# Tax over-40s for old age care, say MPs



## Northerner (Jun 27, 2018)

A new tax for the over-40s in England should be introduced to help pay for elderly care for all, MPs say.

Retired people should also be made to pay it if they have lucrative pensions or investments, two influential House of Commons' committees said.

The contribution - dubbed a social care premium by MPs - could then be used to ensure everyone who needs support in their old age gets it.

It comes as ministers are considering how to reform social care.

Currently only the poorest get help towards the cost of care, whether it is provided in people's homes or in a care home.

Other people have to pay for it themselves, with one in 10 facing lifetime costs of more than £100,000.

However, increasingly people are relying on family and friends or go without care, which includes everything from help with washing and dressing to support in taking medications.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-44621047


----------



## Vince_UK (Jun 27, 2018)

This should stimulate some interesting debate. I also feel they should start to look closely at the benefits that the more well-off in our society claim but really don't need but do claim because they can.


----------



## grainger (Jun 27, 2018)

Fantastic - Not too long until I’m 40. must be time to get screwed tax wise because we don’t pay enough already!


----------



## Vince_UK (Jun 27, 2018)

grainger said:


> Fantastic - Not too long until I’m 40. must be time to get screwed tax wise because we don’t pay enough already!


Absolutley agree Grainger, my initial thoughts exactly,


----------



## Northerner (Jun 27, 2018)

A lot would depend on where they set the bar. People may recoil from the communist slogan 'To each according to his need, from each according to his ability', but it makes absolute sense to me. Some people get far too little to fulfil their needs, whilst others get more than they could ever need, hence the inequalities in society


----------



## Bubbsie (Jun 27, 2018)

Vince_UK said:


> This should stimulate some interesting debate. I also feel they should start to look closely at the benefits that the more well-off in our society claim but really don't need but do claim because they can.


I agree Vince...several years ago a friend who had no need of it tried to give the winter fuel payment back several times unsuccessfully...finally he & his partner donated it to a charity.


----------



## Vince_UK (Jun 27, 2018)

Northerner said:


> A lot would depend on where they set the bar. People may recoil from the communist slogan 'To each according to his need, from each according to his ability', but it makes absolute sense to me. Some people get far too little to fulfil their needs, whilst others get more than they could ever need, hence the inequalities in society


Very true statement Northie


----------



## Bubbsie (Jun 27, 2018)

Northerner said:


> A lot would depend on where they set the bar. People may recoil from the communist slogan 'To each according to his need, from each according to his ability', but it makes absolute sense to me. Some people get far too little to fulfil their needs, whilst others get more than they could ever need, hence the inequalities in society


It's not as simple as that...we need to deal with those who 'take' more than they need too...as @Vince_UK has already pointed out.


----------



## Vince_UK (Jun 27, 2018)

Bubbsie said:


> It's not as simple as that...we need to deal with those who 'take' more than they need too...as @Vince_UK has already pointed out.


It positively infuriates me @Bubbsie when I have friends who are genuinely struggling to cope not only financially but also with day to day living. At the same time, we have some people taking what they don't really need tthen they openly boast and brag about doing it. Nauseating to be honest.


----------



## Bubbsie (Jun 27, 2018)

Vince_UK said:


> It positively infuriates me @Bubbsie when I have friends who are genuinely struggling to cope not only financially but also with day to day living. At the same time, we have some people taking what they don't really need tthen they openly boast and brag about doing it. Nauseating to be honest.


Agree unequivocally Vince.


----------



## Robin (Jun 27, 2018)

The problem with means testing a benefit such as winter fuel allowance, is the cost of administering it. But if they have to give it to everyone, then balancing it out with a tax to recoup it seems a sensible option, why not make National insurance payable on investment income as well as earned income?


