|
|
Post by Steve on Nov 18, 2022 18:43:10 GMT
Eh?
Both were down ~ 0.7% yesterday
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2022 5:52:10 GMT
My honest assessment.
They upgraded pensions and welfare benefits in line with inflation, which is good.
They also pleasantly surprised me by increasing the so-called living wage from £9.50 to £10.42, which is only 3p short of 10% and thus very nearly in line with inflation which is also good. To be honest I was anticipating a much smaller rise.
Lowering the threshold for the 45p rate of income tax whilst freezing that for inheritance tax are both good in modest ways. The latter will only hit those who leave what to most of us would be considered significant wealth, whilst the former only affect's those earning in excess of 125k. Which is only the top 2 or 3 percent, so in terms of broadest shoulders reasonable enough. Anyone on 150k+ will pay an extra £1250 which is not a huge increase for that income level and would barely be noticed when you get up to millionaires.
The extension of the windfall tax is also good but still with too many loopholes.
Freezing the thresholds for both the basic rates and the 40p rates for the next 6 years is not so good however. The former will increasingly hammer the low paid and will gradually undo all the benefits of the threshold increases of the last few years. Whilst the latter will hammer middle income earners who will suffer from the freezing of both thresholds.
Increased taxes on dividends is good but they are still taxed at a lower rate than other forms of income so more could have been done.
There has been talk of 12p a litre on fuel in March, but the chancellor denies that any such decision has been made yet so it might not happen. But certainly any rise of that magnitude would be a hammer blow to motorists, particularly those who must commute any distance to work as I do.
The cancellation of the planned stamp duty cuts is probably necessary as it is surely an unaffordable giveaway right now. Plus house prices have been too high for too long and a downwards correction is long overdue. Anything that encourages higher prices as a stamp duty cut would ought to be avoided at least until house prices fall substantially, as they are forecast to do this coming year. But this is not expected to continue indefinitely and prices will rebound on their own. If this does not happen, perhaps then a rethink on stamp duty might be worth considering.
Also most of the big departmental cuts do not kick in until 2025, which is after the next election. This is clever politics because if Labour should win they will inherit these cuts and if they cancel them it might well damage their attempts to appear financially responsible. It also shunts most of the pain of the cuts to the other side of an election, which would suit the Tories were they to win too.
There was significant extra money in the short term for both the NHS and education, which is of course good.
So a mixed bag but overall more good than bad. It certainly could have been a whole lot worse.
|
|
|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Nov 19, 2022 7:06:11 GMT
The freezing of thresholds is regressive in that it hits those on low pay most, but it brings in a lot of tax for the govt and most people don't realise they're being shafted.
The worst is the 23% increase in fuel duty which comes in next March. That's 12p on fuel and after VAT (a tax on a tax) it means about 15p on a litre of fuel. Hunt didn't even have the balls to announce that. It's crazy because it again hits those on lowest pay most and feeds directly into inflation. Crazy.
|
|
|
|
Post by totheleft3 on Nov 19, 2022 8:04:20 GMT
They upgraded pensions and welfare benefits in line with inflation, which is good. They also pleasantly surprised me by increasing the so-called living wage from £9.50 to £10.42, which is only 3p short of 10% and thus very nearly in line with inflation which is also good. To be honest I was anticipating a much smaller rise. Lowering the threshold for the 45p rate of income tax whilst freezing that for inheritance tax are both good in modest ways. The latter will only hit those who leave what to most of us would be considered significant wealth, whilst the former only affect's those earning in excess of 125k. Which is only the top 2 or 3 percent, so in terms of broadest shoulders reasonable enough. Anyone on 150k+ will pay an extra £1250 which is not a huge increase for that income level and would barely be noticed when you get up to millionaires. The extension of the windfall tax is also good but still with too many loopholes. Freezing the thresholds for both the basic rates and the 40p rates for the next 6 years is not so good however. The former will increasingly hammer the low paid and will gradually undo all the benefits of the threshold increases of the last few years. Whilst the latter will hammer middle income earners who will suffer from the freezing of both thresholds. Increased taxes on dividends is good but they are still taxed at a lower rate than other forms of income so more could have been done. There has been talk of 12p a litre on fuel in March, but the chancellor denies that any such decision has been made yet so it might not happen. But certainly any rise of that magnitude would be a hammer blow to motorists, particularly those who must commute any distance to work as I do. The cancellation of the planned stamp duty cuts is probably necessary as it is surely an unaffordable giveaway right now. Plus house prices have been too high for too long and a downwards correction is long overdue. Anything that encourages higher prices as a stamp duty cut would ought to be avoided at least until house prices fall substantially, as they are forecast to do this coming year. But this is not expected to continue indefinitely and prices will rebound on their own. If this does not happen, perhaps then a rethink on stamp duty might be worth considering. Also most of the big departmental cuts do not kick in until 2025, which is after the next election. This is clever politics because if Labour should win they will inherit these cuts and if they cancel them it might well damage their attempts to appear financially responsible. It also shunts most of the pain of the cuts to the other side of an election, which would suit the Tories were they to win too. There was significant extra money in the short term for both the NHS and education, which is of course good. So a mixed bag but overall more good than bad. It certainly could have been a whole lot worse. So you think the so called new labour conserviative Government has done faily well  |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Nov 19, 2022 8:04:37 GMT
