Yes, and the use of dividends to avoid NICs not touched either. Surprised by that to be honest.
Give it time. The penalty for paying through PAYE is so glaring (especially because of employer's NI) that it really does need to be addressed. The tax system should be neutral as to the corporate structure.
I thought the whole point about having lower taxes on self-employed reflected the risks they were taking and no employer benefits.
If the gov aim to even the two types up, then this creates a huge disincentive for people to become self-employed.
In reality the problem is we now have two classes of self-employed, one of which the tax system never anticipated, the "gigger".
Both technically don't have steady wages nor employee benefits, but one is much more like a normal job than the other and it seems with various legal challenges the gigger will soon get employment benefits etc.
But surely that should be dealt with by clamping down on the employers who are pretending their employees are self-employed.
Yes, and the use of dividends to avoid NICs not touched either. Surprised by that to be honest.
Give it time. The penalty for paying through PAYE is so glaring (especially because of employer's NI) that it really does need to be addressed. The tax system should be neutral as to the corporate structure.
That's what he said but it is not (yet) what he has done. Those able to operate through a service company are still being very generously treated.
I might be switching from Team Osborne to Team Hammond.
Let's see how tomorrow's papers look first. The problems for Osborne normally came from what was in the red book rather than what he said in the House.
That's what he said but it is not (yet) what he has done. Those able to operate through a service company are still being very generously treated.
Yes, it's mad. The root cause is NI.
Whilst on that subject, why on earth do we still have the absurd anomaly that people who work on past retirement age don't pay NI? I'd have thought correcting that would be a free hit in political terms - and there are going to be a lot more such people in the future. Many of them are very well paid.
If Theresa May should ever fall under the proverbial political bus, looks like we have a very capable PM in waiting in Hammond.
I remain with Team Osborne at the moment but he came into politics for today. This is what he always wanted to do. And he is not making a bad fist of it.
T-Levels sound very much like the German or Swiss apprenticeship/technical school qualifications. Bloody finally. I only wish that Osborne had been bold enough to make these changes in 2010.
That's what he said but it is not (yet) what he has done. Those able to operate through a service company are still being very generously treated.
Yes, it's mad. The root cause is NI.
Whilst on that subject, why on earth do we still have the absurd anomaly that people who work on past retirement age don't pay NI? I'd have thought correcting that would be a free hit in political terms - and there are going to be a lot more such people in the future. Many of them are very well paid.
The solution is obvious. NI should be abolished and IT increased to compensate. So many different unfair differentials removed at a stroke.
Yes, and the use of dividends to avoid NICs not touched either. Surprised by that to be honest.
Give it time. The penalty for paying through PAYE is so glaring (especially because of employer's NI) that it really does need to be addressed. The tax system should be neutral as to the corporate structure.
That's what he said but it is not (yet) what he has done. Those able to operate through a service company are still being very generously treated.
The difficulty in ever implementing it would be that many companies are truly old fashioned companies, and there needs to be a vehicle for the investment of money and fair taxation of profits from that, whilst others are personal service companies with little capital at risk.
Ni increase is bollocks....... you don't get employer pensions, sick pay, child care vouchers and are on your own..... state pension is better now but to claim little difference between self employed and employed is false.
Director dividend tax cut is fairer but was only brought in when taxing directors more on dividends last year. So an increase tax to the last increase.
That's what he said but it is not (yet) what he has done. Those able to operate through a service company are still being very generously treated.
Yes, it's mad. The root cause is NI.
Whilst on that subject, why on earth do we still have the absurd anomaly that people who work on past retirement age don't pay NI? I'd have thought correcting that would be a free hit in political terms - and there are going to be a lot more such people in the future. Many of them are very well paid.
The solution is obvious. NI should be abolished and IT increased to compensate. So many different unfair differentials removed at a stroke.
Absolutely not. NI was set up to pay for welfare, pensions and healthcare, social care is exactly what it should be paying for
That's what he said but it is not (yet) what he has done. Those able to operate through a service company are still being very generously treated.
Yes, it's mad. The root cause is NI.
Whilst on that subject, why on earth do we still have the absurd anomaly that people who work on past retirement age don't pay NI? I'd have thought correcting that would be a free hit in political terms - and there are going to be a lot more such people in the future. Many of them are very well paid.
The solution is obvious. NI should be abolished and IT increased to compensate. So many different unfair differentials removed at a stroke.
Yes, although it would probably have to be combined with a large increase in the State Pension to compensate any losers.
The solution is obvious. NI should be abolished and IT increased to compensate. So many different unfair differentials removed at a stroke.
I agree with that. NI conjures up visions amongst the public — their own personal pot of gold at the Bank of England — that are completely wrong. Getting rid of it would be a fairer way of taxing income, simpler to administer, and have fewer anomalies.
