LEAVE the Conservative Party and save your country!

rjsterry

rick_chasey said:

feelgoodlost said:

Those lovely Tories ey?!

https://twitter.com/PoliticsJOE_UK/status/1727346110417564137

How hard is it to behave professionally, honestly. You’re at work in one of the most watched rooms in the land.

It seems there's some dispute over exactly what was said. Pretty trivial in the scheme of things, though.

rjsterry

The scale of fiscal drag 👠👠

https://twitter.com/FraserNelson/status/1727342929138880588?t=WnJLfvmE7CIu9FjNjYO9SQ&s=19

Although, notwithstanding the daft cliff edges higher up the scale, if you have a pay rise which brings you into paying income tax for the first time, you are still better off.

rick_chasey

rjsterry said:

rick_chasey said:

feelgoodlost said:

Those lovely Tories ey?!

https://twitter.com/PoliticsJOE_UK/status/1727346110417564137

How hard is it to behave professionally, honestly. You’re at work in one of the most watched rooms in the land.

It seems there's some dispute over exactly what was said. Pretty trivial in the scheme of things, though.

Very representative of the quality of the front bench - career back benchers who should never be let near the front.

rjsterry

Cleverly is obviously not a career backbencher. He's had a senior position since 2018 and was only elected in 2015 after a senior position in the GLA.

Stevo_666

pangolin said:

How will everyone be spending their bumper 2% NI saving come January?

Haven't yet decided what to spend my £750 a year on yet. Best enjoy while you can.

morstar

rjsterry said:

The scale of fiscal drag 👠👠

https://twitter.com/FraserNelson/status/1727342929138880588?t=WnJLfvmE7CIu9FjNjYO9SQ&s=19

Although, notwithstanding the daft cliff edges higher up the scale, if you have a pay rise which brings you into paying income tax for the first time, you are still better off.

I’ve argued this on here before.

You will have more take home pay yes. But unless your rise outstrips both the rate of inflation and the new tax burden combined, you are not better off.

I.e. if I earn 12,570 and get a 10% pay rise whilst inflation is also 10%, I lose 30% of my pay rise to tax and NI.
My wage has increased 7% in real terms vs 10% inflation. I am worse off.

morstar

But 2% NI reduction not to be sniffed at.
Most working households going to save between 500 and 1500 per annum I’d have thought.

I’m treating it as cancelling out two years worth of static tax bands and is more than the 1% I was expecting. I can’t see how the static tax bands last until 2028.

rick_chasey

It’s only between £12k and £50k so if you’re on £35k you’re getting around £450 in savings, or roughly a day of heating extra a month.

surrey_commuter

rick_chasey said:

It’s only between £12k and £50k so if you’re on £35k you’re getting around £450 in savings, or roughly a day of heating extra a month.

You need better insulation.

morstar

rick_chasey said:

It’s only between £12k and £50k so if you’re on £35k you’re getting around £450 in savings, or roughly a day of heating extra a month.

Understood the numbers. A tax break of £500-£1,500 p/a seems reasonable to me given that the tax thresholds only ever moved by a couple of hundred, maybe 300 quid a year. (£1,500 being two 50K salaries.)

Or were people expecting some sort of bonanza tax cut?

briantrumpet

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

It’s only between £12k and £50k so if you’re on £35k you’re getting around £450 in savings, or roughly a day of heating extra a month.

You need better insulation.

That's my heating for a year.

rjsterry

morstar said:

rjsterry said:

The scale of fiscal drag 👠👠

https://twitter.com/FraserNelson/status/1727342929138880588?t=WnJLfvmE7CIu9FjNjYO9SQ&s=19

Although, notwithstanding the daft cliff edges higher up the scale, if you have a pay rise which brings you into paying income tax for the first time, you are still better off.

I’ve argued this on here before.

You will have more take home pay yes. But unless your rise outstrips both the rate of inflation and the new tax burden combined, you are not better off.

I.e. if I earn 12,570 and get a 10% pay rise whilst inflation is also 10%, I lose 30% of my pay rise to tax and NI.
My wage has increased 7% in real terms vs 10% inflation. I am worse off.

I meant better off than not getting the pay rise.

pblakeney

briantrumpet said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

It’s only between £12k and £50k so if you’re on £35k you’re getting around £450 in savings, or roughly a day of heating extra a month.

You need better insulation.

That's my heating for a year.

I'm not as frugal/tight as I thought I was. Or colder. 😉
£450 is 9.2 months for me.

super_davo

Thing I dislike is the cynicism of it all. Tax burdens have raised massively through freezing of tax bands throughout the high inflation period. We're not really in any better position financially than in any year of this parliament; borrowing is still sky high as are debt repayments.

Why cut NI now? Because they think we're all stupid enough to forget the last 13 years of being squeezed by seeing headlines like "Biggest tax cut since the 80s" from papers that are acting as propaganda machines. When the "stealth" freezing of the bands is effectively taking more than the cut is giving anyway.

