Autumn statement,Budget

[discobob]

9 hours ago, oldypigeonpopper said:

Is Truss not to blame for the financial wobble then we are hit again by this budget

Partly, because it was what the markets didn't want to hear, but also the MSM etc....The main one being the Higher Rate of Tax though that was used to oust them by turning public sentiment.

Now picture this, those high earners, who thought they were getting a reduction in tax have now been hit with a hike in tax - to the tune of an amount of money that can be the rent of an apartment overseas - or just sell their property and move overseas - eyup - just lost all that income tax revenue now.

Similar with the increase in Corporation Tax and also the Dividend (although I haven't looked closely at that one) change - that will hit smaller companies, mom and pop ones etc and stifle growth of them  - and they are the biggest employers in this country - you know - the ones that don't have fancy accountants and have meals with seniors from the HMRC Supremo's and that.

Sentiment is a big thing - and making the country more positive would have had a beneficial effect. Now, we just have negativity at every turn - you wait and see what else pops out of the small print in this one - Welcome to the highest fuel duties (I think but stand to be corrected) in the world - and it won't be 12p that goes on per litre, it will be 15p by the time it hits the pumps - like Rishi's 5p duty cut last year - didn't even make the displays flicker at garages.....

 

[old man]

13 minutes ago, ShootingEgg said:

The billions paid on furlough, the pandemic and the amount of debt we are in made the wobble. Truss is a really easy scapegoat right now.. 

Most of that was just straightforward theft to help their mates? Truss and Kwartengs actions bordered on treason? In either event nothing will be done as we must move on and dish out more awards for idiocy in office?

Kick the ball down the road for the next lot to try to solve?

Edited November 18, 2022 by old man

[Jaymo]

17 minutes ago, discobob said:

Partly, because it was what the markets didn't want to hear, but also the MSM etc....The main one being the Higher Rate of Tax though that was used to oust them by turning public sentiment.

Now picture this, those high earners, who thought they were getting a reduction in tax have now been hit with a hike in tax - to the tune of an amount of money that can be the rent of an apartment overseas - or just sell their property and move overseas - eyup - just lost all that income tax revenue now.

Similar with the increase in Corporation Tax and also the Dividend (although I haven't looked closely at that one) change - that will hit smaller companies, mom and pop ones etc and stifle growth of them  - and they are the biggest employers in this country - you know - the ones that don't have fancy accountants and have meals with seniors from the HMRC Supremo's and that.

Sentiment is a big thing - and making the country more positive would have had a beneficial effect. Now, we just have negativity at every turn - you wait and see what else pops out of the small print in this one - Welcome to the highest fuel duties (I think but stand to be corrected) in the world - and it won't be 12p that goes on per litre, it will be 15p by the time it hits the pumps - like Rishi's 5p duty cut last year - didn't even make the displays flicker at garages.....

 

Someone who understands. 
 

Had the Truss budget been tweaked a bit to not inflame the general public and sieved upon by the media. Then it would have been held in greater esteem.

The energy cap for two years should have been enough to have appeased many, yet those same detractors are bemoaning the increases we face. 

Markets were and are, jittery. What was failed to be mentioned, was that with the pound/dollar, that it was a Euroland occurrence too. 
 

The ‘Hunt’ budget will undoubtedly drive a deeper wedge and make a few weigh up their domicile arrangements with the subsequent loss

[oldypigeonpopper]

10 hours ago, oldypigeonpopper said:

I just heard a lady on BBC news say she was happy with the budget 🤔, tax rise, energy rise, council tax rise , the latter will knock out any pension rise, energy to rise to £3000, what planet is she on 🤔

Is Truss not to blame for the financial wobble then we are hit again by this budget, 

Once again I see news reporters talking to pensioners who say they only get the basic pension yet never mention the pension credit allowance , then that brings in other benefits  that will make you far better off than a pensioner on maximum pension who will not get anything except the winter fuel allowance, I sometimes wonder has it been worth the effort of saving for retirement with private pensions and enough savings to give a reasonable life in retirement, 

[Lloyd90]

16 hours ago, TOPGUN749 said:

Another £900 next year for some including those on working tax credits including some who don’t need it! I know my brother for example,big bungalow owned outright,£100,000+ in savings, works just 18 hours and gets every hand out going,although one of the wealthiest around the area! Ridiculous..It’s about time these benefits were means tested,then the money can go to the genuine poor.

