Is the NIC equalisation fair? Lots of self-employed people do work our company. They get no sick pay, holiday pay etc etc. Employees get tons of benefits that freelance suppliers lack (and have to pay to cover).
Brexit has to be paid for somehow.
Well quite. It seems those who offer companies huge flexibility by taking on employment risk on their own shoulders are the ones the government wants to pay the penalty.
The BBC economics man made the excellent point that this hits those 1-man self employed people on their NI but not the big firms who use them as rather than employ them, presumably referring to the delivery drivers and uber type workers?
Who knew the foundations of the self-employed economy teetered on just a 60p a week NI increase.
Here's the thing. Let's see how many of the self-employed are desperate to become employees as a consequence of these changes. I'm thinking the answer is going to be EXTREMELY close to zero....
I know a lot of self employed people, I am sure they will happily adjust the amount they declare to suit the new policies
I suspect this NIC rise will get a disproportionate amount of discussion on PB and the wider media because it will affect a disproportionate amount of people who frequent this site and work in the media.
Mr. Eagles, if we take as read the NI move is at least controversial, what other areas make it an omni-shambles, as you call it? [I didn't watch the Budget].
Who knew the foundations of the self-employed economy teetered on just a 60p a week NI increase.
Here's the thing. Let's see how many of the self-employed are desperate to become employees as a consequence of these changes. I'm thinking the answer is going to be EXTREMELY close to zero....
I know a lot of self employed people, I am sure they will happily adjust the amount they declare to suit the new policies
A pound a week cash in hand and they'll be sorted....
@nicholaswatt: At least 24 hours before @George_Osborne budgets in trouble. HMT team struggling within secs to explain how manifesto not broken on NICs
Is the NIC equalisation fair? Lots of self-employed people do work our company. They get no sick pay, holiday pay etc etc. Employees get tons of benefits that freelance suppliers lack (and have to pay to cover).
Brexit has to be paid for somehow.
Well quite. It seems those who offer companies huge flexibility by taking on employment risk on their own shoulders are the ones the government wants to pay the penalty.
The BBC economics man made the excellent point that this hits those 1-man self employed people on their NI but not the big firms who use them as rather than employ them, presumably referring to the delivery drivers and uber type workers?
Yes, companies get off notionally scot-free as far as I can see. Although I guess the fees we pay will have to rise in time to make up for the tax hit on our suppliers. No such thing as a free Brexit lunch.
Who knew the foundations of the self-employed economy teetered on just a 60p a week NI increase.
Here's the thing. Let's see how many of the self-employed are desperate to become employees as a consequence of these changes. I'm thinking the answer is going to be EXTREMELY close to zero....
I agree actually - politically though it doesn't matter it's an open goal to explore manifesto breaking which the media loves to go on and all for not much £ raised.
My point earlier was the over simplistic equalisation of being employed vs s/employed that Hammond portrayed.
I suspect this NIC rise will get a disproportionate amount of discussion on PB and the wider media because it will affect a disproportionate amount of people who frequent this site and work in the media.
Of course, that graph does not take into account the substantial attendant costs of being self-employed, and the very significant benefits of being employed. £60,000 pa s/e is worth a lot less than £60,000 pa employed.
But if the IR35 tax dodger is getting £60k p.a., the tax-paying staffy will probably be on around £40k p.a. for doing the same job.
In my experience in process engineering design houses, there is always a big income advantage for the contractors, but they have almost as much job security as the staff (the standing joke being what is the difference between a contractor and a staffy? 3 weeks - i.e. 1 week notice v 1 month notice). Contract draffies would be getting more than staff lead engineers.
However the 2.4% projection for inflation is a BIG joke. The Brexit calamity will continue to put huge pressure on Sterling. In my opinion the devaluation of the pound has a long way to go....
Who knew the foundations of the self-employed economy teetered on just a 60p a week NI increase.
Here's the thing. Let's see how many of the self-employed are desperate to become employees as a consequence of these changes. I'm thinking the answer is going to be EXTREMELY close to zero....
Yes, well every time there's a tax rise the cheerleaders declare it will have no effect. The truth is that tax rises do have effects – usually by increasing costs on companies. That is not to say that tax rises should not be made, simply that they all have consequences.