It's all so cynical, and so far away from governing in the best interests of the country.

rick_chasey

morstar said:

Understood the numbers. A tax break of £500-£1,500 p/a seems reasonable to me given that the tax thresholds only ever moved by a couple of hundred, maybe 300 quid a year. (£1,500 being two 50K salaries.)

Or were people expecting some sort of bonanza tax cut?

Pedant mode: it’s not a tax break of £1500, it maxes out at £745.

I’d be delighted if they started considering household income rather than individual like the rest of Europe, but alas.

morstar

rick_chasey said:

morstar said:

Understood the numbers. A tax break of £500-£1,500 p/a seems reasonable to me given that the tax thresholds only ever moved by a couple of hundred, maybe 300 quid a year. (£1,500 being two 50K salaries.)

Or were people expecting some sort of bonanza tax cut?

Pedant mode: it’s not a tax break of £1500, it maxes out at £745.

I’d be delighted if they started considering household income rather than individual like the rest of Europe, but alas.

As I said, I get the numbers.

50,270 - 12,570 = 37,700
37,500 x 0.02 = 754

2 x 50 K earners doubles that.

I did explicitly describe households in my first post and then 2 50k earners when I explained the top limit of the saving.

It’s a long overdue, one off, partial correction to static tax bands that I think is a good move. I’m also glad they targeted NI rather than tax, especially when they talk about rewarding work.

It is the total opposite of Sunak who targeted workers by raising NI.

pangolin

morstar said:

rick_chasey said:

morstar said:

Understood the numbers. A tax break of £500-£1,500 p/a seems reasonable to me given that the tax thresholds only ever moved by a couple of hundred, maybe 300 quid a year. (£1,500 being two 50K salaries.)

Or were people expecting some sort of bonanza tax cut?

Pedant mode: it’s not a tax break of £1500, it maxes out at £745.

I’d be delighted if they started considering household income rather than individual like the rest of Europe, but alas.

As I said, I get the numbers.

50,270 - 12,570 = 37,700
37,500 x 0.02 = 754

2 x 50 K earners doubles that.

I did explicitly describe households in my first post and then 2 50k earners when I explained the top limit of the saving.

It’s a long overdue, one off, partial correction to static tax bands that I think is a good move. I’m also glad they targeted NI rather than tax, especially when they talk about rewarding work.

It is the total opposite of Sunak who targeted workers by raising NI.

The fact that you get the numbers and still think it's a good thing is exactly what they want.

But the percentage of the nation's income being paid in tax is still set to rise to its highest level in 70 years, according the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR).

We're paying more tax. This is just window dressing so they have a catchy slogan to shout at Labour in the run up to the election.

morstar

pangolin said:

morstar said:

rick_chasey said:

morstar said:

Understood the numbers. A tax break of £500-£1,500 p/a seems reasonable to me given that the tax thresholds only ever moved by a couple of hundred, maybe 300 quid a year. (£1,500 being two 50K salaries.)

Or were people expecting some sort of bonanza tax cut?

Pedant mode: it’s not a tax break of £1500, it maxes out at £745.

I’d be delighted if they started considering household income rather than individual like the rest of Europe, but alas.

As I said, I get the numbers.

50,270 - 12,570 = 37,700
37,500 x 0.02 = 754

2 x 50 K earners doubles that.

I did explicitly describe households in my first post and then 2 50k earners when I explained the top limit of the saving.

It’s a long overdue, one off, partial correction to static tax bands that I think is a good move. I’m also glad they targeted NI rather than tax, especially when they talk about rewarding work.

It is the total opposite of Sunak who targeted workers by raising NI.

The fact that you get the numbers and still think it's a good thing is exactly what they want.

But the percentage of the nation's income being paid in tax is still set to rise to its highest level in 70 years, according the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR).

We're paying more tax. This is just window dressing so they have a catchy slogan to shout at Labour in the run up to the election.

Liking an isolated good policy does not sway my vote. I can distinguish between good and bad motivation for making a policy decision. I also think the preference was to tackle inheritance tax until they realised it was landing badly.

Doesn’t change the fact it’s a good policy.

I have bitched many times about the static tax bands, long before the press recently started getting vocal about it.

Static tax bands is one of the worst possible policy decisions of any government. Especially during in a cost of living crisis. The tax increases disproportionately hurt the lowest earners.

wallace_and_gromit

rjsterry said:

wallace_and_gromit said:

pangolin said:

How will everyone be spending their bumper 2% NI saving come January?

I know this is meant as a flippant comment, but it does demonstrate the problem of "boosting" the economy via tax cuts. The NI saving will be welcome to many, but largely irrelevant to more, and yet it has used up pretty much all of the "fiscal headroom" that probably doesn't really exist anyway.

But to answer your question, I will spend a decent chunk of its annualised amount for the whole of next year on holiday beer in France. #greatfortheUKeconomy

It's not going to change the world but it's also not trivial when you employ even a small number of people.

Is there a reduction in employer NICs too? I'm struggling to see how the change in employee NICs would affect an employer, but maybe I'm missing something.

rjsterry

morstar said:

rick_chasey said:

morstar said:

Understood the numbers. A tax break of £500-£1,500 p/a seems reasonable to me given that the tax thresholds only ever moved by a couple of hundred, maybe 300 quid a year. (£1,500 being two 50K salaries.)

