Forum Topic

Politics Of Envy

outrageous Labour want to send inspectors into home to assess the value to levy mansion tax, communist move sunrise outrageous. What is this country becoming, lack of any aspiration, if you dare to be ambitious Labour are coming for you. The top 1% already contribute approx 33% of income tax for what….to give to people who don’t work, wrong on every level. Stop benefiting fraud. Labour has zero clue on how to grow the economy.

Jayne Thorburn ● 3d24 Comments

Tax threshold was last increased in 2021,so both the parties that have been in power have used that ploy.

Keith Iddon ● 1d

The basic rate of income tax was steadily reduced under the Conservatives and Labour was scared to increase it again for fear of losing votes. Instead they have frozen the starting threshold and therefore brought more poorly-paid workers and pensioners into the tax bracket, but that does not get the same headlines as would an increase in the basic rate - even more so if NI was combined with it to raise the basic rate even higher as many voters still regard NI as a contribution to their pensions.

Richard Greenhough ● 1d

The quid pro quo would  be that ALL the reforms to social care promised by government after government were actually put in place and that hospices received proper state funding. Yes this would take a brave Chancellor to introduce this reform.

Sam Hearn ● 1d

"Income Tax and Employees National Insurance should be merged.."I think Nigel Lawson looked at that option during his time as Chancellor, and came to the conclusion that there was no way it could be done without leaving a significant number of people worse off, which would cost the government a lot of votes. That is why no government is willing to bite that particular bullet.

Richard Greenhough ● 1d

And remember, if your not old yet, you will be next.

Janice Evans ● 1d

And elderly people pay for their care, so keep saying they get everything free is false information, some are even paying for their medication now.

Janice Evans ● 1d

maybe a lot of elderly people would like to downsize, some are very ill and do need the space for medical equipment or live in carer, but sometimes they just have no one to help them downsize by taking them to view places etc., i downsized after my husband died, never had to just thought the place was to big for me on my own once the two dogs had passed away I made the move.

Janice Evans ● 1d

Let's be honest the only reason that many people support a Mansion tax is that they will not have to pay it or make any adjustment to their way of life. We do not need a complex and punitive entirely new tax. What we need is reform of our existing tax system. Income Tax and Employees National Insurance should be merged so that pensioners with large retirement incomes bear some of the burden of the costs incurred by the State in looking after the after the elderly. Yes the basic rate of income tax would have to increase but at least this would be an honest acknowledgement that the burden had to be shared.There are often elderly people living in large family homes who would simply not have the disposable income to pay an annual Mansion tax. Saying the tax could roll-up and be paid on death is quite frankly grotesque. If you want people to pay more Inheritance Tax why not say so in straight forward manner rather than by adding further chapters to our tax code (already the longest in the world).Yes people living in houses that are larger than they need should consider downsizing. But if Governments really believed this why do they discourage this by charging ridiculous stamp duty charges when we attempt to do this. Duh, how stupid can our politicians get. For goodness sake let's keep it real - ALL taxes must be inexpensive to collect, raise much more than they cost to collect, be easy to calculate, be hard to evade or avoid and have a high level of acceptance by those who pay the tax   

Sam Hearn ● 1d

Peter, surely that would stop people selling.

Janice Evans ● 1d

Hi Keith, I agree it’s everyone who’s working who pays. The ‘inequality’ increases the younger you are which is why I used the example of someone just starting out in work.They will be paying for those who are beneficiaries of the Triple Lock and who started receiving their State Pension Benefit at an age many years ahead of what the young can expect to start receiving their pension at.I already know that people born only a few years after me will have to wait a year longer for their State Pension to start.I totally get that we don’t want the state pension to be reducing in relation to average income.Re your comment about going on strike, occasionally it works, but for the vast majority of the working population it isn’t really a viable or realistic option.

Andrew Jones ● 1d

The cash-poor granny in the big house is always rolled out as an excuse for not taxing the far greater number of well-enough-off people in big houses! Pension credit might cover it, as with council tax, or it could become a charge on the property set against any future sale or transfer?

Peter Evans ● 1d

Not just a roof, it’s your home and now Labour want to go after that too. They don’t care about peoples home they care about tax. We have a system it’s called council tax update it. The whole point of council tax is if a council runs efficiently and effectively it keeps cost down and we vote accordingly. The problem for labour is that they don’t run councils efficiently or effectively. I don’t believe anyone in government actually has any commercial experience they are career politicians not sure if the same is true re councils.

Jayne Thorburn ● 1d

The greatest value of a house will always be as it should be - a roof over someone's head.

