This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

I'm against it, not because I don't favour tax increases per se....but that current proposals argue towards the 25m that work and spare pensioners.

It is a reality that when you reach state retirement age (currently 66) you cease paying NI thus your costs decrease by at leat 10%.

Yet at least half of those that might need social care are pensioners, why is it the rest of the working population should be poorer to provide this kind of care for many of them?

I don't buy into this nonsense that they have paid in all their lives, they were never promised to be personally looked after or live as long.

For me the contrat has changed, people are living longer and need to accept and contribute towards that.

I'm in my late 30s, with no children and its likely I will have paid in more as a percentage of my lifetime income that pensioners of today.......why should I be poorer as a result to fund the care they might need when they wont?

The reality is that young people now only just about afford to rent, yet they seemingly face being poorer to fund social care for pensioners who want to avoid a bill so they can pass on their home to their family.

I'm sick to death of being expected to bear the costs of the silver generation they did not plan for.

Lets be real here, social care needs are a white problem where white families outsource the care to other people....its very much a privilige matter.

For me its a red line, I have no issue to pay more in NI but so must those post 66!

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

I get your point, but don't forget that many pensioners are reliant only on their State pension, and are already struggling to make ends meet. How would they then afford this?

I don't have any objection to pay it as I could afford to do so, but I am not a typical pensioner.

The argument you make about the pensioner benefiting, and therefore the pensioner should pay is a bit like saying that it is those in poverty are the ones receiving benefits, so they should be the ones taxed more to pay for it.

It's better to look at it another way. You will benefit from this better system when you get older.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

and your income drops to £175 per week.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

It’s an awkward one…

I’d look to enforced partial equity release if they’re a home owner. IIRC this is already done to a degree if someone had to move into long term residential care as you can have savings up to 16k before contributions are required. (Or used to be anyway)

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

I'd be pressing the private care homes to justify the insane charges they demand for care.

At the start of the pandemic, private homes were screaming poverty, saying they were unable to pay for PPE which they should have had in use already for the most vulnerable.

And meanwhile the greatest number of deaths were occurring on their premises, with minimum-wage workers moving from site-to-site several times a day, often carrying the virus.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Nationalise it,

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

It's the way this will go as the NHS and the care homes sector merge. The question is, how do we make it operate efficiently? Much bigger homes, presumably, which will not be a pleasant environment for the residents.

The amount of waste in the NHS is scandalous, so I don't expect the poor taxpayer to benefit.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

So what do you expect them to do ? Live in their own filth and die a nasty lonely death?

We live in a capitalist society that dictates every costs something. What really needs to happen is some sort of revolution where there is a massive redistribution of wealth or at least everyone just play fair and pay your taxes. If the likes of Amazon and Mac Ds paid their bill instead of finding ways to pay as little as possible then the coffers would be full and things would be a lot different but alas I know it is pie in the sky

As I have said before this is a middle class forum. Very easy to say they should have planned for it while you can afford to dine out on lobster sleep is the highest thread count Egyptian cotton sheets holiday in Barbados twice a year and afford the full VIP pack off Virgin media. Many do not have that kind of income and never did

Plus for all you know you may need specialist care yourself one day costing £600+ a week. Your well thought out savings will soon dwindle then

---------- Post added at 11:19 ---------- Previous post was at 11:13 ----------

I have done IT work for one and as part of it I had to transfer their accounts from one computer to another and got to see what they charge ( had to view some to check it had worked and was supervised so all above board) and it is a crazy amount

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

I get fed up with the constant whines of people having to sell their home to pay for care.
When they have moved into a care home, the house is no long their home, it is just a house they no longer live in. It is an asset

People at the low income and assets, end of things, don't pay and aren't expected to pay.

Are people going to be given a blank cheque by the taxpayer to pay for whatever level of provision they desire?
If there is a cap of the maximum amount people will have to pay for care, then they can choose the most expensive provision there is, as they know they won't have to pay for the extra costs.

People move away from their families to take up jobs elsewhere. It is not possible for them to care for their parents. You also have single people(unmarried, divorced) who cannot do anything because they are working.