They are means tested, which means your brother is cheating / lying to the system. 
 

If you’re so annoyed about it, report him! 
Bet you won’t. 

16 hours ago, Grandalf said:

Not heard anything about it today but the papers said that we were all going to pay more local council tax so that they can spend more on social care.

Now that bugs me.   I have been a carer for the Memsahib for nigh on ten years in a worsening situation.   It gets worse because her condition deteriorates as I get ever older (83 the last time I looked).   Now I am too 'rich' to get any help accept Attendance Allowance.   But I pay rates, as it used to be known, so I will be paying more so the council can spend more on social services but I am too 'rich' to get any help.

Now anyone who knows me knows that I am not rich.   Just been prudent with my money and saved more than £23,500 pounds.

If I have to put her into a home then guess who will have to pay for it?

Ask to be assessed as a couple, it doubles the allowance - so £47,000 if the current threshold is what you say (I’ve not checked for a while). 
 

Your allowed that amount each. 
 

If you do have over £47,000 (hopefully not) in cash sat in the bank and you’re both well into your 80’s … is it fair to ask the tax payer to find your care so you can have all that money just sat there? 

[TOPGUN749]

3 hours ago, Lloyd90 said:

They are means tested, which means your brother is cheating / lying to the system. 
 

If you’re so annoyed about it, report him! 
Bet you won’t. 

I can assure you that the working tax credit  system is not means tested! It it based purely on income,not savings.The only thing they ask is about interest on savings if it’s over £300 a year.So as I said my brother is entitled to claim this cash and be given all the top ups and handouts for working a few hours for £180 a week,pay no tax or national insurance ,his wife refuses to work at all so extra allowance for her.Everyone thinks it’s means tested but it isn’t unlike the newer universal credit which is.There may not be a lot of people still in the working tax credits system,and not many with huge wealth,but for some it still applies,in fact I know of a couple who had a big inheritance,owned 3 houses,and were still allowed working tax credits and child tax credits based on income of one postman’s wage!

Edited November 18, 2022 by TOPGUN749

[enfieldspares]

16 hours ago, oowee said:

At last they have a plan for EV's and have listened to labour re windfall tax on energy firms. No vat on private education or tax for non doms. How long do we have now until they are out? 

Finally...well at least in the near future...a tax on EVs which, as said elsewhere weigh more that the same model but with an aspirated engine and thus cause more road wear and tear. I agree with OWEE too on VAT on private education these may have once (as was my old school) been established in the late 1400s for the teaching of the poor of the parish but are no businesses no more no less.

And non-doms? In the USA if you live there you pay tax AFAIK yet that hasn't yet seen this always stated exodus of the talents.

To my mind if you have a UK passport you should pay UK tax regardless of where you live just as if if you have a US passport you pay US tax regardless of where you live. Because if FOREIGNOSTAN goes "tits up" those British passport holders living and working there tax free will be first on the quay, airport or the helipad to be evacuated out by British forces. Just as in Afghanistan.

Edited November 18, 2022 by enfieldspares

[discobob]

8 minutes ago, Lloyd90 said:

is it fair to ask the tax payer to find your care so you can have all that money just sat there? 

Is it fair to ask anyone to fund their care when they have paid into the system all their life,when people who haven't get it all handed on a plate. The former will lose everything bar a few thousand pounds the state allows them to retain....while the latter will be sat in a chair in the lounge next to the former, and that is after the former paying the latters benefits all their life

Obviously if the latter is honestly disabled, long term sick or whatever then that is understandable

37 minutes ago, Jaymo said:

Someone who understands. 

Thanks @Jaymo

True Conservatism - small government, small tax - let the country get on and make money - the more they make the more that flows into the central coffers.