I suspect this NIC rise will get a disproportionate amount of discussion on PB and the wider media because it will affect a disproportionate amount of people who frequent this site and work in the media.
However the 2.4% projection for inflation is a BIG joke. The Brexit calamity will continue to put huge pressure on Sterling. In my opinion the devaluation of the pound has a long way to go....
There may well be a short term dip when A50 is sent, but otherwise my feeling is that devaluation is pretty much done. Inflation, on the other hand, certainly isn't, since it is ticking up across the developed economies, and we have to cope with Brexit in addition.
Who knew the foundations of the self-employed economy teetered on just a 60p a week NI increase.
Here's the thing. Let's see how many of the self-employed are desperate to become employees as a consequence of these changes. I'm thinking the answer is going to be EXTREMELY close to zero....
As I said earlier I am not convinced that Hammond has gone too far at the moment. For sure over the last couple of years the Government has added many thousands of pounds to my tax bill through changes to dividends and other changes but I understand the reasoning at this point. The same goes with the NI changes for self employed today.
My concern is the rhetoric exemplified by idiots like TGOHF who seem to think self employed and one man limited companies are in that position because of tax reasons. There are vast swathes of the economy which rely upon short term working at every level from manual labour up to highly specialised contract work. This sort of activity is simply not suited to the employment model and it also carries significant downsides in terms of risks that are not carried by employers or employees. There needs to be some recognition of this or you will start to see serious damage to the economy. It would help greatly if there was less emphasis on marginal tax benefits and more on the costs and risks of being self employed or a one man band.
I suspect this NIC rise will get a disproportionate amount of discussion on PB and the wider media because it will affect a disproportionate amount of people who frequent this site and work in the media.
Of course, that graph does not take into account the substantial attendant costs of being self-employed, and the very significant benefits of being employed. £60,000 pa s/e is worth a lot less than £60,000 pa employed.
But if the IR35 tax dodger is getting £60k p.a., the tax-paying staffy will probably be on around £40k p.a. for doing the same job.
In my experience in process engineering design houses, there is always a big income advantage for the contractors, but they have almost as much job security as the staff (the standing joke being what is the difference between a contractor and a staffy? 3 weeks - i.e. 1 week notice v 1 month notice). Contract draffies would be getting more than staff lead engineers.
Yes, in some cases, but that is not the point I was making. I was making the point that the graph is an illusion because – for the very reasons you cite – s/e get paid more to cover the costs and risks of being s/e!
I suspect this NIC rise will get a disproportionate amount of discussion on PB and the wider media because it will affect a disproportionate amount of people who frequent this site and work in the media.
I have to say we have got to quite a weird stage with budgets where no group can ever be clearly seen to have being singled out and on the losing end (with the exception of rich...but not those on £100k a year, cos they are just JAMs)....and I say that as somebody who will be getting the kick in the knackers with this change.
e.g. In the Omnishambles budget, the whole granny tax stuff was total utter nonsense.
Who knew the foundations of the self-employed economy teetered on just a 60p a week NI increase.
Here's the thing. Let's see how many of the self-employed are desperate to become employees as a consequence of these changes. I'm thinking the answer is going to be EXTREMELY close to zero....
I know a lot of self employed people, I am sure they will happily adjust the amount they declare to suit the new policies
And it may well impact on the cost-benefits of declaring part-time earnings from an online business in order to qualify for tax credits, as well.
Who knew the foundations of the self-employed economy teetered on just a 60p a week NI increase.
Here's the thing. Let's see how many of the self-employed are desperate to become employees as a consequence of these changes. I'm thinking the answer is going to be EXTREMELY close to zero....
As I said earlier I am not convinced that Hammond has gone too far at the moment. For sure over the last couple of years the Government has added many thousands of pounds to my tax bill through changes to dividends and other changes but I understand the reasoning at this point. The same goes with the NI changes for self employed today.
My concern is the rhetoric exemplified by idiots like TGOHF who seem to think self employed and one man limited companies are in that position because of tax reasons. There are vast swathes of the economy which rely upon short term working at every level from manual labour up to highly specialised contract work. This sort of activity is simply not suited to the employment model and it also carries significant downsides in terms of risks that are not carried by employers or employees. There needs to be some recognition of this or you will start to see serious damage to the economy. It would help greatly if there was less emphasis on marginal tax benefits and more on the costs and risks of being self employed or a one man band.