Ni increase is bollocks....... you don't get employer pensions, sick pay, child care vouchers and are on your own..... state pension is better now but to claim little difference between self employed and employed is false.
Director dividend tax cut is fairer but was only brought in when taxing directors more on dividends last year. So an increase tax to the last increase.
3k nsi savings bond is piffling
Boo hoo - not many people are forced to be self employed - mostly a tax efficient choice.
Ni increase is bollocks....... you don't get employer pensions, sick pay, child care vouchers and are on your own..... state pension is better now but to claim little difference between self employed and employed is false.
Director dividend tax cut is fairer but was only brought in when taxing directors more on dividends last year. So an increase tax to the last increase.
3k nsi savings bond is piffling
Always said now that the original NI aims and its link to actual use is totally broken, we should wrap NI and IC together. Yes I know lots of complications, but can be done (and actually should end up with the rich paying more tax).
That's what he said but it is not (yet) what he has done. Those able to operate through a service company are still being very generously treated.
Yes, it's mad. The root cause is NI.
Whilst on that subject, why on earth do we still have the absurd anomaly that people who work on past retirement age don't pay NI? I'd have thought correcting that would be a free hit in political terms - and there are going to be a lot more such people in the future. Many of them are very well paid.
The solution is obvious. NI should be abolished and IT increased to compensate. So many different unfair differentials removed at a stroke.
Yes, although it would probably have to be combined with a large increase in the State Pension to compensate any losers.
Nope, wouldn't do that either, at least for that reason. We really must start to trim the featherbedding of higher rate tax paying pensioners. It is immoral and unaffordable.
Ni increase is bollocks....... you don't get employer pensions, sick pay, child care vouchers and are on your own..... state pension is better now but to claim little difference between self employed and employed is false.
Director dividend tax cut is fairer but was only brought in when taxing directors more on dividends last year. So an increase tax to the last increase.
3k nsi savings bond is piffling
Boo hoo - not many people are forced to be self employed - mostly a tax efficient choice.
£16m for a 5G mobile technology hub -- meanwhile America starts trials of 5G in 11 cities from next year. Maybe the £16 million is to pay the hotel and airline bills for Tory SpAds to go and see.
The solution is obvious. NI should be abolished and IT increased to compensate. So many different unfair differentials removed at a stroke.
I agree with that. NI conjures up visions amongst the public — their own personal pot of gold at the Bank of England — that are completely wrong. Getting rid of it would be a fairer way of taxing income, simpler to administer, and have fewer anomalies.
Yes, but you need gangbusters growth and a surplus to pay for that. Major changes require lots of winners and few losers.
No holiday pay if self employed - exactly where is the holiday pay supposed to come from.
The money saved by lower tax rates, which Hammond has just taken away?
That's covered by the higher taxes bit and supposedly its £1.60 a week on average which isn't much of a holiday (night in Premier Inn if you are lucky)..
That's what he said but it is not (yet) what he has done. Those able to operate through a service company are still being very generously treated.
Yes, it's mad. The root cause is NI.
Whilst on that subject, why on earth do we still have the absurd anomaly that people who work on past retirement age don't pay NI? I'd have thought correcting that would be a free hit in political terms - and there are going to be a lot more such people in the future. Many of them are very well paid.
The solution is obvious. NI should be abolished and IT increased to compensate. So many different unfair differentials removed at a stroke.
Yes, although it would probably have to be combined with a large increase in the State Pension to compensate any losers.
Nope, wouldn't do that either, at least for that reason. We really must start to trim the featherbedding of higher rate tax paying pensioners. It is immoral and unaffordable.
Currently pensioners pay no NI so if you combine IT and NI you will increase tax on relatively low income pensioners by a hefty margin. For low income pensioners this move would need to be cost neutral which is why the simplest way would be to increase the state pension and claw it back on wealthier pensioners.
That's what he said but it is not (yet) what he has done. Those able to operate through a service company are still being very generously treated.
Yes, it's mad. The root cause is NI.
Whilst on that subject, why on earth do we still have the absurd anomaly that people who work on past retirement age don't pay NI? I'd have thought correcting that would be a free hit in political terms - and there are going to be a lot more such people in the future. Many of them are very well paid.
The solution is obvious. NI should be abolished and IT increased to compensate. So many different unfair differentials removed at a stroke.
Yes, although it would probably have to be combined with a large increase in the State Pension to compensate any losers.
Nope, wouldn't do that either, at least for that reason. We really must start to trim the featherbedding of higher rate tax paying pensioners. It is immoral and unaffordable.
Currently pensioners pay no NI so if you combine IT and NI you will increase tax on relatively low income pensioners by a hefty margin. For low income pensioners this move would need to be cost neutral which is why the simplest way would be to increase the state pension and claw it back on wealthier pensioners.