Covid was being passed around inside care homes, not between them.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Based purely on no specific knowledge I’m hazarding a guess that more people who are of state pension age own their own homes than people aged < 30 if that’s correct and it’s a big if it seems very strange to me that we should place higher NI contributions across society to protect these individuals assets which would eventually be handed over via inheritance.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Let the big corporations pay a fair share of taxes then let's turn to increasing NI for all.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

I've mentioned before that the wife & daughter both work in social care for the local council, and they've been working from home for the past 18 months or more.

During this time, the obvious unintended consequence of this is that I often overhear stuff I really shouldn't . . . and some of the things I hear regarding costs of providing a 'care package' using third party people/agencies (of which are the majority) are astounding.

Private care homes and private agencies employing care staff is where the money is going.

edit:
Some of the people needing care aren't yet at 'pension age', and many of those who are still have a partner living at home who, although capable of many things, finds it difficult to cope 24/7 with someone with a problem (dementia, mobility, blindness etc) . . . surely you're not advocating making those homeless by selling the residence, or do you mean taking the house off them when they die and giving the funds back to the Govt?

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

They are. Intellectual property rights can be paid to any country in the world, as they always have been. Nothing new.
Eg Franchise payments for European countries will go to one European country. Makes sense rather than having to deal with dozens of different tax jurisdictions and rules. Also avoids having to pay tax several times over on the same income. IE Country A imposes a tax, the remainder passes to a company in country B which imposes a tax on that already taxed income.
The profits arising from the individuals franchises ARE taxed, just as any other business
Amazon in the UK, will inevitably pay low taxes at first, because of the costs of building the warehouses etc. SAME as for any other business.


Taxes are based upon PROFIT, not TURNOVER or increased value of assets.:rolleyes:

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

The latter, which is why I said partial equity release. I don’t see why someone sat on an asset worth for example 250k shouldn’t provide towards their care. This means that they’re making a contribution & there’s still something to pass on via inheritance

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

However, when you artificially decrease the profits by paying "licence" fees to another subsidiary in a low-tax regime…

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

:Yes:

Not the only trick in the portfolio either I bet ;)

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Where else are the costs involved in developing and maintaining that intellectual property, supposed to come from?:rolleyes: That IP income is still liable for tax somewhere.

Nobody in their rights mind would move worldwide intellectual property rights to the UK, whatever the tax level. One minute the IP tax levels are low, then suddenly they could be ridiculously high. Too unstable a political and tax environment.
The bulk of the tax paid on a car bought in the UK, but built in Germany, is paid in Germany. That is where the cost of building the car occurred. It is an IMPORT. The car showrooms etc, will earn income, and will be liable for UK tax. Again, nothing new in that.
If you earned royalties worldwide from music, which would rather do, deal with over a hundred different tax regimes in different countries, or deal with one tax regime. When they move some of that income to the UK, they are taxed on it.



Many Care homes are facing bankruptcy. The costs are constantly being driven higher, but their income isn't matching it.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Council owned care homes, or Private care homes?

There's a difference ;)

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Our council, along with many others I bet, sold off their care homes, so as to reduce the number of staff they employed. All part of delaying the pension bubble explosion due at some point in Local Government.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Spectacular Daily Mail esque posting Sephi.... Bravo

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Seems some people want pensioners to pay towards the state pension they're now getting, so I'm wondering who's pension I've been paying for over the last 52 years?

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

The whole thing is a giant Ponzi scheme. The current contributors pay for those taking out of the system.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Yup…

https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.ne...pdf?1472132879

The average household (2 people) paid (in 2016) £107,045 of Employee’s National Insurance Contributions - divide that by 2, and you get £53,523 payments in; State Pension in 2016 was £137.60 per week, or £7,155.20 per year, so the average person got their payments back if they lived to 72.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Seems like some people want others to pay for their care without contributing themselves, wonder if bozo will be let of the hook for this mess to

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

You can't go around knocking the unemployed like that mate, it's not their fault they haven't worked and contributed for 30 years :D

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Thing is, on average, most people don’t fully fund their state pension with their own NI Contributions…

I’ve had to use averages for these calculations, because that evens out those getting paid/paying less and those getting paid/paying more.