So, all those tweets that the journalists and politicians had prepared before the budget, full of indignation about 'Targeting the disabled' and (favourite of all) 'Discriminating against women', have had to be scrapped and replaced by ones about 'Targeting white van man'.
I don't see how 2.4% inflation and 2.0% real GDP growth work together. That implies 4.4% underlying income growth, before changes in net exports and gross capital formation. Now, net exports have been disappointing to date, largely thanks to both commodity price rises and declining oil & gas output. Gross capital formation looks likely to drop by about 0.3-0.5% of GDP in 2017 (and I think the risk is largely on the downside).
Together, that suggests that underlying income growth needs to be a little over 5%. That seems optimistic. My view is that income may accelerate slightly from 4%, but getting above 5% is extremely unlikely. (Certainly, it hasn't been achieved since 2007.) The world and the Eurozone economies are accelerating, which helps, but the OBR forecasts feel a little optimistic for this year.
Speaking to several conservative activists, I'm calling this an omni-shambles budget.
That NI decision will be reversed.
I'd say the bigger FUBAR was the introduction of a £5k dividend allowance then cutting it back to £2k immediately.
Yup - big hit last year with the token £5k to soften the blow and now taking that away too... it was stupid that it meant many of my highest salaried earners could suddenly have a portfolio paying £5k pa tax free out of nothing....
This hits me but actually it is fairer as NI is largely irrelevant to we company directors and dividends are still more advantageous.
So, all those tweets that the journalists and politicians had prepared before the budget, full of indignation about 'Targeting the disabled' and (favourite of all) 'Discriminating against women', have had to be scrapped and replaced by ones about 'Targeting white van man'.
(Only Jeremy Corbybn failed to make the switch).
@DPJHodges: Corbyn failing to hit Hammond on NICs is his version of Ed forgetting the deficit.
It's International Women's Day. I saw a tweet promoting Empress Irene, and the name rang a bell, so I checked an article I wrote. As I suspected, she'd had her son blinded so horribly he died of his wounds.
For pointing out this historical fact I suffered the penalty of blocking. Damn you, historical facts!
Paging @Jungleland - What will SPIN be settling up as for the minutes
I'm actually not in the office, my prices but I've been on nights trading Indian Wells all week. I have just given CS a nudge for you to settle, should be in the next couple of minutes.
Speaking to several conservative activists, I'm calling this an omni-shambles budget.
That NI decision will be reversed.
Well, that's a pretty biased sample too (both *all* activists, and more specifically the ones you've spoken to since an adverse tax change!) Though a very relevant one.
I'll be disappointed to see it reversed. All these mini-reversals after Budgets tend to reduce the authority of the Budget in the first place.
Maybe a proper thumping majority is needed, so the Government can actually take some hard choices with a longer-term horizon.
Who knew the foundations of the self-employed economy teetered on just a 60p a week NI increase.
Here's the thing. Let's see how many of the self-employed are desperate to become employees as a consequence of these changes. I'm thinking the answer is going to be EXTREMELY close to zero....
As I said earlier I am not convinced that Hammond has gone too far at the moment. For sure over the last couple of years the Government has added many thousands of pounds to my tax bill through changes to dividends and other changes but I understand the reasoning at this point. The same goes with the NI changes for self employed today.
My concern is the rhetoric exemplified by idiots like TGOHF who seem to think self employed and one man limited companies are in that position because of tax reasons. There are vast swathes of the economy which rely upon short term working at every level from manual labour up to highly specialised contract work. This sort of activity is simply not suited to the employment model and it also carries significant downsides in terms of risks that are not carried by employers or employees. There needs to be some recognition of this or you will start to see serious damage to the economy. It would help greatly if there was less emphasis on marginal tax benefits and more on the costs and risks of being self employed or a one man band.
I suspect this NIC rise will get a disproportionate amount of discussion on PB and the wider media because it will affect a disproportionate amount of people who frequent this site and work in the media.
