The Budget

Nobody else seems to have much to say about this, so here goes:

Whoopee! I get to save an extra £1500 in my cash ISA this year (I am over fifty...)

Boo, we get to pay more for alcohol.

Boo, we have to pay back multiple millions of pounds of debt, but not until the Conservatoids get in (next year).

Whoopee, those Bankers get to pay more on their £150,000 plus incomes...

Vote Liberal!!! That's what I say. Then we get Vince Cable as chancellor. The only person to actually get things right...

Please don't vote for that George Osborne smugmobile who attended the convention with Peter Mandelson on that Russian oligarch's yacht.

Oops, have I revealed my political leanings. (Well, no actually, although you might think so from this post!)

Have a nice day, and do please respond with your own bias...

;-)

Reply to
Bioboffin
Loading thread data ...

I'm over 50 too. So at 3% that's an extra £45 interest and a tax break worth a whole extra £9 per annum. As soon as I finish my ice-cream I'll turn somersaullts. Pity that the fall interest rates is costing my wife and me about £80 per week.

Toom

Reply to
Toom Tabard

I'm over 50 too. So at 3% that's an extra £45 interest and a tax break worth a whole extra £9 per annum. As soon as I finish my ice-cream I'll turn somersaullts. Pity that the fall interest rates is costing my wife and me about £80 per week.

Toom

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well, Toom, like the Governmint, you are guilty of short termism! Your £45 interest will increase next year when interest rates go up, and all of that extra cash which you have squirreled away will pay dividends later. Of course if you really believe that things are pathetic at the moment, you could do worse than put it into your now increased S & S ISA. That is likely to go up big time once the economy gets off its collective knees!

Reply to
Bioboffin

But only from October. Can't see why he bothered with the "over 50" bit since it applies to everyone 6 months later. That's 4.50 difference for a whole lot of extra admin for the banks and building societies.

Reply to
Reentrant

What a pity they have a lot of nonsense costly *vote catching* policies (like scrapping Uni fees) that are un-funded

tim

Reply to
tim.....

It's called gesture politics - making New Labour look good, but with little of much substance for you and me. Seen it before with the 2% VAT cut (balanced twice over by the extra tax on fuel).

Reply to
Robin T Cox

In message , Bioboffin writes

He appears to me to be the only politician who is talking honest common sense, but of course without any power he hasn't had chance to be corrupted.

Reply to
Gordon H

Best sleight of hand is the 100k 'bracket'. From 100k to approx. 113k there will be a nominal tax rate of 60% (As 40% applies plus for every 2 there's a 1 loss of allowance, thus moving half from 0% to 40%)... Once the allowance is exhausted the rate returns to 40% until 150k is hit...

Hmmmm.

Justin.

Reply to
Justin Cole

Bitstring , from the wonderful person Justin Cole said

Yep, you can tell this has been carefully thought through. Not. Of course they've had years to study the same effect on age allowance, or pension credits, or whatever, and still haven't figured out how to smooth the curve.

Why the wasters didn't just bring in a 50% rate lower down (£120k or whatever) mystifies me. We now have another 'sorry we can't figure out your tax code for PAYE until we know what your income is going to be' fiasco (I'm assuming the £100k is total income, i.e. interest or dividend income, can trigger loss of tax allowances?).

Reply to
GSV Three Minds in a Can

Yup, overly complicated... However, it's automatic tax return for earning over 100k.

Yes, the 100k will consider all taxable income... I'm not sure yet how it will interface with higher rate pension contribution relief - My assumption is that the allowance will reduce based on the taxable income alone and the

20% band will be expanded (as normal) for pension contributions, thus reducing the 60% hit...

Justin.

Reply to
Justin Cole

Sad but true.

:-)

John

Reply to
Bioboffin

snipped-for-privacy@from.is.invalid...

No need to make assumptions - you can read all about it here:-

formatting link

Reply to
Neil Jones

Yes, just read the definition of "Adjusted net income".

Basically, all taxable earnings less gross pension conts.

Justin.

Reply to
Justin Cole
[snip]

IR have solved that problem with my age allowance. This year, for the first time, they assumed I will lose it all. Then advised me if this is incorrect to discusss the actual figure with them, at the end of the year of course. Hmm and with sod all interest this coming year they have my cash until I claim it back. Real stealthy!

Reply to
brightside S9

its like an MOT..........tomorrow forgotten.

Reply to
Tom E

The trouble is that he'll be 60 or perhaps even 70 by then.

FoFP

Reply to
M Holmes

Bitstring , from the wonderful person brightside S9 said

I've complained about this before - the default position is 'you're earning a fortune, your age allowance is reduced back to standard personal allowance', regardless of what you may have told them the year before (if you are turning in tax returns anyway).

Goodness knows how many confused old dears are losing out as a result.

Reply to
GSV Three Minds in a Can

In message , GSV Three Minds in a Can writes

I know many people who would be glad to have that problem...

Reply to
Gordon H

Don't really care. But I don't understand why he didn't add more to off sales[1] and keep the on sales rate the same.

I know there's concern about binge drinking in pubs but there's also concern about overly cheap alcohol from supermarkets. Putting the duty on off sales could be presented as attacking the second issue. At least in theory, consumption on a licenced premises should be monitorable and controlled.

[1] Hope that's the right term - selling for consumption off the premises

Although it's really not going to raise very much. Eventually someone is going to have to raise tax rates for normal people.

I'm surprised he didn't expand the 1% NI band. He could have avoided changing the "headline" top rate tax completely by making earnings over

150K subject to full employee NI.

Tim.

Reply to
Tim Woodall

A couple of billion, still it means he only needs to borrow 175 billion this year instead of 177 billion.

Yes, but not them.

He *wanted* to change the "headline" rate, so it's that which made the "headlines" rather than the eye watering borrowing figures. Things are so bad for this goverment that they deliberately broke an election promise hoping that that becomes the talking point of the budget rather than the mess they've made of the economy.

Reply to
Andy Pandy

BeanSmart website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.