My honest assessment. They upgraded pensions and welfare benefits in line with inflation, which is good. They also pleasantly surprised me by increasing the so-called living wage from £9.50 to £10.42, which is only 3p short of 10% and thus very nearly in line with inflation which is also good. To be honest I was anticipating a much smaller rise. Lowering the threshold for the 45p rate of income tax whilst freezing that for inheritance tax are both good in modest ways. The latter will only hit those who leave what to most of us would be considered significant wealth, whilst the former only affect's those earning in excess of 125k. Which is only the top 2 or 3 percent, so in terms of broadest shoulders reasonable enough. Anyone on 150k+ will pay an extra £1250 which is not a huge increase for that income level and would barely be noticed when you get up to millionaires. The extension of the windfall tax is also good but still with too many loopholes. Freezing the thresholds for both the basic rates and the 40p rates for the next 6 years is not so good however. The former will increasingly hammer the low paid and will gradually undo all the benefits of the threshold increases of the last few years. Whilst the latter will hammer middle income earners who will suffer from the freezing of both thresholds. Increased taxes on dividends is good but they are still taxed at a lower rate than other forms of income so more could have been done. There has been talk of 12p a litre on fuel in March, but the chancellor denies that any such decision has been made yet so it might not happen. But certainly any rise of that magnitude would be a hammer blow to motorists, particularly those who must commute any distance to work as I do. The cancellation of the planned stamp duty cuts is probably necessary as it is surely an unaffordable giveaway right now. Plus house prices have been too high for too long and a downwards correction is long overdue. Anything that encourages higher prices as a stamp duty cut would ought to be avoided at least until house prices fall substantially, as they are forecast to do this coming year. But this is not expected to continue indefinitely and prices will rebound on their own. If this does not happen, perhaps then a rethink on stamp duty might be worth considering. Also most of the big departmental cuts do not kick in until 2025, which is after the next election. This is clever politics because if Labour should win they will inherit these cuts and if they cancel them it might well damage their attempts to appear financially responsible. It also shunts most of the pain of the cuts to the other side of an election, which would suit the Tories were they to win too. There was significant extra money in the short term for both the NHS and education, which is of course good. So a mixed bag but overall more good than bad. It certainly could have been a whole lot worse. Not at all surprised that you quite liked the Budget. But I would need to correct you on one point. Dividends are not taxed lower than other forms of income - dividends come out of profits that are already taxed whereas wages come from revenue before tax. So for example my dividends from Shell have already been subject to a 75% taxation rate before I receive them and I then pay another 33% of the remaining pittance that I receive in tax. So for every £10,000 profit that Shell makes - £7,500 immediately goes to the Government and £825 of the remaining amount that is paid in Dividends to the owners also goes in tax to the Government. Giving a total tax rate of 83%. Taxing people until the pips squeak is a good old Labour Party policy - so not surprised Hunt and Sunak are following in their footsteps. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2022 10:23:38 GMT
They upgraded pensions and welfare benefits in line with inflation, which is good. They also pleasantly surprised me by increasing the so-called living wage from £9.50 to £10.42, which is only 3p short of 10% and thus very nearly in line with inflation which is also good. To be honest I was anticipating a much smaller rise. Lowering the threshold for the 45p rate of income tax whilst freezing that for inheritance tax are both good in modest ways. The latter will only hit those who leave what to most of us would be considered significant wealth, whilst the former only affect's those earning in excess of 125k. Which is only the top 2 or 3 percent, so in terms of broadest shoulders reasonable enough. Anyone on 150k+ will pay an extra £1250 which is not a huge increase for that income level and would barely be noticed when you get up to millionaires. The extension of the windfall tax is also good but still with too many loopholes. Freezing the thresholds for both the basic rates and the 40p rates for the next 6 years is not so good however. The former will increasingly hammer the low paid and will gradually undo all the benefits of the threshold increases of the last few years. Whilst the latter will hammer middle income earners who will suffer from the freezing of both thresholds. Increased taxes on dividends is good but they are still taxed at a lower rate than other forms of income so more could have been done. There has been talk of 12p a litre on fuel in March, but the chancellor denies that any such decision has been made yet so it might not happen. But certainly