Of course, that graph does not take into account the substantial attendant costs of being self-employed, and the very significant benefits of being employed. £60,000 pa s/e is worth a lot less than £60,000 pa employed.
But if the IR35 tax dodger is getting £60k p.a., the tax-paying staffy will probably be on around £40k p.a. for doing the same job.
In my experience in process engineering design houses, there is always a big income advantage for the contractors, but they have almost as much job security as the staff (the standing joke being what is the difference between a contractor and a staffy? 3 weeks - i.e. 1 week notice v 1 month notice). Contract draffies would be getting more than staff lead engineers.
Yes, in some cases, but that is not the point I was making. I was making the point that the graph is an illusion because – for the very reasons you cite – s/e get paid more to cover the costs and risks of being s/e!
Ref the NI increase, it's not defensible to argue that it's not a broken manifesto commitment because it is. So the government needs to be arguing why it's broken it (i.e. Brexit means we need more money and equalizing a progressive tax is a fair way of doing it), rather than trying to argue that black is white.
The public will give a fair argument a hearing; they won't accept obvious spin.
Sky news really do not like Theresa may government,first they get a nhs worker on in newcastle who has nothing good to say about the budget and then the may chuckle is shown.
So, all those tweets that the journalists and politicians had prepared before the budget, full of indignation about 'Targeting the disabled' and (favourite of all) 'Discriminating against women', have had to be scrapped and replaced by ones about 'Targeting white van man'.
(Only Jeremy Corbybn failed to make the switch).
@DPJHodges: Corbyn failing to hit Hammond on NICs is his version of Ed forgetting the deficit.
Or Dave not noticing that Brown dropping the 10 pence tax rate meant a tax rise for the low paid. It happens.
The NIC rise is going to hit a fair amount of people and not raise that much by the looks of it. Also goes against the aspirational some of them middle class voters the Tories have been courting and have said they are on their side. My father is self employed because he can't find a HR job because of his age, he has no choice but to go self employed at the moment.
I strongly suspect it will get dropped before it comes into effect.
I suspect it wont - and this is just the first increase - expect YoY increases.
Most voters are PAYE and probably didn't realise how cushy the S/E have it.
You really do display a most stunning level of ignorance about this subject.
But if that level of ignorance is widely shared (i.e. the "self employed" are BBC presenters on 150,000/year fiddling their taxes) then he's right about the political implications - given the vast majority are on PAYE......
Isn't the rule of thumb that budgets that are incredibly popular on the day turn out to be a pile of crap? On that basis, Hammond has probably done a good job. It's hard to find anything to get particularly worked up about - except for throwing money at free schools. That is a poor use of resources.
I wonder what the reaction on PB would have been if Hammond had brought back gambling tax?
Mike and myself would have done countless PB threads headlined
'Phil Hammond and Theresa May: Enemies of the people/punters'
How on earth would Betfair cope ?
They already have a massive tax!
Premium charge ? Betfair tells me I have £226 remaining allowance on that..
I don't understand exactly how it works, but it makes me worse off!!
It would be a good idea to use the money raised from PC paid by big punters and syndicates to abolish commission charges for small punters. The increase in business through better prices would benefit everyone
Sky news really do not like Theresa may government,first they get a nhs worker on in newcastle who has nothing good to say about the budget and then the may chuckle is shown.
They literally showed the chuckle like 6 times just before the budget.
I have to say we have got to quite a weird stage with budgets where no group can ever be clearly seen to have being singled out and on the losing end (with the exception of rich...but not those on £100k a year, cos they are just JAMs)....and I say that as somebody who will be getting the kick in the knackers with this change.
e.g. In the Omnishambles budget, the whole granny tax stuff was total utter nonsense.
It's completely ridiculous to expect a budget to have no losers. Along the lines that I say about other similar supposedly controversial things, if every budget is an omnishambles then no budget is an omnishambles.
I don't think we've had a genuinely poor budget since Brown was Chancellor.
I wonder what the reaction on PB would have been if Hammond had brought back gambling tax?
Mike and myself would have done countless PB threads headlined
'Phil Hammond and Theresa May: Enemies of the people/punters'
How on earth would Betfair cope ?
They already have a massive tax!
Premium charge ? Betfair tells me I have £226 remaining allowance on that..