This budget is just extreme capitalism (globalism) at a government level and totally regressive. The socialist elements will love it

 

[TOPGUN749]

16 hours ago, Grandalf said:

Not heard anything about it today but the papers said that we were all going to pay more local council tax so that they can spend more on social care.

Now that bugs me.   I have been a carer for the Memsahib for nigh on ten years in a worsening situation.   It gets worse because her condition deteriorates as I get ever older (83 the last time I looked).   Now I am too 'rich' to get any help accept Attendance Allowance.   But I pay rates, as it used to be known, so I will be paying more so the council can spend more on social services but I am too 'rich' to get any help.

Now anyone who knows me knows that I am not rich.   Just been prudent with my money and saved more than £23,500 pounds.

If I have to put her into a home then guess who will have to pay for it?

If you were living in Wales the threshold would be £50,000 per person which would help a lot!

[enfieldspares]

16 minutes ago, discobob said:

Is it fair to ask anyone to fund their care when they have paid into the system all their life,when people who haven't get it all handed on a plate. The former will lose everything bar a few thousand pounds the state allows them to retain....while the latter will be sat in a chair in the lounge next to the former, and that is after the former paying the latters benefits all their life

But is it also fair to expect Death Duties of £85,000 to be levied on an estate of someone who never went into care but died in that, their own home, at age ninety-four so that Karen down the road can send her parents off to a care home and expect everybody else to pick up the bill (via the tax they pay including these Death Duties) so she can then sell their house and bank the money? There's more than black and white to every argument. Basically as others said these Karen types are expecting others to pick up the tab (for their parents care) so as to enable them to then profit from their parents having to go into care by acquiring their house.

Edited November 18, 2022 by enfieldspares

[discobob]

17 minutes ago, enfieldspares said:

But is it also fair to expect Death Duties of £85,000 to be levied on an estate of someone who never went into care but died in that, their own home, at age ninety-four so that Karen down the road can send her parents off to a care home and expect everybody else to pick up the bill (via the tax they pay including these Death Duties) so she can then sell their house and bank the money? There's more than black and white to every argument. Basically as others said these Karen types are expecting others to pick up the tab (for their parents care) so as to enable them to then profit from their parents having to go into care by acquiring their house.

No, they have paid in all their life - people need to wake up and see what this set up is - it is a massive Ponzi Scheme (pyramid but think diamond) where only the rich and those who have nothing win - the ones in the middle have to pick up the slack to pay the money for benefits for others, along with the ever increasing revenues for the rich along with Government White Elephants.

I foresee in the not too distant future a grab on savings as well - like what was done in Cyprus several years ago. I bet as well in the weeks before an announcement of that that you would see money flowing off shore faster than the dinghies are heading to our shores!!!

I do know of someone who was caught by that grab - they had sold their property and had the money in the bank while waiting to buy a new property - then the grab happened and they were left without the money to buy and I heard they had to come back to the UK...

[udderlyoffroad]

Those calling for a change of government or general election:  This budget is basically Continuity New Labour.  Hunt and Sunak are not conservatives, not by a long shot.  They have taxed everyone to the hilt, and hiked benefits.  And what would Labour (or a lib-lab-green coalition hellscape) change exactly? 

12p+ a litre increase in fuel duty in March?  Do they not understand how this will cause inflation to go off the scale?  I  predict a riot (or two), especially as people's nerves will be frayed following rolling black outs.

 

20 minutes ago, enfieldspares said:

And non-doms? In the USA if you live there you pay tax AFAIK yet that hasn't yet seen this always stated exodus of the talents.

To my mind if you have a UK passport you should pay UK tax regardless of where you live just as if if you have a US passport you pay US tax regardless of where you live. Because if FOREIGNOSTAN goes "tits up" those British passport holders living and working there tax free will be first on the quay, airport or the helipad to be evacuated out by British forces. Just as in Afghanistan.

