Budget 2025

[Psamathe]

OBR have issued a statement on the early release of their document.

It wasn’t actually emailed or posted anywhere.

“The document was not listed on the OBR website, journalists - including those at the BBC - were able to access it by guessing its URL, which was very similar to one used in a previous official document.”

So it was just a basic phishing exercise which exploited poor file management. But an easy mistake to make for the average administrator who is unfamiliar with such protocols.

It is piss poor security, who is their sys admin, the CEO's ten year old sprog?

They seem unable to distinguish between publishing and listing/promoting.

They did publish it on a piublic accessible website. That the didn't tell many people the URL or that they didn't protect it with login protection are quite separate.

Were they to publish confidential personal data about a taxpayer "but didn't tell reporters the URL" is would be a massive security breach.

 

[Psamathe]

Income tax rates have increased on savings

Again, don't go into Politics. Tax has increased on savings interest. Savings interest is not income tax, it's tax on savings.
The promise is kept.

Government Rules (from Government website highlighting budget changes):

Income Tax for savings income will now be 22% at the savings basic rate, 42% at the savings higher rate and 47% at the savings additional rate for 2027 to 2028

and

The rates of Income Tax on savings income will be as follows:
savings basic rate 22% ...

Note that it clearly, explicitly states "Income Tax for savings income ...". To me (and my investment broker (that means "Income Tax").

 

[C R]

They seem unable to distinguish between publishing and listing/promoting.

They did publish it on a piublic accessible website. That the didn't tell many people the URL or that they didn't protect it with login protection are quite separate.

Were they to publish confidential personal data about a taxpayer "but didn't tell reporters the URL" is would be a massive security breach.

It is still a security breach. The document was meant to be embargoed, but was made available in a publicly accessible url without any controls.

 

[Psamathe]

It is still a security breach. The document was meant to be embargoed, but was made available in a publicly accessible url without any controls.

I agree. Just "we didn't tell the reporters the URL" is no excuse atall. It was published, just instructions for accessing it were not so widely published but were still available.

That they regard it as "no breach" highlights how incapable the Government is with data security and leaking information.

 

[CXRAndy]

That they regard it as "no breach" highlights how incapable the Government is with data security and leaking information.

They want us to have all our data packaged in digital ID

 

[icowden]

Note that it clearly, explicitly states "Income Tax for savings income ...". To me (and my investment broker (that means "Income Tax").

Yes, it's an income tax but not, for the purposes of political manoeuvring - , Income Tax.

In real terms we are all paying more tax on our income, but the spin is that Labour have kept their promise by not raising the Income Tax Rates.
It would have been a lot easier not to make nonsense promises, or to say "the situation is different, the promise is no longer viable) and stick a penny on income tax.

However because Politicians will get roasted by the Billionaire Press barons, they flagellate themselves with these linguistic wins.

 

[Psamathe]

Yes, it's an income tax but not, for the purposes of political manoeuvring - , Income Tax.

In real terms we are all paying more tax on our income, but the spin is that Labour have kept their promise by not raising the Income Tax Rates.
It would have been a lot easier not to make nonsense promises, or to say "the situation is different, the promise is no longer viable) and stick a penny on income tax.

However because Politicians will get roasted by the Billionaire Press barons, they flagellate themselves with these linguistic wins.

HMRC call it "Income Tax" Chancellor was setting rules and making promises about what HMRC will be taxing us. If they are trying to dance on a pin head they have failed as the absolutely have changed the rates of "Income Tax" just as they have increased employee National Insurance.

 

[icowden]

HMRC call it "Income Tax" Chancellor was setting rules and making promises about what HMRC will be taxing us. If they are trying to dance on a pin head they have failed as the absolutely have changed the rates of "Income Tax" just as they have increased employee National Insurance.

Well, all of the press seem to think that they have kept their promise not to raise income tax. So it worked.

 

[Dorset Boy]

Well, all of the press seem to think that they have kept their promise not to raise income tax. So it worked.

They really don't think that.

 

[Shortfall]

Well, all of the press seem to think that they have kept their promise not to raise income tax. So it worked.

It's bad enough that she's trying to keep this idiotic fiction going without otherwise sensible people cheerleading her on. Nobody is buying it. It's absolute bu11shit and you know it.

 

[CXRAndy]

They really don't think that.

No they dont

Some of the comments from press

We all know this all about buying votes, paying billions more for benefit wallers,

whilst low earners, middle earner, high earners pay for it in one way or another.

Labour will never ever recover from this. Sooner this government is brought down the better.

The next government has a monumental task, in reducing the national debt, interest payments, immigration, welfare, health, infrastructure

Generating business confidence and attracting back investment is paramount

The cuts are going to be brutal but absolutely necessary

 

[Psamathe]

It's bad enough that she's trying to keep this idiotic fiction going without otherwise sensible people cheerleading her on. Nobody is buying it. It's absolute bu11shit and you know it.

And it's actually worse as the frozen band thresholds mean more people with savings will be dragged into the higher savings rates. So hitting people with increased amounts (above thresholds) AND higher rates. Double whammy.

And real "working families" also have savings.

 

[CXRAndy]

Hardly a prime minister riding the crest of a wave

The sharks are just waiting for the next disaster in a already long line

 

[Psamathe]

Maybe this budget change highlights Labour's approach

Rachel Reeves’s budget creates tax break for rich ex-non-doms
A tax break for rich former non-doms that slashes their potential inheritance tax bills was included in the small print of the budget.
...
On Wednesday, the chancellor introduced a £5m cap on how much IHT can be levied every decade on non-dom offshore trusts created before the status was abolished. Experts said this would only help those worth more than £83m.

Treasury estimates suggest the change will cost the exchequer £30m. However, several tax advisers told the Guardian they considered that figure was likely to be too low, given the values contained within some trusts that could benefit from the tax break were worth hundreds of millions.

 

[Pross]

No of course I'm not, but they will receive income from different sources which are taxed in different ways.

But so far, CR has only come up with dividends being taxed at a lower rate than income from employment, which ignores the reward for taking risk, and the fact the underlying investments (if holding shares) are also subject to Capital Gains tax), and Stowie has come up with a loanback scheme that almost certainly falls foul of the UK and EU anti Avoidance rules.

Maxing out pensions, drawing PCLs, maxing Isas, using investment bonds either onshore or offshore, using VCTs and EISs are all methods used by ordinary people.

You have a good idea what do for a living, and I don't hear anything other than rumours, usually from people who don't know. Holding investments in certain juridictions means no tax paid there, but you still have to pay tax if you repatriate the money.....

So what are these wonderful other ways that the rich avoid paying taxes? Genuinely i'm curious.

I'm not sure that's really true, I don't know many people with enough income left over each month that they can take advantage of these things. I would suggest that's the thing with the "wealthy" as people see them. They have more disposable income to invest in legitimate tax efficient schemes plus a lot of income will come from stocks and shares. The average person earning £40k or so generally isn't able to do any of this as their monthly salary gets them through the month, maybe with a chance to stick a few quid into savings or an ISA if they're lucky.