I don't understand exactly how it works, but it makes me worse off!!
It would be a good idea to use the money raised from PC paid by big punters and syndicates to abolish commission charges for small punters. The increase in business through better prices would benefit everyone
PC is a seperate issue though - that is Betfair internals - would you want to pay 5% gambling tax on top of your PC ?
Just checked, my commission is 6.9% of my lifetime profit - Betfair prefer this to be around 20......
The NIC rise is going to hit a fair amount of people and not raise that much by the looks of it. Also goes against the aspirational some of them middle class voters the Tories have been courting and have said they are on their side. My father is self employed because he can't find a HR job because of his age, he has no choice but to go self employed at the moment.
I strongly suspect it will get dropped before it comes into effect.
I suspect it wont - and this is just the first increase - expect YoY increases.
Most voters are PAYE and probably didn't realise how cushy the S/E have it.
Garbage. Being self-employed is "cushy"?? Erm, actually no, it isn't. It's risky, and lacks many of the benefits of being an employee. Catching the flu costs you hundreds if not thousands of pounds.
When I was self-employed I took on every bit of work out there and was doing 16 hour days six, sometimes seven, days a week. You take the cash when you can because you never know when it might not be there. I was delighted to get back to PAYE and actually took an income cut to do it. That said, what Hammond is proposing does not look too horrific to me.
I have to say we have got to quite a weird stage with budgets where no group can ever be clearly seen to have being singled out and on the losing end (with the exception of rich...but not those on £100k a year, cos they are just JAMs)....and I say that as somebody who will be getting the kick in the knackers with this change.
e.g. In the Omnishambles budget, the whole granny tax stuff was total utter nonsense.
It's completely ridiculous to expect a budget to have no losers. Along the lines that I say about other similar supposedly controversial things, if every budget is an omnishambles then no budget is an omnishambles.
I don't think we've had a genuinely poor budget since Brown was Chancellor.
The spinning is poor though. Nothing wrong with the maxim of underpromising and overdelivering. If you're going to break a promise, be up-front about it and explain why. That way, there's no scoop when someone points out what you tried to hide.
Speaking to several conservative activists, I'm calling this an omni-shambles budget.
That NI decision will be reversed.
Well, that's a pretty biased sample too (both *all* activists, and more specifically the ones you've spoken to since an adverse tax change!) Though a very relevant one.
I'll be disappointed to see it reversed. All these mini-reversals after Budgets tend to reduce the authority of the Budget in the first place.
Maybe a proper thumping majority is needed, so the Government can actually take some hard choices with a longer-term horizon.
It is a policy that has united in opposition both John Redwood and Anna Soubry, that tells you much it transcends the Tory party.
Sky saying Brexit affect still there because borrowing higher then expected. Bs, Brexit has nothing to do with it, borrowing is lower then the worse figures expected straight after Brexit. Sky news is shit.
I don't see how 2.4% inflation and 2.0% real GDP growth work together. That implies 4.4% underlying income growth, before changes in net exports and gross capital formation. Now, net exports have been disappointing to date, largely thanks to both commodity price rises and declining oil & gas output. Gross capital formation looks likely to drop by about 0.3-0.5% of GDP in 2017 (and I think the risk is largely on the downside).
Together, that suggests that underlying income growth needs to be a little over 5%. That seems optimistic. My view is that income may accelerate slightly from 4%, but getting above 5% is extremely unlikely. (Certainly, it hasn't been achieved since 2007.) The world and the Eurozone economies are accelerating, which helps, but the OBR forecasts feel a little optimistic for this year.
The private dwellings component of GDP seems to be anomalously large this year compared to others.
The NIC rise is going to hit a fair amount of people and not raise that much by the looks of it. Also goes against the aspirational some of them middle class voters the Tories have been courting and have said they are on their side. My father is self employed because he can't find a HR job because of his age, he has no choice but to go self employed at the moment.
I strongly suspect it will get dropped before it comes into effect.
I suspect it wont - and this is just the first increase - expect YoY increases.
Most voters are PAYE and probably didn't realise how cushy the S/E have it.
Garbage. Being self-employed is "cushy"?? Erm, actually no, it isn't. It's risky, and lacks many of the benefits of being an employee. Catching the flu costs you hundreds if not thousands of pounds.