Philippa Bond ● 1d

Thank you everyone for your contribution of which I totally agree except Felicity. The older generation went straight to work and very few went to university and those that did had a chosen career path, law, accounting, medical etc. today university isn’t a chosen career path at all. A large % of degrees today have little value other than perhaps life experience. The older generation went straight to work paid tax & NI with the expectation that they received a pension. Their tax paid pensions for the older generation. I totally accept that the world has changed unless you are a public servant who still get final salary pension this has to change. The private sector no longer provides this. So the tax payer of all ages are funding current & past civil servants on final salary pension . Everything is relevant the older generation had little access to credit so saved to buy items didn’t live on credit. Equally didn’t have access to modern technology washing machine, tumble dryers etc. they cooked, they work hard both at home & the work place. Valuing a property is market driven they can go up and down, labour are driving prices down. If they go down this road there will be a class action property is only worth what someone will pay.

Jayne Thorburn ● 2d

Why do you begrudge the elderly getting a pension they paid for their working life, they are keeping a lot of careers in work, also they do pay for that care, well my mother did.  Also you have to think of circumstances before expecting someone to move, apart from moving would probably be to stressful for an elderly person, my mother was blind but knew her way around her home asking someone like that to move would be cruel, which I'm thinking some of you might be.

Janice Evans ● 2d

Yes Andrew,but it's not just the young who are paying for pensioners,but also those below pensionable age who are currently in work.I think the triple lock was introduced in 2010 partly to try to reduce the number of pensioners  claiming additional top ups via benefits(the pension is viewed as an entitlement rather than a benefit) and to recognise that pensioners can't get another job,ask their boss for a rise or go on strike in order to increase their income.Reducing the amount of money paid to pensioners would likely increase the number applying for top ups.

Keith Iddon ● 2d

There are a few problems with the so called Mansion tax.The first and biggest is that the costs of valuing and collecting will be far greater than the Government predicts.The second is that the time to collect will be far longer than predicted (or more refunds than predicted) as there will be a nice new income stream for estate agents who provide valuations that contradict HMRC's leading to valuation appeals that take months.The third is that if they do roll out value inspectors who demand entry to your home these will no doubt be put off by the owner asking to see ID and then phoning HMRC to check that the person is in fact from HMRC - which would be a sensible security measure in any event - will the value inspector wait an hour or more whilst the home owner is on hold waiting for HMRC to answer?The fourth is that valuations would need to be updated annually, lots of home owners do renovate and/or extend in any 12 month period.Fifthly there will need to be some significant exceptions - suppose you upgrade the heating/hot water using solar panels and a heat pump, which is what the Government would like us to do, if that increase the value and attracts tax it contradicts the Government's green net zero policies.  I am sure there will be other examples.Finally, there is the little old granny problem.  Little old granny bought her house with her husband 50 years ago when the area was run down.  Whilst it is too big for her she will not move because of the memories and it is safe for her to be there.  She of course now lives on a state pension. How will Labour deal with in effect forcing her to move when they all opposed the so called bedroom tax for forcing tenants on benefits to move?  And of course little old granny and all her retired friends are the most likely demographic to vote

Justin Stephenson ● 2d

Brian,'so many people' didn't vote for Labour.They had the lowest % of the vote for many years,despite the huge majority of seats.That statistic quarantees that the country has a division between what it voted for and what it received.

Keith Iddon ● 2d

Out of interest, what do people think about those starting out in their work lives now, who will end up never claiming benefits but will pay a considerable amount of tax to help fund the triple lock for those pensioners  now, many of whomwill never have contributed anything like what they ended up getting out of the system.Do people believe that is unfair, the young paying for the gilded benefits of the old?

Andrew Jones ● 2d

Begs the question as to why so many people voted for Labour, and Starmer, and more importantly, why?

Brian Coyle ● 2d

Churchill once said that a nation trying to tax itself into prosperity 'Is like a man standing in a bucket trying to lift himself up by the handle'.

Keith Iddon ● 2d

Just looking at income tax doesn't give you the whole picture. People on lower incomes pay a much higher proportion of what they earn to the government due to VAT, 'sin' taxes, fees and fines. Put on top of that other quasi government charges such was water rates and they have little left. Older people have benefited from an economic policy over the last half century or so that effectively underwrote property prices. They are the same generation that are the heaviest users of our biggest growing cost items - the NHS and social care. Asking younger people who are much more likely to be working poor, and have additional burdens such as student debt to pay for this is grossly unfair.

Felicity Caborn ● 2d

1% supporting so much mansion tax is politics of envy. Then labour would rather waste money from those that work super hard, employ thousands, pay a fortune in other taxes, corp tax, NI etc Without wealth creators we are doomed to have benefits cheats. Our welfare bill is unsustainable its need checks & balances forget young be able to claim anything if they are not in work, education or training, it’s a joke. Employing people to snoop on homes is outrageous and a complete waste of money. That’s Labour wasteful & a race to the bottom.

Jayne Thorburn ● 3d

That 'The top 1% already contribute approx 33% of income tax..' presumably reflects how much that top 1% earns rather than any failing in the tax system!And with all the tax loopholes that top earners can employ, they probably earn somewhat more than that!As for the house valuation exercise, I suspect most of it will be done without any physical inspection.Oh, and more people fail to claim the benefits they're due than falsely claim what they're not.

Peter Evans ● 3d