Starmer's vision quest

[Stevo 666]

As often said, they should have shared the NI burden between employers (via the thresholds) and employees (by removing the uncosted cut made just before the election), but they didn't have the cahunas to campaign on it.

The promise not to raise income tax, NI, VAT or CT was a particularly stupid promise for a Labour government to make as those 4 taxes are (IIRC) the largest sources of tax revenue in the UK.

 

[Stevo 666]

And in other news, the Fruit & Nut Party is not short of ambition:
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/ukne...r&cvid=7bd44d38c8ed4784cdf1e3fbdddff81d&ei=41

 

[Pross]

The promise not to raise income tax, NI, VAT or CT was a particularly stupid promise for a Labour government to make as those 4 taxes are (IIRC) the largest sources of tax revenue in the UK.

I said that at the time, they fell into an obvious trap the Tories set knowing full well they were getting voted out. It was completely unnecessary, they were nailed on to win the election comfortably and could have easily said they weren't committing to anything in relation to taxes until they had a full understanding of the countries finances.

 

[First Aspect]

And in other news, the Fruit & Nut Party is not short of ambition:
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/ukne...r&cvid=7bd44d38c8ed4784cdf1e3fbdddff81d&ei=41

I find the name Zarah Sultana quite pleasing to the ear, alliteratively, and so I hope they get more press coverage.

 

[First Aspect]

Pension being paid out, is, as you say, taxed as income, are you suggestion the dividends and/or Capital Gains which are funding that payout should also add to the individuals tax liability?

Pension being paid into a scheme is not (generally speaking) taxed.

Not really suggesting anything. However broadly speaking, schemes that pay people via something other than a "salary" captured by income tax is an issue, when that other option accesses a much lower tax burden than someone else contributing the same to the economy.

Already, clearly, a small percentage of earners pay a high percentage of income tax - top 10% of incomes account for 60% of income tax more or less. So firstly there's a big incentive for high erarners to avoid this and secondly quite a lot of potential gain for government to close some loopholes. Just ignore the Daily Mail spouting off about disgruntled billionaires who don't pay it either way walking off in a huff to live in the Cayman Islands. That's not data.

I don't think pensions fall into the same category, although no doubt there are debates going on in Whitehall as we speak about how they should be taxed going in and coming out. I'm starting to think this chancellor is stupid enough to screw over the current working generation both in terms of retirement age and multiple tax filters on the money they need to avoid taking state benefits when they are old.

 

[Pross]

I find the name Zarah Sultana quite pleasing to the ear, alliteratively, and so I hope they get more press coverage.

Should be in a rock band, it reminds me of Tony Iommi

 

[First Aspect]

Should be in a rock band, it reminds me of Tony Iommi

Or Ed Wood Wood Wood.

 

[bobzmyunkle]

Rachel's after economic experts @Stevo 666.
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...s-economic-heavyweights-advisers-reduce-roles

 

[Psamathe]

Anyone in receipt of a Pension (other than State Pension) is indirectly in receipt of dividends, I would hazard a guess that includes quite a few "little people".

Similarly, anyone "growing" a "Private" Pension, is indirectly in receipt of Dividends, and Capital Gains (unless their Pension scheme is a dog.

It actually varies depending on the individual's age and how much they are controlling their pension investments. A younger plicy holder's investments will be receiving dividends but as they get closer to retirement age many pension companies adjust the investment balance to be more secure but maybe lower return (eg Guilts). Reason being is stock markets can go down as well as up and further from retirement and there is time for a "down" to turn round and long term recover; but a bad down shortly before retirement and somebodies pot can suffer badly, hence the change of balance to more secure investments. Quite possible for a policy holder to instruct to pension company to invest their funds in different (riskier) schemes to the change is default.

Ian

 

[Psamathe]

As often said, they should have shared the NI burden between employers (via the thresholds) and employees (by removing the uncosted cut made just before the election), but they didn't have the cahunas to campaign on it.

Unsure what actually happened but at the time the NI increase was announced many financial analyst were saying in practice employees would be paying anyway as companies are already stretched so the cost increases will in effect be passed on through lower pay increases as well as price increases (also affecting employees indirectly).

Ian

 

[Stevo 666]

I find the name Zarah Sultana quite pleasing to the ear, alliteratively, and so I hope they get more press coverage.

I think Diane Abbott should sign up. She used to be very good friends with Jezza as I recall.

 

[CXRAndy]

I think Diane Abbott should sign up. She used to be very good friends with Jezza as I recall.

👩‍❤️‍💋‍👩

 

[All uphill]

It actually varies depending on the individual's age and how much they are controlling their pension investments. A younger plicy holder's investments will be receiving dividends but as they get closer to retirement age many pension companies adjust the investment balance to be more secure but maybe lower return (eg Guilts). Reason being is stock markets can go down as well as up and further from retirement and there is time for a "down" to turn round and long term recover; but a bad down shortly before retirement and somebodies pot can suffer badly, hence the change of balance to more secure investments. Quite possible for a policy holder to instruct to pension company to invest their funds in different (riskier) schemes to the change is default.

Ian

I like the typo: Guilts

 

[Shortfall]

There was a leap in receipts as people tried to beat the new rates, then the expected drop afterwards. It'll most likely return to normal levels.

Is there a precedent for this? I genuinely don't know so I'm not trying to do a gotcha. On the face of it appears that Stevo has a point about Laffer in that people modify their behaviour in response to higher capital gains rates and either bring forward or delay the realising of their assets to coincide with more favourable rates. With regard to taxation in general we are being taxed more heavily than ever which appears to have led to a doom loop of crushing personal incomes and spending power, depressing the labour market, and there are signs of capital flight and the start of another brain drain (although I see that some of you dispute this). Are there any Labour voters here who are prepared to defend the government's handling of the economy, preferably without resort to how bad the Tories were/are?

 

[CXRAndy]

Are there any Labour voters here whom are prepared to defend the government's handling of the economy,

No,

and even funnier is that everyone is denying being a labour voter.

There denial is behaving like 3 times Peter the disciple