Average salary in U.K. is around £30k pa - the employee NI contributions on this are £2,460 pa; if you consider most people will work for 45 years, their lifetime NI payments will be just under £112k.

Current average time between getting the State Pension and popping one’s clogs is 15 years, and as the current State Pension is £180 per week (£9,360 pa), and over 15 years this is just over £140k.

If you add in the Employers NICs of around £2,700 pa for 45 years, you get another £122k, giving (hypothetically) a state pension fund of £234k per person.

Unfortunately, the NI Fund doesn’t just pay the state pension - it’s also supposed to fund the NHS, statutory sick pay, maternity leave, & entitlement to additional unemployment benefits.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

My late mum was moved from our local hospital to a nursing home some 30 mins drive away, we weren't charged as the NHS needed the hospital bed due to the coronavirus.

We eventually got her home but as she had £3,000 more in savings she would have had to pay the £2,700 a month, after which she would have to pay something like £100 a month.

But sadly we only paid for 4 visits as she died.

It was annoying all the hoops we had to go through, and I thank my sister for doing nearly all the meetings (Skype).

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Looks like the Government is going ahead with it. 1.25% NI rise.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

One of the most frequent misconceptions out there - I paid in so I’m entitled to. At £2trn of debt the reality is, despite a massive sale of state owned assets, the books never have balanced and successive generations have simply kicked the can down the road to the next one.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

I paid in for my mother and my other elderly relatives. It's called paying forwards and eventually your offspring will be paying forward if we don't go daft and return to the system that was available before the advent of the NHS ect.Not sure I care to return to the days of the poorhouse or people dying in pain because they had no money to pay for healthcare.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

It's not about people who can't afford it, it's about those who have an asset worth a few £100,000. Why should they not pay? Nobody is living in the house(it's no longer their home), therefore it can be sold. No different to having money in the bank or a large amount in shares etc.

It's not as if we're talking about people who could spend the money on a world cruise or something. They are not meant to be physically capable of doing that, that is why they need the care.
In that sense the current situation, works and is fair and right. Those that can pay are required to do so, and those that can't, aren't required to do so.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Pretty much as I've always understood it Maggy.
Basically, what we pay while of working age is used to fund those who are retired, when we then retire, our pension etc is funded by those who come after us.

One of the arguments going around is that people are living longer so more money is needed, however this *should* be offset by the amount of people working compared to, say, 1950 for example . . but the NHS was well run back then though ;)

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

So by any other measure it’s a pyramid scheme, with each generation hoping to squeeze the one after it by more than they paid out themselves.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Life is a pyramid scheme mate, the base is getting larger all the time but the foundations can't handle it.

Too many people looking for handouts instead of taking responsibility.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

It’s a conscious choice to design it as a pyramid scheme - obviously by the generation that seen the greatest benefit.

The base isn’t getting larger - the population and number of net contributors isn’t rising in line with the number extracting money from the system as people live for longer and claim far more in pensions than they claim to have “paid in”.

Until they want to solve this structural problem we will continue to paper over the cracks.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

It's not all about people claiming the state pension, and it's not all about people in care homes.

The 'structural problem' as to income isn't something that can be messed with much, however where the money goes to is a different matter. I could post a number of examples where money is 'thrown' at to appease the sensitive among us, but no doubt I'd be met by a wall of flame by those who want money for their cause at the expense of the public good :p:

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

So we go back to the old system where the poor had to hope that the wealthy would put their hands in their pocket voluntarily to support the workhouse from time to time?:rolleyes:

My goodness how many Scrooges do we have on CF?

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Quite a few apparently, seems they begrudge paying an extra £5 a week . . . the price of a decent pint in some places, or a weeks worth of mobile data, or 5% of the price on a new tyre needed for the big expensive motor :D


ps . . don't mention roaming charges when they jet off abroad either ;)

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Thing is the rich did put their hands in the pockets back then, some of them saw it as their duty to, not so sure the same would happen today.