----------



## Sally71 (Jun 27, 2018)

Loads of people go on at me that I could claim DLA (or whatever it is now) for my daughter.  Yes, I could, and I did initially make enquiries, but the phone line was always engaged and the online application form didn't seem to work properly so after trying not very hard I gave up.  The counsellor we were seeing also tried to make me apply for it and sent me all the forms, but it was such a long document that I couldn't be bothered to read it all.  To be honest, we are lucky and don't need it - almost everything we need for my daughter is on prescription anyway, and I voluntarily only work part time and probably wouldn't have gone back to full time work yet anyway, just because of my daughter's age.  So it's not as if we have given anything up to care for her.  The only thing we don't get free are Libre sensors, and we are lucky enough to be able to afford those also; I have made enquiries about possibly getting them on prescription but it sounds like it won't be easy, so I don't know how hard I will push.  Obviously if my hubby lost his job for any reason then things would be very different, but at the moment we don't need DLA and therefore it seems wrong to apply for it.  And as far as Libre sensors go I'm torn, my hubby pays loads of tax (more than basic rate) so we might as well get something back from it, but then again if we are lucky enough to be able to afford them then maybe the free ones should go to someone else who might not be able to have them otherwise.  So we'll see what happens on that score, if we aren't allowed them on prescription maybe it's fair enough?  Although many people think I'm mad for not claiming DLA and think I should grab whatever I can, because we are "entitled" and that's what everyone else does!


----------



## mikeyB (Jun 27, 2018)

I have a pretty good pension. It’s well over the average wage in the country. I worked for that, and paid all my taxes and National Insurance. I still pay all my taxes on that, bar National Insurance. I’m not a retired fat cat from the banking industry. I can easily self fund Libre costs.

I now get PIP, lower rate for daily care, and enhanced rate for mobility. I’m using that to open the door to Motability- I’ll be getting a road going mobility scooter in the next few days with that. I could afford the £5.5k to buy the scooter, but why should I? It’s the same as leasing a car.

I don’t think I’m fleecing anyone by receiving benefits - I’m entitled. To be honest, I just regard it it as a sort of tax rebate. I pay far more in tax each month than I get in PIP.

The same applies to care, should I ever need it. I’ll pay for it.

What you all have to ask yourselves is how come Scotland can afford to have free care, not means tested? It’s the priority that the English government has in using current tax income, there’s no need to add any more. 

The other thing to remember is that income tax is only a part of the government’s tax income. There’s all the corporation tax, the VAT, petrol and booze tax to name but a few. There’s plenty of other tax the government could tweak to pay for this, leaving income tax and National Indurance alone.


----------



## Vince_UK (Jun 27, 2018)

I just fail to totally comprehend why anyone would go through all the effort etc. of claiming benefits when in reality they do not need them just because they can.  That is a complete waste of Government resources and basically for me that is a moral issue.


----------



## mikeyB (Jun 27, 2018)

It’s not a moral issue, Vince. I can’t get a blue badge without PIP mobility, or at least not easily. It opens other doors too, but that’s the way the system works, and it’s the government’s system. Libre users cheerfully claim VAT off their supplies without batting an eyelid, with PIP I can claim it on bathroom disability kit as well. And my riser recliner chair. 

I wouldn’t need all that if I weren’t disabled, so I apologise for that. But I’m not a drain on society.

By the way, it was no effort at all to claim benefits. I mentioned diabetes under ‘other conditions’.


----------



## Vince_UK (Jun 27, 2018)

mikeyB said:


> It’s not a moral issue, Vince. I can’t get a blue badge without PIP mobility, or at least not easily. It opens other doors too, but that’s the way the system works, and it’s the government’s system. Libre users cheerfully claim VAT off their supplies without batting an eyelid, with PIP I can claim it on bathroom disability kit as well. And my riser recliner chair.
> 
> I wouldn’t need all that if I weren’t disabled, so I apologise for that. But I’m not a drain on society.
> 
> By the way, it was no effort at all to claim benefits. I mentioned diabetes under ‘other conditions’.


Did I mention you in particular?
I believe I was talking in general.


----------



## Bubbsie (Jun 27, 2018)

Vince has said it's a moral issue for him... its a moral issue for me too... possibly a moral issue for other posters in this thread... those are views that relate to us as individuals...everyone here is free to decide for themselves...I don't see any individual judgement or criticism here at all


----------



## mikeyB (Jun 27, 2018)

I know it wasn’t referring to me in particular, I was just explaining my particular situation as one who doesn’t ‘need’ the benefit, so I was included in the ‘moral’ issue. For what it’s worth, I did feel a passing frisson of guilt applying for benefit, but the OT in Scotland insisted I do it to get my Stairlift and Bathroom grants. I stopped feeling  guilty when I got the benefit to which I was entitled. I was worth it.