When I was self-employed I took on every bit of work out there and was doing 16 hour days six, sometimes seven, days a week. You take the cash when you can because you never know when it might not be there. I was delighted to get back to PAYE and actually took an income cut to do it. That said, what Hammond is proposing does not look too horrific to me.
This is very true, but I also know full well, that plenty of people which are 'contractors' should actually be employees, and the reason they aren't is becuase both sides benefit from either running as self-employed or via a company.
The reason is to reduce tax, and hundreds and thousands of people do it for that reason.
I wonder what the reaction on PB would have been if Hammond had brought back gambling tax?
Mike and myself would have done countless PB threads headlined
'Phil Hammond and Theresa May: Enemies of the people/punters'
How on earth would Betfair cope ?
They already have a massive tax!
Premium charge ? Betfair tells me I have £226 remaining allowance on that..
I don't understand exactly how it works, but it makes me worse off!!
It would be a good idea to use the money raised from PC paid by big punters and syndicates to abolish commission charges for small punters. The increase in business through better prices would benefit everyone
PC is a seperate issue though - that is Betfair internals - would you want to pay 5% gambling tax on top of your PC ?
I remember as a very young bookmaker paying tax on turnover rather than profit and spending many happy days doing my bollocks to the punters and paying for the privelege as they reinvested and the favourites kept winning.
Sky saying Brexit affect still there because borrowing higher then expected. Bs, Brexit has nothing to do with it, borrowing is lower then the worse figures expected straight after Brexit. Sky news is shit.
The biggest bullshit Brexit story today is the BBC spin on UK students at Dutch universities...
Headline says 6% drop in those starting at a particular Dutch uni due to Brexit.
You look at the figures, you are talking about 20 less kids starting...Of the 350 or so that have started, most will have applied well before Brexit vote....oh and at another leading Dutch uni the application numbers are up, despite Brexit.
I wonder what the reaction on PB would have been if Hammond had brought back gambling tax?
Mike and myself would have done countless PB threads headlined
'Phil Hammond and Theresa May: Enemies of the people/punters'
How on earth would Betfair cope ?
They already have a massive tax!
Premium charge ? Betfair tells me I have £226 remaining allowance on that..
I don't understand exactly how it works, but it makes me worse off!!
It would be a good idea to use the money raised from PC paid by big punters and syndicates to abolish commission charges for small punters. The increase in business through better prices would benefit everyone
If the Treasury had the time to look in to Premium Charges, they'd conclude that they were effectively an income tax being levied by Betfair, and thus want a large chunk for themselves :-)
I have to say that increasing the cost of being self employed is probably a net negative in the current environment. I understand why the chancellor has made the changes, it is to catch the "self employed" BBC luvvies, but overall it is going to hurt lot of legitimately self employed people, sole-traders especially. I think reducing the director/owner dividend relief to £0 would have been better than this move and probably raised more money.
Shouldn't that plot not be "on all households" but "on self-employed households" or at least those with one self-employed person. If only one in ten households in the 10th decile is affected by the change, for example, wouldn't that mean the change in average earning was actually £900? That being said, the values on the left hand side are so small (0.02% for the 5th decile) that even scaling them up by a factor of ten would only be a 0.2% change in average earnings!!
The local gov't/council hit tucked away over the next few years is enourmous. Increase for social care doesn't look like it covers it to me. That looks to be the real untold story of the budget, the NIC stuff is pure fluff in comparison.
I can't honestly complain about the NI changes, though I expect they will clobber me.
It would be nice, however, to see the costs of Brexit put in part on the shoulders of those who voted for it. Where are the tax rises and spending cuts that affect yokels and coffin dodgers?
I wonder what the reaction on PB would have been if Hammond had brought back gambling tax?
Mike and myself would have done countless PB threads headlined
'Phil Hammond and Theresa May: Enemies of the people/punters'
How on earth would Betfair cope ?
They already have a massive tax!
Premium charge ? Betfair tells me I have £226 remaining allowance on that..
I don't understand exactly how it works, but it makes me worse off!!