any rise of that magnitude would be a hammer blow to motorists, particularly those who must commute any distance to work as I do. The cancellation of the planned stamp duty cuts is probably necessary as it is surely an unaffordable giveaway right now. Plus house prices have been too high for too long and a downwards correction is long overdue. Anything that encourages higher prices as a stamp duty cut would ought to be avoided at least until house prices fall substantially, as they are forecast to do this coming year. But this is not expected to continue indefinitely and prices will rebound on their own. If this does not happen, perhaps then a rethink on stamp duty might be worth considering. Also most of the big departmental cuts do not kick in until 2025, which is after the next election. This is clever politics because if Labour should win they will inherit these cuts and if they cancel them it might well damage their attempts to appear financially responsible. It also shunts most of the pain of the cuts to the other side of an election, which would suit the Tories were they to win too. There was significant extra money in the short term for both the NHS and education, which is of course good. So a mixed bag but overall more good than bad. It certainly could have been a whole lot worse. So you think the so called new labour conserviative Government has done faily well The budget had a lot of good in it but a fair bit of bad too. Most notably the freezing of the basic rate threshold which will gradually undo all the gains from threshold hikes of recent years. It also means that the 92p an hour increase in the minimum wage will be taxed in full for most recipients, so that the government grabs back a full third of it. But I believe in being fair, not partisan, and will give credit to anyone where it is due. And that would extend to any budget under Starmer as well. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2022 10:28:27 GMT
My honest assessment. They upgraded pensions and welfare benefits in line with inflation, which is good. They also pleasantly surprised me by increasing the so-called living wage from £9.50 to £10.42, which is only 3p short of 10% and thus very nearly in line with inflation which is also good. To be honest I was anticipating a much smaller rise. Lowering the threshold for the 45p rate of income tax whilst freezing that for inheritance tax are both good in modest ways. The latter will only hit those who leave what to most of us would be considered significant wealth, whilst the former only affect's those earning in excess of 125k. Which is only the top 2 or 3 percent, so in terms of broadest shoulders reasonable enough. Anyone on 150k+ will pay an extra £1250 which is not a huge increase for that income level and would barely be noticed when you get up to millionaires. The extension of the windfall tax is also good but still with too many loopholes. Freezing the thresholds for both the basic rates and the 40p rates for the next 6 years is not so good however. The former will increasingly hammer the low paid and will gradually undo all the benefits of the threshold increases of the last few years. Whilst the latter will hammer middle income earners who will suffer from the freezing of both thresholds. Increased taxes on dividends is good but they are still taxed at a lower rate than other forms of income so more could have been done. There has been talk of 12p a litre on fuel in March, but the chancellor denies that any such decision has been made yet so it might not happen. But certainly any rise of that magnitude would be a hammer blow to motorists, particularly those who must commute any distance to work as I do. The cancellation of the planned stamp duty cuts is probably necessary as it is surely an unaffordable giveaway right now. Plus house prices have been too high for too long and a downwards correction is long overdue. Anything that encourages higher prices as a stamp duty cut would ought to be avoided at least until house prices fall substantially, as they are forecast to do this coming year. But this is not expected to continue indefinitely and prices will rebound on their own. If this does not happen, perhaps then a rethink on stamp duty might be worth considering. Also most of the big departmental cuts do not kick in until 2025, which is after the next election. This is clever politics because if Labour should win they will inherit these cuts and if they cancel them it might well damage their attempts to appear financially responsible. It also shunts most of the pain of the cuts to the other side of an election, which would suit the Tories were they to win too. There was significant extra money in the short term for both the NHS and education, which is of course good. So a mixed bag but overall more good than bad. It certainly could have been a whole lot worse. Not at all surprised that you quite liked the Budget. But I would need to correct you on one point. Dividends are not taxed lower than other forms of income - dividends come out of profits that are already taxed whereas wages come from revenue before tax. So for example my dividends from Shell have already been subject to a 75% taxation rate before I receive them and I then pay another 33% of the remaining pittance that I receive in tax. So for every £10,000 profit that Shell makes - £7,500 immediately goes to the Government and £825 of the remaining amount that is paid in Dividends to the owners also goes in tax to the Government. Giving a total tax rate of 83%. Taxing people until the pips squeak is a good old Labour Party policy - so not surprised Hunt and Sunak are following in their footsteps. But you are clearly and quite deliberately conflating taxes on a company with taxes on your personal income. The dividend you receive is your personal income and it is taxed at a much lower rate than other forms of income. We could all claim to be paying shedloads of tax if we included the taxes our employers paid before they paid us, lol |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Nov 19, 2022 11:44:55 GMT