In any event, it’s not meant as income. It’s intended to cover the additional costs that come with being disabled - taxis, supermarket delivery costs and such. Nobody could live on PIP alone.


----------



## Bubbsie (Jun 27, 2018)

Nobody has asked anyone to justify their entitlement to benefits...or their decision to claim them...they simply stated their own position...I have no objection to anyone claiming what they are entitled to...morals are entirely personal to the individuals concerned.


----------



## Vince_UK (Jun 27, 2018)

Mikey, you have no need to justify it to me or anyone else for that matter.  That is your individual choice  whether to claim or not.


** Edited my fat finger typo..


----------



## mikeyB (Jun 27, 2018)

I assume you mean ‘no need’. Fair enough, I’ll shut up


----------



## Lucy Honeychurch (Jun 27, 2018)

Crazy that this is only being addressed now, this has been an issue for decades. 
Why just the over 40's? Surely it should be based on income rather than age 
If they do this then the money needs to be ring fenced (bet it won't) otherwise it will be swallowed up by other departments.

Seeing as benefits have been mentioned, the introduction of Universal Credit, has cost us £15 billion so far and is likely to eventually cost £30 billion  far more than it is going to save. By all accounts it's a complete f##k up 
Apparently £10 billion of benefits go unclaimed.
There's £40 billion right there, you're welcome Theresa


----------



## Ruby/London (Jun 27, 2018)

I heard this issue being debated on LBC this morning.... everything from scrap Trident to reduce the overseas aid budget. 

I despair for young people trying to make a start in life with unaffordable housing, student loans to pay back, rising retirement ages and increasing taxes.  Zero hours contracts and a culture of minimum wage are crippling our young people.  An additional tax at 40 will just add to the burden, with no guarantee that it really will be sufficient or available to meet their care needs come the time..  I expected to retire at 60 and that goal post was changed. 

Personally,  would give universal income a go and scrap all benefits.  We could save millions on the cost of administering these multi layered, bureaucratic systems.

https://www.basicincome.org.uk/reasons-support-basic-income

I have always had a problem with the concept of "each according to their needs."  I am a dye in the wool socialist but I believe that people deserve to  benefit from their own efforts and as a baby boomer, it certainly felt that if you made the effort you could succeed.  Everything seems so stacked against young people.  I really don't think an even heavier tax burden and a badly thought out plan is the answer.


----------



## ypauly (Jun 28, 2018)

Total cost of social care for the elderly is capped at £72000, so how will people pay over £100000? looks like dodgy reporting to me.


----------



## ypauly (Jun 28, 2018)

Unless that's the extra tax


----------



## mikeyB (Jun 28, 2018)

The Scottish government is trialling universal basic income, pitched at £150 a week in four council areas. Just to see what happens, essentially, but also to weigh up whether the cost is a saving on the complex shambles of universal credit.  It’s almost bound to be a saving.


----------



## KARNAK (Jun 28, 2018)

grainger said:


> Fantastic - Not too long until I’m 40. must be time to get screwed tax wise because we don’t pay enough already!


Well said @grainger. I already get taxed on my personal pension.


----------



## Vince_UK (Jun 28, 2018)

KARNAK said:


> Well said @grainger. I already get taxed on my personal pension.


So do I @KARNAK  it boils my blood to be honest.


----------



## ypauly (Jun 28, 2018)

mikeyB said:


> The Scottish government is trialling universal basic income, pitched at £150 a week in four council areas. Just to see what happens, essentially, but also to weigh up whether the cost is a saving on the complex shambles of universal credit.  It’s almost bound to be a saving.


It hasn't worked anywhere else it has been tried so why they think Scotland will be any different is beyond me.