Or were people expecting some sort of bonanza tax cut?

Pedant mode: it’s not a tax break of £1500, it maxes out at £745.

I’d be delighted if they started considering household income rather than individual like the rest of Europe, but alas.

As I said, I get the numbers.

50,270 - 12,570 = 37,700
37,500 x 0.02 = 754

2 x 50 K earners doubles that.

I did explicitly describe households in my first post and then 2 50k earners when I explained the top limit of the saving.

It’s a long overdue, one off, partial correction to static tax bands that I think is a good move. I’m also glad they targeted NI rather than tax, especially when they talk about rewarding work.

It is the total opposite of Sunak who targeted workers by raising NI.

The NI reduction is a bigger issue for businesses.The thing is the government can't really afford it. It's being paid for by future cuts in departmental spending that are being widely described as not achievable.

rjsterry

morstar said:

rick_chasey said:

morstar said:

Understood the numbers. A tax break of £500-£1,500 p/a seems reasonable to me given that the tax thresholds only ever moved by a couple of hundred, maybe 300 quid a year. (£1,500 being two 50K salaries.)

Or were people expecting some sort of bonanza tax cut?

Pedant mode: it’s not a tax break of £1500, it maxes out at £745.

I’d be delighted if they started considering household income rather than individual like the rest of Europe, but alas.

As I said, I get the numbers.

50,270 - 12,570 = 37,700
37,500 x 0.02 = 754

2 x 50 K earners doubles that.

I did explicitly describe households in my first post and then 2 50k earners when I explained the top limit of the saving.

It’s a long overdue, one off, partial correction to static tax bands that I think is a good move. I’m also glad they targeted NI rather than tax, especially when they talk about rewarding work.

It is the total opposite of Sunak who targeted workers by raising NI.

The NI reduction is a bigger issue for businesses.The thing is the government can't really afford it. It's being paid for by future cuts in departmental spending that are being widely described as not achievable. So in reality we're just locking in more borrowing.

Stevo_666

super_davo said:

Thing I dislike is the cynicism of it all. Tax burdens have raised massively through freezing of tax bands throughout the high inflation period. We're not really in any better position financially than in any year of this parliament; borrowing is still sky high as are debt repayments.

Why cut NI now? Because they think we're all stupid enough to forget the last 13 years of being squeezed by seeing headlines like "Biggest tax cut since the 80s" from papers that are acting as propaganda machines. When the "stealth" freezing of the bands is effectively taking more than the cut is giving anyway.

It's all so cynical, and so far away from governing in the best interests of the country.

I thought you would approve of more tax being collected?

rjsterry

Stevo_666 said:

super_davo said:

Thing I dislike is the cynicism of it all. Tax burdens have raised massively through freezing of tax bands throughout the high inflation period. We're not really in any better position financially than in any year of this parliament; borrowing is still sky high as are debt repayments.

Why cut NI now? Because they think we're all stupid enough to forget the last 13 years of being squeezed by seeing headlines like "Biggest tax cut since the 80s" from papers that are acting as propaganda machines. When the "stealth" freezing of the bands is effectively taking more than the cut is giving anyway.

It's all so cynical, and so far away from governing in the best interests of the country.

I thought you would approve of more tax being collected?

More tax is being collected. Just not quite as much more.

Stevo_666

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

super_davo said:

Thing I dislike is the cynicism of it all. Tax burdens have raised massively through freezing of tax bands throughout the high inflation period. We're not really in any better position financially than in any year of this parliament; borrowing is still sky high as are debt repayments.

Why cut NI now? Because they think we're all stupid enough to forget the last 13 years of being squeezed by seeing headlines like "Biggest tax cut since the 80s" from papers that are acting as propaganda machines. When the "stealth" freezing of the bands is effectively taking more than the cut is giving anyway.

It's all so cynical, and so far away from governing in the best interests of the country.

I thought you would approve of more tax being collected?

More tax is being collected. Just not quite as much more.

Let's give super davo a chance to answer the question himself.

First.Aspect

I'll just leave this here.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/brexit-clever-people-more-likely-to-vote-remain-in-eu-referendum-study-shows/ar-AA1kpJnc?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=6efce6bfbffa4459abc2fd1e5ab4ad39&ei=11

Stevo_666

I'd like to see the equivalent curve showing the voting patterns for smartarses and know-it-alls, though I recognise that is less likely to be the subject of a study by academics

First.Aspect

I think there would be a peak slightly left of centre for that group, Stevo.

rick_chasey

People get annoyed by smart arses, but they should be more annoyed that they're usually right, and that's what annoying about them

Stevo_666

rick_chasey said:

People get annoyed by smart arses, but they should be more annoyed that they're usually right, and that's what annoying about them

Do you find me annoying?

First.Aspect

Stevo_666 said:

rick_chasey said:

People get annoyed by smart arses, but they should be more annoyed that they're usually right, and that's what annoying about them

Do you find me annoying?

Not at all.