The vast majority of 'non-doms' are earning money outside the UK, already being taxed handsomely on it by the state they live in. The brain drain not to mention the UK's reputation if it follows the US' model will make Brexit seem like an irrelevance.  The US has seen an exodus of talent, with lots of people surrendering their citizenship*, meaning the IRS gets exactly $0 from them ever again.  Really stupid, short sighted nonsense.  Not to mention the fact the UK has dual-taxation agreements with several countries (I.e. you can't be taxed twice on the same money earnt).

The Afghanistan example you cite is an outlier and not at all relevant to most of the non-doms working to provide a better life for them and their families.  Though I would agree that the UK should have a 'no repatriation assistance' list of countries.  Working in a hell-hole war zone**?  Tough, you'll be left to rot.

*Including a certain Prime Minister of the UK.  Whether or not you count that as talent is another question.

**Yes including the hell holes the UK helped create

[12gauge82]

3 hours ago, discobob said:

Partly, because it was what the markets didn't want to hear, but also the MSM etc....The main one being the Higher Rate of Tax though that was used to oust them by turning public sentiment.

Now picture this, those high earners, who thought they were getting a reduction in tax have now been hit with a hike in tax - to the tune of an amount of money that can be the rent of an apartment overseas - or just sell their property and move overseas - eyup - just lost all that income tax revenue now.

Similar with the increase in Corporation Tax and also the Dividend (although I haven't looked closely at that one) change - that will hit smaller companies, mom and pop ones etc and stifle growth of them  - and they are the biggest employers in this country - you know - the ones that don't have fancy accountants and have meals with seniors from the HMRC Supremo's and that.

Sentiment is a big thing - and making the country more positive would have had a beneficial effect. Now, we just have negativity at every turn - you wait and see what else pops out of the small print in this one - Welcome to the highest fuel duties (I think but stand to be corrected) in the world - and it won't be 12p that goes on per litre, it will be 15p by the time it hits the pumps - like Rishi's 5p duty cut last year - didn't even make the displays flicker at garages.....

 

This. 

 

[Rem260]

17 hours ago, oowee said:

A 7% fall in living standards. Growth the lowest in the g7 and the only country in negative growth territory. 

You have to give it to the tories they know how to run a party. 

I may have to break out some mid week wine. 😢

Give Labour a chance and you will be calling them the good old days.

[oowee]

3 hours ago, udderlyoffroad said:

 

 

The vast majority of 'non-doms' are earning money outside the UK, already being taxed handsomely on it by the state they live in. The brain drain not to mention the UK's reputation if it follows the US' model will make Brexit seem like an irrelevance.  The US has seen an exodus of talent, with lots of people surrendering their citizenship*, meaning the IRS gets exactly $0 from them ever again.  Really stupid, short sighted nonsense.  Not to mention the fact the UK has dual-taxation agreements with several countries (I.e. you can't be taxed twice on the same money earnt).

 

Research (University of Warwick and LSE) suggests that departure from the UK would not be the case. It is predicted that less than a 100 would leave the UK and a tax would raise 3.2bn.

https://www.lse.ac.uk/News/Latest-news-from-LSE/2022/i-September-22/Abolishing-the-non-dom-regime-would-raise-more-than-3.2-billion-each-year-finds-new-report

[udderlyoffroad]

Exactly, massive reputational damage and terrible long-term consequences for a measly £3.2 billion?  

This idea belongs in the dustbin.  Sadly, as Hunt has poo-poo'd it, doubtless it is coming down the track.

 

[243deer]

Personally I am disappointed that he is not taxing all those who were in receipt of furlough payments for sitting on their backsides (the ones who did not volunteer) at a higher rate than those who had to work through the pandemic.

[discobob]

1 minute ago, 243deer said:

Personally I am disappointed that he is not taxing all those who were in receipt of furlough payments for sitting on their backsides (the ones who did not volunteer) at a higher rate than those who had to work through the pandemic.

I did post - on the CV subforum - that people (and companies) that were in receipt of Furlough should have to pay it back in a way similar to Student Loans with a split responsibility - perhaps via higher employee and employer NIC payments with a 10 year life to it - easily done with a tax code modification.

 

I have just seen that they have closed down the department that was investigating corrupt business payments during lockdown as well.....