----------



## mikeyB (Jun 28, 2018)

That’s not actually the case in Finland. The limited scheme is coming to a natural planned end so that the government can study the effects before rolling it out nationwide if the conclusions are positive, though this has been described in the press as ‘Finland abandons universal basic income’. Nothing could be further from the truth. There are multiple experiments like this in Europe and Canada. Early days, yet. 

Any attempt to dispose of the clumsy and expensive benefit scheme that the UK has contrived should be given a chance.


----------



## Bubbsie (Jun 28, 2018)

Lucy Honeychurch said:


> Crazy that this is only being addressed now, this has been an issue for decades.
> Why just the over 40's? Surely it should be based on income rather than age
> If they do this then the money needs to be ring fenced (bet it won't) otherwise it will be swallowed up by other departments.
> 
> ...


Good points Lucy...and no one is ever accountable for the wasted expenditure & the trauma this causes to those 'damaged' by the process.


----------



## ypauly (Jun 28, 2018)

mikeyB said:


> That’s not actually the case in Finland. The limited scheme is coming to a natural planned end so that the government can study the effects before rolling it out nationwide if the conclusions are positive, though this has been described in the press as ‘Finland abandons universal basic income’. Nothing could be further from the truth. There are multiple experiments like this in Europe and Canada. Early days, yet.
> 
> Any attempt to dispose of the clumsy and expensive benefit scheme that the UK has contrived should be given a chance.


I'm not sure a very more expensive system will help


----------



## mikeyB (Jun 28, 2018)

That is exactly why they are closely assessing the system in Finland. That kind of analysis of entire cost is how the Scottish government worked out that it was cheaper to give everyone free prescriptions, which on the face of it you would think it would cost more. It doesn’t.


----------



## Ruby/London (Jun 28, 2018)

There have been a few studies carried out on universal income, mainly based on the fact that over the next decade many lower paid manual jobs will disappear as technology advances.  I think more work needs to be done on evaluating Finland's experience before dismissing it out of hand.  The old systems of government are breaking down and changing demographics in population require innovative thinking and changes, not some back of a fag packet tax rise that will inevitably fail because it was never fit for purpose in the first place - in my opinion


----------



## onefooteight (Jun 30, 2018)

I think claiming benefits can change your mindset in a negative way.  Some years ago my parents were encouraged by Age Concern to sign up for all sorts of benefits.  I had just had my second child and money was tight.  At the time I helped my parents with some cleaning, food shopping and meals.  It was suggested that I could sign up for carers allowance (I think).  Age Concern gave the form to my parents and I initially started to fill it in.  I had just started doing a little bit of self employed work and was earning around £50 a week.  The form stated that if I earnt more than £79 a week I would lose the benefit.  A day or so later I was offered some work that would take me above the £79 - and I caught myself considering turning it down so that I would be eligible for carer's allowance.  I didn't like this change as I've always been a hard worker.  So I tore the form up and took on the extra work.


----------



## mikeyB (Jul 1, 2018)

I wouldn’t disagree with that, though I think there is a difference in mindset between the means tested benefits and the disability benefits, which aren’t.


----------



## Lucy Honeychurch (Jul 1, 2018)

Carers allowance is a woeful £64.60 a week, hardly a King's ransom


----------



## Ralph-YK (Jul 1, 2018)

There's one interesting way of approaching this I've heard of. It would involve a complete change of attitude and approach.
You'd completely forget the idea of means testing (and possibly individuals applying) for all benefits/aid. This would cut out a lot of administration and save money. Chaing the name (Citizens wage was suggested).
Then just pay one payment to everyone (instead of having lots of different schemes).  Then count it for tax.  Anyone who didn't need it would get taxed accordingly.
Done right, the needy would be better off as they wouldn't get hit by the tax.  The really well off would pay the taxes to cover their payments.  And the middling well off would pay accordingly.
Since the tax system already exists, and shouldn't need any changes to run this scheme, their wouldn't be more expenses involved.


----------



## mikeyB (Jul 1, 2018)

That’s the idea of the Universal wage. It eliminates most of the staff are the DWP, which saves millions, if not billions. You would still need invalidity benefits as a residual rump.


----------