It would be a good idea to use the money raised from PC paid by big punters and syndicates to abolish commission charges for small punters. The increase in business through better prices would benefit everyone
If the Treasury had the time to look in to Premium Charges, they'd conclude that they were effectively an income tax being levied by Betfair, and thus want a large chunk for themselves :-)
I'd have much less of an issue paying PC to the treasury rather than betfair's shareholders.
As I understand it though, Betfair's overall profits are taxed at a pretty high rate anyway - so a big chunk of what BF take in premium charges end up being handed over to the treasury.
I can't honestly complain about the NI changes, though I expect they will clobber me.
It would be nice, however, to see the costs of Brexit put in part on the shoulders of those who voted for it. Where are the tax rises and spending cuts that affect yokels and coffin dodgers?
People have a romantic attachment to them. That attachment doesn't extend to lawyers.
I can't honestly complain about the NI changes, though I expect they will clobber me.
It would be nice, however, to see the costs of Brexit put in part on the shoulders of those who voted for it. Where are the tax rises and spending cuts that affect yokels and coffin dodgers?
I'm not sure that they will clobber you unless NI has been uncapped or your drawings are exceptionally low.
I wonder what the reaction on PB would have been if Hammond had brought back gambling tax?
Mike and myself would have done countless PB threads headlined
'Phil Hammond and Theresa May: Enemies of the people/punters'
How on earth would Betfair cope ?
They already have a massive tax!
Premium charge ? Betfair tells me I have £226 remaining allowance on that..
I don't understand exactly how it works, but it makes me worse off!!
It would be a good idea to use the money raised from PC paid by big punters and syndicates to abolish commission charges for small punters. The increase in business through better prices would benefit everyone
If the Treasury had the time to look in to Premium Charges, they'd conclude that they were effectively an income tax being levied by Betfair, and thus want a large chunk for themselves :-)
I'd have much less of an issue paying PC to the treasury rather than betfair's shareholders.
As I understand it though, Betfair's overall profits are taxed at a pretty high rate anyway - so a big chunk of what BF take in premium charges end up being handed over to the treasury.
What do you think to the idea that PC should pay for small punters to bet comm free?
Championship top 6 and top 3 (if anyone followed my Bottas title each way bet at 26, effectively 6 for top 3 [well, 5 given the loss of the title], you can hedge at 2.9, if you don't think it'll fall).
There are a couple more Australian markets, but not much money there yet.
I have to say that increasing the cost of being self employed is probably a net negative in the current environment. I understand why the chancellor has made the changes, it is to catch the "self employed" BBC luvvies, but overall it is going to hurt lot of legitimately self employed people, sole-traders especially. I think reducing the director/owner dividend relief to £0 would have been better than this move and probably raised more money.
£2k is pretty much doing that really - and this way you don't hit the grannies with their privatisation shares.
I can't honestly complain about the NI changes, though I expect they will clobber me.
It would be nice, however, to see the costs of Brexit put in part on the shoulders of those who voted for it. Where are the tax rises and spending cuts that affect yokels and coffin dodgers?
You really are Quite nasty,when are you selling up the house in hungary after the new law on asylum seekers or is it just this country you think is nasty on that issue.
I thought it was already illegal to claim self-employed status if you do most of your work for one company.
Uber, Amazon etc etc? They all use "self employed" . no it is not illegal.
It is difficult to legislate on precisely. So the net result is that self employed and employed need to be treated very similiarly in tax and NI terms.
Shouldn't that plot not be "on all households" but "on self-employed households" or at least those with one self-employed person. If only one in ten households in the 10th decile is affected by the change, for example, wouldn't that mean the change in average earning was actually £900? That being said, the values on the left hand side are so small (0.02% for the 5th decile) that even scaling them up by a factor of ten would only be a 0.2% change in average earnings!!
The NIcs increase raises ~ £500ma year and affects about 1.5m workers so an average cost of £330.
Comments
It's a tax very much targeted at the tory base.
May & Hammond are testing the limits of their mandate - it'll be very interesting to see how it plays out.
My point earlier was the over simplistic equalisation of being employed vs s/employed that Hammond portrayed.
In my experience in process engineering design houses, there is always a big income advantage for the contractors, but they have almost as much job security as the staff (the standing joke being what is the difference between a contractor and a staffy? 3 weeks - i.e. 1 week notice v 1 month notice). Contract draffies would be getting more than staff lead engineers.