The right thing to do would be to charge pensioners a reduce but non-zero NI rate to reflect the fact that they are no contributing to the state pension
No holiday pay if self employed - exactly where is the holiday pay supposed to come from.
Normally it would come from the employer. Self-employed don't get that benefit.
Yes but you accept that if you are self employed. I'm happy to accept the fact I don't get paid for my holidays given the rate I charge for a hour of my time... The point is he's complaining about 3 things (two of which are probably through his own choice) and only 1 has changed and it hasn't changed that much.
Ni increase is bollocks....... you don't get employer pensions, sick pay, child care vouchers and are on your own..... state pension is better now but to claim little difference between self employed and employed is false.
Director dividend tax cut is fairer but was only brought in when taxing directors more on dividends last year. So an increase tax to the last increase.
3k nsi savings bond is piffling
Boo hoo - not many people are forced to be self employed - mostly a tax efficient choice.
I'm missing your point. Or you've missed mine.
News to most white van drivers, small shop owners or carpenters ...
Increasingly there seem to be two groups, the very low-income self-employed and a few on high incomes like barristers and IT contractors. The latter usually have a huge incentive to form a co. Don't blame the former.
Good point. Lifetime isa comes in next month and nothing on it????? Nothing on pensions thank God but not abolished taper annual allowance it seems.. shame if so.
The solution is obvious. NI should be abolished and IT increased to compensate. So many different unfair differentials removed at a stroke.
I agree with that. NI conjures up visions amongst the public — their own personal pot of gold at the Bank of England — that are completely wrong. Getting rid of it would be a fairer way of taxing income, simpler to administer, and have fewer anomalies.
No precisely the opposite, NI contributions should be more linked to welfare, pensions and care entitlements
The greatest political surprise from Hammond's budget is that there was at least as much micro-managing as in Osborne's budgets. A lot of small measures announced.
Absolutely not. NI was set up to pay for welfare, pensions and healthcare, social care is exactly what it should be paying for
By that reasoning the revenue from income tax should be exclusively devoted to fighting the French.
Well, if Brexit goes really badly, it may well be again.
Please, people, perspective. UK gov raises £200bn (ish) off income tax. How much would it take to beat the French; few million, tops? That's a *lot* of tax refunds.
Qualifying recognised overseas pension schemes (QROPS): introduction of transfer charge – The government will introduce a 25% charge on transfers to QROPS. This charge is targeted at those seeking to reduce the tax payable by moving their pension wealth to another jurisdiction. Exceptions will apply to the charge allowing transfers to be made tax-free where people have a genuine need to transfer their pension, including when the individual and the pension are both located within the European Economic Area.
Comments
I think I've fallen in love with Phil Hammond.
Few changes to shore up fiscal needs.
We've just grown up under Brownbornianism - political tinkering.
Labour should throw themselves down a well....
But surely that should be dealt with by clamping down on the employers who are pretending their employees are self-employed.
Whilst on that subject, why on earth do we still have the absurd anomaly that people who work on past retirement age don't pay NI? I'd have thought correcting that would be a free hit in political terms - and there are going to be a lot more such people in the future. Many of them are very well paid.
Tick tock
Director dividend tax cut is fairer but was only brought in when taxing directors more on dividends last year. So an increase tax to the last increase.
3k nsi savings bond is piffling
https://twitter.com/Crocodile_Stu/status/839461003943362561
No holiday pay if self employed - exactly where is the holiday pay supposed to come from.
I'd vote for any party that made that a manifesto commitment.
Normally it would come from the employer. Self-employed don't get that benefit.
OGH loves Hammo ..
Currently pensioners pay no NI so if you combine IT and NI you will increase tax on relatively low income pensioners by a hefty margin. For low income pensioners this move would need to be cost neutral which is why the simplest way would be to increase the state pension and claw it back on wealthier pensioners.
Well, he does spend his time talking to the Shadow Cabinet.
55 minutes 10 seconds or some such ?
Increasingly there seem to be two groups, the very low-income self-employed and a few on high incomes like barristers and IT contractors. The latter usually have a huge incentive to form a co. Don't blame the former.
To be fair, I used similar language.
My favourite ever PB thread I wrote was the one where I said Mark Reckless deserved a red hot poker up his arse.
Edit - I said 'he's a f**king c**t who deserves a hot poker up his arse.'
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2014/09/30/memo-to-the-tories-never-hate-your-enemies-it-affects-your-judgement/
Glad I didn't bet.
Qualifying recognised overseas pension schemes (QROPS): introduction of transfer charge – The government will introduce a 25% charge on transfers to QROPS. This charge is targeted at those seeking to reduce the tax payable by moving their pension wealth to another jurisdiction. Exceptions will apply to the charge allowing transfers to be made tax-free where people have a genuine need to transfer their pension, including when the individual and the pension are both located within the European Economic Area.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/spring-budget-2017-documents/spring-budget-2017