A couple of things jump out at me, why is care so expensive, why does the average residential home cost more per night than a decent hotel and why do people have to pay when large corporations don't, we know they've bought and paid for bozo and his chums but they can't expect a free ride because of that forever

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

The private sector tripled capacity in the space of a decade. The demand must've been there. That freed up local authority places for those that really needed them.
The standards in private sector places must have been higher than council run places, as people were expected to pay for it. Taking over council run homes wouldn't have been a real option, they wouldn't have been good enough. So were council care homes sold off? Or is it a baseless rant? How many were simply moved out of hospitals? IIRC Where I once lived(late 1970s) there was a large geriatric hospital, it is now a more general type of hospital.
A big reason for the shift in council to private, wasn't selling off of council run homes, but shifting costs from councils to the benefit system which paid for the private care instead.

The predicted increase in demand(doubling?) in the next couple of decades is huge. Who is going to provide that?
if a person, in different circumstances, could be cared for at home by relatives, doesn't that mean they are not really an NHS matter and not necessarily provided for free. As in the 1980s where funding increasingly came from the benefits system, doesn't that also indicate it isn't an NHS matter.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Well no. You make people pay tax to fund it in their own lifetimes - or at worst raise inheritance tax / adjust thresholds to claim it back at the end.

The myth you can have quality public services and a low tax economy is just that. Everyone is a capitalist until it comes to social care and they don’t want to pay.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Except that it isn’t, because the NI fund has never been ring fenced, nor has welfare spending ever been isolated from the Treasury’s general tax take. Moreover, no government has ever claimed that was the case. NI was introduced in order to create a sense of ownership and fairness. Everyone paid in, everyone could take out. It was important, especially in the early days, to ensure the programme succeeded.

All taxation in a modern welfare state is inherently redistributive. Wealthy corporations and individuals pay in more, poorer individuals and economically deprived regions receive more.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

You won’t find me complaining about taxation to fund quality public services. However I don’t see why the generation that lowered taxes to their lowest ever levels while enjoying the one off windfall of privatisation is exempt from putting their own hands in their own pockets along with the younger generations who will be lucky to see any pension at all at this rate.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Ah, boomers …

With the necessary caveat that blaming boomers is a sweeping generalisation because they didn’t all get rich buying shares in BT, British Gas and their local electricity board, this is one of those rare, epoch-defining points on which I suspect we are in broad agreement.

However, the fact that boomers understand you influence governments by actually voting in elections rather than posting hashtags on the internet means that governments tend to be more responsive to their priorities.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Why should people pay that extra whatever for people who effectively have a few £100,000 in the bank? Nobody is begrudging providing for those who don't have a large stash "in the bank".
Perhaps if the question was asked of people as to whether they were prepared to pay for people who had £100,000+ in cash in the bank, the answer might be different.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

I know it isn’t that’s my point. While the system moves money around at the margins it fundamentally redistributes debt downwards to younger generations to cover the fact the generations who preceded them had no interests in funding public expenditure adequately.

---------- Post added at 12:13 ---------- Previous post was at 11:31 ----------

It’s a sweeping generalisation to claim they all got rich because I didn’t claim that at all.

You can personally remain poor while still benefiting from a low tax economy, and get handouts that you made negligible contribution towards.

Yes, the voting system means it’s far more likely successive generations will kick the can down the road that seek to resolve the issue and make the tough choices on taxation required. Which is the crux of this thread - making it exclusively a working age tax.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

I reach pension age 66 next june [should be getting pension now but gov moved the goal posts] any hoo all i can say to the younger generations is get yer hand in your pockets and quit moaning, we've all had to pay so suck it up.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Can't be bothered with quotes, but to answer a few points.

Local councils (ours anyway) sold off most of it's care homes . . well when I say sold off, they stated they were old and 'in need of extensive maintenance & refurbishment' or that they'd 'discovered dangerous materials' in the building. They were then demolished and the land sold for housing . . well, rabbit hutch housing anyway. This obviously led to a rise in demand for private care homes, and the costs inherent with that.

People with 'a few £100,000 in the bank' will have to pay towards any care they receive, but they're still entitled to their state pension.

If we make all people needing care sell their homes - the ones they've worked hard for and maintained themselves - won't this drive people back into the rental sector? Maybe the Govt should purchase all privately owned houses, and let tax payers pay when they need new central heating boilers, double glazing, wiring, structural repairs, fencing etc . . the sort of stuff a house owner has to pay for (no grants here, move along folks).