[Lloyd90]

4 hours ago, discobob said:

Is it fair to ask anyone to fund their care when they have paid into the system all their life,when people who haven't get it all handed on a plate. The former will lose everything bar a few thousand pounds the state allows them to retain....while the latter will be sat in a chair in the lounge next to the former, and that is after the former paying the latters benefits all their life

Obviously if the latter is honestly disabled, long term sick or whatever then that is understandable

Thanks @Jaymo

True Conservatism - small government, small tax - let the country get on and make money - the more they make the more that flows into the central coffers.

This budget is just extreme capitalism (globalism) at a government level and totally regressive. The socialist elements will love it

 

Not the “I’ve paid my stamp all my life” again. 
 

The vast, vast, vast, vast majority of people pay in less than they get back well before they reach the age they need care. 

51 minutes ago, 243deer said:

Personally I am disappointed that he is not taxing all those who were in receipt of furlough payments for sitting on their backsides (the ones who did not volunteer) at a higher rate than those who had to work through the pandemic.

Without a doubt, myself and lots of colleagues worked all the way through, often under very testing conditions, being busier than ever… everyone clapped then they gave us a massively below inflation pay deal 🤣🤣

 

Meanwhile I know of lots of tradesmen and small companies etc, who claimed furlough but kept on working all the way through!! 

[Yellow Bear]

2 minutes ago, Lloyd90 said:

Not the “I’ve paid my stamp all my life” again. 
 

The vast, vast, vast, vast majority of people pay in less than they get back well before they reach the age they need care. 

The trouble is the vast, vast, vast, vast majority of people getting care pay in nothing before they get care.

But I have no doubt you will totally disagree with this statement because it does not suit your usual narrative.

[discobob]

22 minutes ago, Lloyd90 said:

Not the “I’ve paid my stamp all my life” again. 

Yes - I have - with the exception of 2 months prior to joining up (hard to get a job living in temporary accommodation back then - YMCA) and then 1 week after I left the Army (waiting for my job to start)

I have made sacrifices to ensure that we got on in life, worked hard etc. etc. for what - to get it all taken away as there is nothing in the coffers because the feckless can be funded cradle to grave.....

You would have seen some of my posts on how I feel on the matter.

30 minutes ago, Lloyd90 said:

Meanwhile I know of lots of tradesmen and small companies etc, who claimed furlough but kept on working all the way through!! 

As I said above, the department that was supposed to have been 'clawing' this money back from people who took it has been closed so they get away scott free - or rather they don't and have to pay 25% corp tax going forward

[TOPGUN749]

6 hours ago, enfieldspares said:

But is it also fair to expect Death Duties of £85,000 to be levied on an estate of someone who never went into care but died in that, their own home, at age ninety-four so that Karen down the road can send her parents off to a care home and expect everybody else to pick up the bill (via the tax they pay including these Death Duties) so she can then sell their house and bank the money? There's more than black and white to every argument. Basically as others said these Karen types are expecting others to pick up the tab (for their parents care) so as to enable them to then profit from their parents having to go into care by acquiring their house.

The inheritance tax threshold of £325,000 have not been uprated since 2009,it should really be at least £500,000 by now! However as with the income tax threshold they leave it low and get far more taxes in.

[Newbie to this]

42 minutes ago, Lloyd90 said:

everyone clapped

Not everyone.

[TOPGUN749]

1 hour ago, 243deer said:

Personally I am disappointed that he is not taxing all those who were in receipt of furlough payments for sitting on their backsides (the ones who did not volunteer) at a higher rate than those who had to work through the pandemic.

The furlough scheme was abused by employers.The should only have used it to furlough staff who would otherwise be made redundant.Where I was working they actually asked everyone what they would prefer,work as normal or furlough at 80%,It only lasted 3-4 weeks and they wanted everyone back,but the ones put on furlough by choice were not at risk of redundancy ever!

[Grandalf]

23 hours ago, ditchman said:

is your house in joint ownership ?

Yes Ditchman, it is.   I know you have been through all this yourself.