Budget 2012

[CHAPPERS]

Bit annoyed that they didn't extend the stamp duty holiday for first time buyers, being that I'm trying to buy a house at the moment.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

So are you saying that a single Mum living on £15k per year in a rented one-bedroomed flat should receive the same level of child benefit as those who are, for example, on a very high 5 figure salary or more, living in high value owned home in commuter belt South-East England?

The lack of means testing on Child Benefit is absolutely farcical in the extreme.

3 kids equals, what, c£2500 in child benefit per year? I think someone is talking out of their own personal wallet here.

(Note: I lose too, but it's absolutely correct that I do)

But, whatever the merits of the benefit it is a reduction in income that middle-England will have to bear. Higher up the food chain they are getting an increase in their income via the 5p tax cut. That does not strike me as fair. If we're all in this together then some cash should also be recouped from those above middle England.

I feel a bit miffed as I do not want children and I feel I should get some form of tax relief for this as I am saving the nation a few quid.

 

[gazingdown]

But, whatever the merits of the benefit it is a reduction in income that middle-England will have to bear. Higher up the food chain they are getting an increase in their income via the 5p tax cut. That does not strike me as fair. If we're all in this together then some cash should also be recouped from above middle England.

See my post earlier, the cut could (and probably will) INCREASE the income, not reduce it. Given that the allowance level is also being raised, middle-England could have MORE in their wage packet.

 

[ROSM]

Apparently - though this came from Ed Milliband - there are 4,000 properties in the UK worth more than £2m.

so that's roughly 560m per annum this could raise if every one of those is sold once every 3 years based on an average price of £6m

 

[The Large One]

so that's roughly 560m per annum this could raise if every one of those is sold once every 3 years based on an average price of £6m

Not exactly likely to happen, is it?

 

[CHAPPERS]

See my post earlier, the cut could (and probably will) INCREASE the income, not reduce it. Given that the allowance level is also being raised, middle-England could have MORE in their wage packet.

I'm an idiot, can you please explain how this could (and probably will) happen? I don't really understand (due to my being an idiot).

Thanks

 

[ROSM]

Here's the key part of that:

Ultimately, he's phasing out child benefit whilst giving top earners a hefty tax cut.

And what about the other "temporary" tax measures. I remember the Tories "temporarily" upping VAT to 15%, then again to 17.5%. Then Labour upped it to 20%. When do these equally damaging tax hikes get removed then?

It was this government that upped it to 20% after the labour temporary reduction back to 15%

 

[ROSM]

Not exactly likely to happen, is it?

You detected my irony then!!

 

[Bozza]

CBI director-general, John Cridland: "by putting more money in the pockets of ordinary people, the chancellor has provided a much-needed confidence boost"

 

[ROSM]

I fully appreciate the comments around Child Benefit - that there is a view that those earning over 50k can afford to lose this income. But this is the very population who are expected to spend their way out of this recession.

However it is out of kilter with the alleged direction of this government given the reduction in top rate and the failure to close loopholes.

I also agree with Simster that the last labour Government made a huge foul up in not simplifying the tax and tackling the top earner anomalies. This and the failure to support and promote apprenticeships were the major failures of new labour.

 

[gazingdown]

I'm an idiot, can you please explain how this could (and probably will) happen? I don't really understand (due to my being an idiot).

Thanks

To use a crappy analogy Think of a meal out. It costs £30 now. You pay it and restaurant get £30 of revenue from you.

The restaurant wants more money so put it up to £40. You decide it's not worth it and don't have that meal and the restaurant get £0 revenue from you.

The restaurant alternatively decide to put the price to £35 and you decide that, yes you can stretch to that. The restaurant then get £35 in revenue.

In other words the restaurant get more revenue from meals being £35 than being £40.

 

[ROSM]

CBI director-general, John Cridland: "by putting more money in the pockets of ordinary people, the chancellor has provided a much-needed confidence boost"

lets see:

£200 increase in terms of increased allowance

£1000 reduction for someone earning £55k per year with two children

Yep, cash in pockets there.

 

[Bozza]

I also agree with Simster that the last labour Government made a huge foul up in not simplifying the tax and tackling the top earner anomalies. This and the failure to support and promote apprenticeships were the major failures of new labour.

Absolutely - Child Benefit is such a ridiculous thing - it should simply be scrapped completely and incorporated into other properly (or at least better) means tested elements of the welfare system.

Imagine the uproar from commuter belt Surrey if that happened though. It would be ggggggggrrrrrrrrrrr-central.

 

[gazingdown]

In reply to ROSM above, Depends on how you define "ordinary". People earning £55k are a relative minority so many people wouldn't consider them "ordinary".

 

[Bozza]

lets see:

£200 increase in terms of increased allowance

£1000 reduction for someone earning £55k per year with two children

Yep, cash in pockets there.

Does that very specific scenario encompass the entire population do you know?

 

[Bozza]

The more I think about this, the more I'm coming round to [MENTION=232]Simster[/MENTION]'s view. c£80 a month is being brought into the house by the little chap currently. We might have to cut down on visits to both Wagamama and Yo Sushi now FFS.

 

[ROSM]

Absolutely - Child Benefit is such a ridiculous thing - it should simply be scrapped completely and incorporated into other properly (or at least better) means tested elements of the welfare system.

Imagine the uproar from commuter belt Surrey if that happened though. It would be ggggggggrrrrrrrrrrr-central.

or alternatively used to offset the cost of childcare which acts as an inhibitor to work (if we had any jobs for people to go into given the reduction in confidence that this government has overseen with their gloom and doom behaviour over the last 2 years)

 

[ROSM]

Does that very specific scenario encompass the entire population do you know?

Of course not - the same way as not all top earners are devious tax dodgers who are so clever that they can avoid paying the levels of tax that the 50% rate would have brought in if properly collected

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

CBI director-general, John Cridland: "by putting more money in the pockets of ordinary people, the chancellor has provided a much-needed confidence boost"

how much for your average Joe blogs , some people need to get a reality check

 

[Common as Mook]

The more I think about this, the more I'm coming round to [MENTION=232]Simster[/MENTION]'s view. c£80 a month is being brought into the house by the little chap currently. We might have to cut down on visits to both Wagamama and Yo Sushi now FFS.

The other thing that should be means tested is the bus pass. My Dad, despite being a middle income earner, get's given a bus pass desite not needing it. Outrageous waste of money.

And, he can afford heating bu still gets a heating allowance. That should be means tested too.