NHS . . . stop funding (or partially funding) people who want a sex change, or nose job, boob enhancements etc, it's probably quicker to get a facelift than a hip replacement nowadays .

enough mild ranting, I'm off back gaming :p:

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Upskilling lorry drivers.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

migrants.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

So a 1.25% rise that will hurt those near the breadline with least assets most whilst the wealthy/wealthier or those with significant assets are able to absorb the increase with ease.

Hardly levelling up and i say this as a highest rate tax payer & who has to pay both NI & Employers NI (on stock sales)

---------- Post added at 12:59 ---------- Previous post was at 12:59 ----------

Paying all the 4* hotels ?

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

It’s happening then. 1.25% on NI from next April.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-58473078

Apparently from 2023 it will be separated out on payslips as a ‘Heath and social care levy’. Though further to my earlier post I think it’s vastly unlikely the money will be legally ring-fenced as that would be quite complex to achieve.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

I think we just witnessed bojo losing the next election.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

I highly doubt it, it will be all forgotten. Also, there is unfortunately being no viable alternative to Boris and his chums.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Doing at NI will help him since it exempts the over 65s.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

It won’t be hypothecated. That just doesn’t happen in our system; it would require some extremely convoluted legislation to achieve it, mostly due to the fact that the actual amount collected from any given tax can be quite variable from month to month and year to year, making definition difficult and, perversely, presenting risks to service delivery. The Treasury would squeal loudly about the extra red tape demanded by compliance and would warn loudly about the risks of hypothecating funds away that could only be released for other uses by Act of Parliament, even in an existential crisis.

The only effective guarantee of a tax being spent as promised in our system is parliamentary scrutiny and political debate.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

The over 65's who are still working are not exempt......

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Highly unlikely. The next election is well over 3 years away and the actual monthly difference on an average payslip isn’t enormous. Plus, when the election comes round, provided Boris has made some progress on service delivery, what exactly would Labour’s attack line be? Even now in the Commons Starmer is forced to take the ‘too little too late’ line because he knows it is untenable for a Labour leader to argue against modest tax hikes to pay for welfare services.

Nobody likes paying more than they have to but this just isn’t an electoral game changer.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Sorry, over 66. You don't pay NI when you reach state pension age.

---------- Post added at 13:36 ---------- Previous post was at 13:16 ----------

Sorry, read the detail more. It seems it will apply to people of state pension age. Not sure if that's the standalone levy that comes later or NI generally? Pretty big change if NI is now applying to those of state pension age.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

The party that delivered Brexit will be forgiven for many broken promises. It’d hard to see this is the straw that breaks the camel’s back - a tax that disproportionately affects poorer working age people as opposed to those who receive their income through dividends and the retired.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

This presumably is why they have also announced a tax increase on dividend income.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

I doubt that, papa. Boris is the first PM who has promised to do something about the system and he did it.

He promised not to put up specified taxes at the election, it's true, but that's before the pandemic struck. The money has to come from somewhere.

The higher earners will be paying more towards social care through the dividend tax, so that should help take the sting away from those complaining that it's generationally unfair.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

That it's a new tax after 2023 is interesting. As with NI it won't be ringfenced. It also means this alone can be raised whilst leaving the other two alone. I think people are more likely to support raising 'The Healthcare Levy' than NI.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

You’re forgetting that more people with assets will contribute less for their care than they currently do.

I’m unsure as to how that’s fair ?

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

So if I have £86,000 and need to go into care, I can choose somewhere that costs that each month? Then what? As there is to be a £86,000 lifetime cap, I wouldn't have to pay anything else for the same level of service. There will still have to a cap on funding, as there is now.

Unless in addition to the value of their house(ie not home, consult a dictionary), people have a surplus of £86,000 in assets, they will have to sell it anyway, which is what people are whinging about.
What's going to happen in 20 years time when the costs will have more than doubled?

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

I understand it as between 23.5k and 100k you will be means tested for the government's contribution but you can pay no more than 86k in total

So, there's an increase in state funding from the current levels IF you have savings/assets above the 23.5k limit. Whilst those earning over 9k ish per year will pay more. Ultimately those with assets will pay less for their care.

