already strained public services."

FT.com

 

[JohnD]

"The cut to NI will put money back into the pockets of workers who have suffered a severe cost of living squeeze. But it is ultimately a wasteful use of the UK’s tight public finances. With tax thresholds having been frozen for years, the ratio of tax to gross domestic product is still expected to hit its highest since 1948 in 2028-29. At least Hunt managed to fend off pressure to cut income taxes. The NI cuts are cheaper, and help to raise the labour supply.

Surveys suggest many voters would have preferred a better deal for strained public services. Hunt maintained growth in departmental spending at 1 per cent per year in real terms. But unprotected services could still face real-terms cuts of about 3.3 per cent per year, according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies"

FT.com

 

[Stivino]

"Pensioners and higher-income Britons will end up being the big losers from tax and benefit changes pushed through in the current parliament, pointing to a striking shift in political strategy by the governing Conservative party.

Analysis in the wake of chancellor Jeremy Hunt’s pre-election Budget shows that of the more than 60 per cent of pensioners who pay income tax, the majority will be £650 a year worse off by 2027 as a result of policy changes in recent years. Higher-rate pensioner taxpayers will lose more than £3,000 a year, according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies think-tank.

Separate research from the Resolution Foundation think-tank shows that across the board wealthy taxpayers are the biggest losers from the Conservative government’s tax changes. It found that the top fifth of the income distribution will lose out by an average of £1,500 by 2027-28, while the typical household will gain £420."

FT.com

I really don't care. But, what's your point anyway?

 

[Murdochcat]

We have crumbling schools, hospitals beyond repair, potholed roads, and aircraft carriers that can't get beyond the Isle of Wight. We have Councils going bust due to central government cuts. We have insufficient dentists, nurses and midwives. We have insufficient housing for those in need.

Can we afford to repair the damage?

So how much extra tax and NI are you willing to pay?

 

[motorbiking]

He could pay 10 X more and still pay less than those he likes to hate.

 

[Mottie]

So how much extra tax and NI are you willing to pay?

Perhaps JohnD could just give up his tax free allowance on his investments?

 

[Notch7]

Bottom line is that if we want better services, we all have to pay more.

But Notch7 never admits this

We are paying more:

tax levels have increased significantly over the last 14 years, Conservative stealth taxes from 2019 onwards are set to increase taxes by £75b

So why at the same time have out public services been cut massively?


maybe its because ever since Thatcher, this country has flogged everything off to private companies and all they care about is profit

 

[Notch7]

So how much extra tax and NI are you willing to pay?

we are already paying more

tax is at a 70 year high

public services are at an all time low

 

[ajohn]

One view of the budget was that it needed to be boring - no sign of Trusenomics which some MP's want or at least some shade of it. These unlike the cabinet do not need to worry about balancing the books. If in power they would need to and as with Trus reactions are not determined by the UK. Problem with politics this doesn't stop them from spouting. Greens are another example. What they want can't be done in a short period of time. We are moving slowly towards what the want. How well will it work - wait and see just as we would if they were in power. Fact - little can be done to speed it up. These areas come under popularism rather than fixing. Great way of gaining support and votes. Politics in many countries have shades of this problem. The public, especially on here finish up arguing about all sorts of things.

Were are we following the budget. Numerical levels of debt will continue to increase over the next 5 years so look at them a different way. Relate it to expected GDP at that point in time which is always likely to be higher even if just due to inflation. This sort of thing has been done before. Trade gap was the god. Can't maintain it so scrap the idea. GDP becomes god. Use a machinism to try and control inflation but nothing can be done when it's due to external sources without pain. Not all jobs are productive in trade gap terms.

 

[JohnD]

He could pay 10 X more and still pay less than those he likes to hate.

If I paid 200% or 400% it would be a higher proportion of my income than any tax-dodger. Whom I do not hate.

I don't see the relevance of tax rates for genocidal racists and violent misogynists. Are you suggesting they pay high taxes?