However the 2.4% projection for inflation is a BIG joke. The Brexit calamity will continue to put huge pressure on Sterling. In my opinion the devaluation of the pound has a long way to go....
Yes, well every time there's a tax rise the cheerleaders declare it will have no effect. The truth is that tax rises do have effects – usually by increasing costs on companies. That is not to say that tax rises should not be made, simply that they all have consequences.
My concern is the rhetoric exemplified by idiots like TGOHF who seem to think self employed and one man limited companies are in that position because of tax reasons. There are vast swathes of the economy which rely upon short term working at every level from manual labour up to highly specialised contract work. This sort of activity is simply not suited to the employment model and it also carries significant downsides in terms of risks that are not carried by employers or employees. There needs to be some recognition of this or you will start to see serious damage to the economy. It would help greatly if there was less emphasis on marginal tax benefits and more on the costs and risks of being self employed or a one man band.
Yes, I know!
e.g. In the Omnishambles budget, the whole granny tax stuff was total utter nonsense.
"Whoa! Cost of servicing our debt has risen £6.4bn *since November*!"
https://twitter.com/JolyonMaugham/status/839481933038043136
(Only Jeremy Corbyn failed to make the switch).
Together, that suggests that underlying income growth needs to be a little over 5%. That seems optimistic. My view is that income may accelerate slightly from 4%, but getting above 5% is extremely unlikely. (Certainly, it hasn't been achieved since 2007.) The world and the Eurozone economies are accelerating, which helps, but the OBR forecasts feel a little optimistic for this year.
@KateEMcCann: John Redwood joins Anna Soubry in warning against Nics increase on self-employed. This measure has not landed well.
This hits me but actually it is fairer as NI is largely irrelevant to we company directors and dividends are still more advantageous.
It's International Women's Day. I saw a tweet promoting Empress Irene, and the name rang a bell, so I checked an article I wrote. As I suspected, she'd had her son blinded so horribly he died of his wounds.
For pointing out this historical fact I suffered the penalty of blocking. Damn you, historical facts!
http://thaddeusthesixth.blogspot.co.uk/2016/09/eastern-empresses.html
https://twitter.com/MorrisF1/status/839486715022749696
'Phil Hammond and Theresa May: Enemies of the people/punters'
I'll be disappointed to see it reversed. All these mini-reversals after Budgets tend to reduce the authority of the Budget in the first place.
Maybe a proper thumping majority is needed, so the Government can actually take some hard choices with a longer-term horizon.
The public will give a fair argument a hearing; they won't accept obvious spin.
Meanwhile some Lib Dem opportunity on the NIC change.
https://twitter.com/JamesKanag/status/839488436075655168
Not suprised at all.
It would be a good idea to use the money raised from PC paid by big punters and syndicates to abolish commission charges for small punters. The increase in business through better prices would benefit everyone
I don't think we've had a genuinely poor budget since Brown was Chancellor.
Just checked, my commission is 6.9% of my lifetime profit - Betfair prefer this to be around 20......
The reason is to reduce tax, and hundreds and thousands of people do it for that reason.
https://twitter.com/TorstenBell/status/839482353055576068
Headline says 6% drop in those starting at a particular Dutch uni due to Brexit.
You look at the figures, you are talking about 20 less kids starting...Of the 350 or so that have started, most will have applied well before Brexit vote....oh and at another leading Dutch uni the application numbers are up, despite Brexit.
That looks to be the real untold story of the budget, the NIC stuff is pure fluff in comparison.
It would be nice, however, to see the costs of Brexit put in part on the shoulders of those who voted for it. Where are the tax rises and spending cuts that affect yokels and coffin dodgers?
https://twitter.com/DuncanWeldon/status/839487076953305091
As I understand it though, Betfair's overall profits are taxed at a pretty high rate anyway - so a big chunk of what BF take in premium charges end up being handed over to the treasury.
Championship top 6 and top 3 (if anyone followed my Bottas title each way bet at 26, effectively 6 for top 3 [well, 5 given the loss of the title], you can hedge at 2.9, if you don't think it'll fall).
There are a couple more Australian markets, but not much money there yet.