---------- Post added at 14:20 ---------- Previous post was at 14:17 ----------

I don't know why they didn't keep the existing level of 23.5k and then limit the NI increase to 1%

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Good summary from the Beeb - one thing that is quite important is that this is about care costs, not accommodation (so if people are in Private Care Homes, not sure how this benefits them).

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-58473787

My personal view (and we are actually doing this at the moment for my mum-in-law) is that if the person is in a residential care home, and has assets to pay for this (and with no partner in the family home), the home should be sold to pay for the Residential Care Home fees.

The challenge will be in 5 years time when the money runs out...

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

I suspect the small print will have something to say about the maximum monthly cost the government will pay on behalf of those who have paid out their personal maximum contribution. That will result in some awkward conversations with nursing homes about their monthly fees. A few of them, especially those whose rates are close to the state maximum, may reduce their fees to keep residents. Others will be forced to watch their residents get relocated to other, cheaper homes.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Yup - mum's fees are just over £1k per week.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Jesus wept !!!!

---------- Post added at 14:44 ---------- Previous post was at 14:34 ----------

Triple lock suspended for 1yr. source: The Independent

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

What happens at the moment if the person doesn't have assets and their family cannot afford it? Does the state step in at that point or is just tough luck?

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

I wonder if, when the new Levy comes in in 2023, they might align it with the minimum rate tax bands (start at £12750 and no upper limit) to mitigate the impact on the very low paid?

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Theoretically what is there to stop you spending the £86,000 cap in a shorter period of time? If you choose a more expensive care home, where is the extra going to come from? If it comes from their assets, that £86,000 will soon disappear.
Those with £20K-100K assets, will have to have a non-house based asset surplus to cover their required contributions, or else they will have to sell the house at some point in time.
When people get to that stage, that can't do anything with those assets other than spend it on their care. Why should the taxpayer be expected to pick up the tab for those with over £100,000 in assets, after reaching the £86,000 cap?

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

I believe you have the choice of those homes whose fees can be met by the local council set rates.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

As before, it's care needs, not accommodation

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

How many pensioners used to vote Tory

The first real test of the triple lock and it gets dumped.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

I would think that's likely. Possibly with the eventual aim of combining NI with income tax and the commensurate savings in bureaucracy. This would also make NI a progessive tax.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Which is why i was wondering if some sort of partial equity release scheme would be an option.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

What happens after somebody has reached the £86,000 cap? Can they select a more expensive service and the taxpayer will pick up the full tab?

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Interesting comment in response to the Times article today from a Rose Ellis

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

I believe they would have to be aligned with the local Council agreed limits

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

He kept his promise by breaking another, they don't cancel each other out, there is no spin you can put on this and like it has plenty of times in the past I hope his dishonesty costs him his job, it's not like he's any good at it anyway

Yeah but at least he's done something about it...

---------- Post added at 15:38 ---------- Previous post was at 15:37 ----------

Outrageous

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

They may be outrageous, but there is a waiting list, as it is like a 4 star hotel, with enough staff (who get paid a reasonable, not minimum, wage, and who also get sick pay*), the food is very good, and she's cared for well.

They also had plenty of PPE at outbreak time, as they had it in preparation in case of a flu outbreak.

*One of the reasons there were so many COVID cases in care homes was that quite a few pay minimum wage with no sick pay, so if they didn't come in, they didn't get paid.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

He’s broken a manifesto commitment, that’s unarguable. But dishonest? How, exactly? Are you suggesting he knew before the election this would be necessary, or that he is about to do something other than what he has announced today?

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

He's broken 2 manifesto pledges today and used covid as an excuse'

just watching a briefing from no 10 i swear it's tony bliar in a blond wig:(

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Again, though: in what way has he been dishonest, as claimed by TheDaddy? Yes, he’s broken his promises. Did he know before the election that he was going to do so?

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

Refresh my memory on how he planned to do it before the election please? I remember him saying he had a plan and I remember the criticism he got for being vague but that's about it, oh yes and I remember Michael Howard and The Times sacking him for being dishonest, do leopards change spots often

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care
 

are you asking about boris the liar or rishi the pension thief.

Re: This NI increase for Social/Health Care