But you are clearly and quite deliberately conflating taxes on a company with taxes on your personal income. The dividend you receive is your personal income and it is taxed at a much lower rate than other forms of income. We could all claim to be paying shedloads of tax if we included the taxes our employers paid before they paid us, lol Only people can pay tax - taxes on company profits come directly out of someones pocket. |
|
|
|
Post by Steve on Nov 19, 2022 11:57:04 GMT
. .They also pleasantly surprised me by increasing the so-called living wage from £9.50 to £10.42, which is only 3p short of 10% and thus very nearly in line with inflation which is also good. To be honest I was anticipating a much smaller rise. . . . An evil move Hunt tries to take the credit for a move that he has to pay nothing for because the burden falls completely on employers and a move that will make the predicted huge rise in unemployment worse while also further fuelling inflation. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2022 22:06:54 GMT
. .They also pleasantly surprised me by increasing the so-called living wage from £9.50 to £10.42, which is only 3p short of 10% and thus very nearly in line with inflation which is also good. To be honest I was anticipating a much smaller rise. . . . An evil move Hunt tries to take the credit for a move that he has to pay nothing for because the burden falls completely on employers and a move that will make the predicted huge rise in unemployment worse while also further fuelling inflation. In fairness to him, it was a move designed to insulate the lowest paid from the effects of inflation. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2022 22:11:06 GMT
But you are clearly and quite deliberately conflating taxes on a company with taxes on your personal income. The dividend you receive is your personal income and it is taxed at a much lower rate than other forms of income. We could all claim to be paying shedloads of tax if we included the taxes our employers paid before they paid us, lol Only people can pay tax - taxes on company profits come directly out of someones pocket. To claim that it personally comes out of yours is not credible. Taxes on company profits are pretty standard. Any dividend you get is your personal income and it is not taxed at anything like the same rate as it would be if you worked for that same company to earn it as a salary. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Nov 19, 2022 22:23:40 GMT
Only people can pay tax - taxes on company profits come directly out of someones pocket. To claim that it personally comes out of yours is not credible. Taxes on company profits are pretty standard. Any dividend you get is your personal income and it is not taxed at anything like the same rate as it would be if you worked for that same company to earn it as a salary. whose pocket does the money come out of if not the owners of the business? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2022 6:23:39 GMT
To claim that it personally comes out of yours is not credible. Taxes on company profits are pretty standard. Any dividend you get is your personal income and it is not taxed at anything like the same rate as it would be if you worked for that same company to earn it as a salary. whose pocket does the money come out of if not the owners of the business? The company is an entity that is taxed on its profits before anything reaches individual pockets. Your dividend alone is your personal income, and it makes no sense for such an unearned income to be taxed at a lower rate than earned income. Unless of course you are self-interestedly one of the beneficiaries of this unfairness, which you clearly are. In which case any tenuous argument in defence of it is de rigueur. But unconvincing. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Nov 20, 2022 7:57:13 GMT
whose pocket does the money come out of if not the owners of the business? The company is an entity that is taxed on its profits before anything reaches individual pockets. Your dividend alone is your personal income, and it makes no sense for such an unearned income to be taxed at a lower rate than earned income. Unless of course you are self-interestedly one of the beneficiaries of this unfairness, which you clearly are. In which case any tenuous argument in defence of it is de rigueur. But unconvincing. it is not 'unearned income' - it is a return for lending my money and me taking a risk. Why shouldn't I have a return for taking on risk? Everything in the world from individual assets to whole companies is owned by someone - if the State removes value from that entity via taxation then that takes money away from the owner. Your idea that business taxation hurts nobody is symptomatic of the Lefts lack of understanding of the economy. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2022 8:17:22 GMT
The company is an entity that is taxed on its profits before anything reaches individual pockets. Your dividend alone is your personal income, and it makes no sense for such an unearned income to be taxed at a lower rate than earned income. Unless of course you are self-interestedly one of the beneficiaries of this unfairness, which you clearly are. In which case any tenuous argument in defence of it is de rigueur. But unconvincing. it is not 'unearned income' - it is a return for lending my money and me taking a risk. Why shouldn't I have a return for taking on risk? Everything in the world from individual assets to whole companies is owned by someone - if the State removes value from that entity via taxation then that takes money away from the owner. Your idea that business taxation hurts nobody is symptomatic of the Lefts lack of understanding of the economy. It is unearned income in the sense that you have not worked for it to earn it via your labour. And no one says you should not get a return. I am merely saying that your return is an income that should be taxed in the same way as any other income. |
|
