The devout Cameroons now primarily link to tweets from Labour and the Guardian... as I said, the Brexit vote brought out the truth from behind the smokescreen that suggested there was a difference between the 2015 big 3
The CoE for the Big Banks and Google and Amazon while those shirkers who have been fiddling the system and not paying their dues - Plumbers, builders and White Van Man - Can go to hell...
I suspect its one of these tax rises where those who aren't affected have little sympathy for those who are.
Many people on PAYE regard the self-employed as tax dodging cash in hand merchants who run a lot of personal costs through the books.
It's certainly a view I have a lot of sympathy for, and as a PAYE employed accountant, something I see a lot of. Mileage claims with only vague support, costs incurred that I might not consider allowable waved through by my partner (usually 'advertising' - at that nice restaurant up the road), any and all capital expenditure justified as somehow business related (iPads, iPhones... anything by Apple really).
I use my personal computer at home to work remotely. Did I (could I) have ever claimed that as a 'business expense'? Course I couldn't. But go self employed and literally everything goes.
And with HMRC investigations few and far between these days, it's no wonder people try it on, and equally no wonder that PAYE employees feel somewhat aggrieved at this situation.
actually hmrc rules allow you to have a laptop for business use and private use is incidental if it's main purpose is for business no benefit in kind is payable even though there may be some private use . it's pefectly legal and there is no cheating
The devout Cameroons now primarily link to tweets from Labour and the Guardian... as I said, the Brexit vote brought out the truth from behind the smokescreen that suggested there was a difference between the 2015 big 3
Non stop whinge to be perfectly honest. The "perk" of being self employed is that you get to cut out certain stuff as business expenses - although I accept if you're doing it properly then it is limited.
BUT THAT IS REFLECTED IN YOUR INCOME FOR TAX & NI PURPOSES ANYWAY.
So after all that why shouldn't NI for employed and self employed be broadly bought into line ?
We'll all cost the state the same when we're 95 and up to our knees in our own piss.
That's going to be what millions on PAYE will be thinking tomorrow when they discover that the self-employed have been paying less NI than them.
What it boils down to is that you can't make any change which adversely affects anyone without mass hysteria breaking out.
The sums involved are so small that I doubt any self-employed person would even notice them if they weren't told.
If they are genuinely self-employed then their income will be varying anyway so an extra 1% (only above the threshold) is barely noticeable and of course it's partially offset by the abolition of Class 2 anyway (and low earners will actually gain more by the abolition of Class 2).
The whole thing is laughable but that's the society we now live in.
It's only laughable in a "ha ha, no wonder this country is so f*cked up" sense. It's a reasonably small change to taxation, partly due to changes in future state pensions, to raise a modest amount of money, to partly pay for social care which essentially everybody agrees needs more money. If the press are up in arms about this then any prospect of substantive change to our taxation system (which is a total mess) will prove impossible.
It's not complicated, if you want to spend more money you have to raise/earn more money, you can't simply borrow more and more, forever and ever.
What it boils down to is that you can't make any change which adversely affects anyone without mass hysteria breaking out.
The sums involved are so small that I doubt any self-employed person would even notice them if they weren't told.
If they are genuinely self-employed then their income will be varying anyway so an extra 1% (only above the threshold) is barely noticeable and of course it's partially offset by the abolition of Class 2 anyway (and low earners will actually gain more by the abolition of Class 2).
The whole thing is laughable but that's the society we now live in.
There are two things.
1. The policy. Which is understandable and possibly even desirable.
2. Mr Hammond's snide little comment about small business owners not paying their way.
My father was a builder and small business owner from when he left school (and started working with his dad) in 1965 to his death at 67 last year.
In all that time he paid his NI until his retirement age in April 2013. Out of that money he paid in he got back two years and 8 months in the state pension... And the government get's to keep the rest.
He worked himself to the bone every day of his life until he literally dropped down dead.
When I think of the money the government made out of him (there was also income tax, VAT, etc.) compared to what he got back... Who says the self employed don't pay their way?
Non stop whinge to be perfectly honest. The "perk" of being self employed is that you get to cut out certain stuff as business expenses - although I accept if you're doing it properly then it is limited.
BUT THAT IS REFLECTED IN YOUR INCOME FOR TAX & NI PURPOSES ANYWAY.
So after all that why shouldn't NI for employed and self employed be broadly bought into line ?
We'll all cost the state the same when we're 95 and up to our knees in our own piss.
That's going to be what millions on PAYE will be thinking tomorrow when they discover that the self-employed have been paying less NI than them.
I genuinely thought your payment 'structure' didn't matter. Why SHOULD it matter ?
The devout Cameroons now primarily link to tweets from Labour and the Guardian... as I said, the Brexit vote brought out the truth from behind the smokescreen that suggested there was a difference between the 2015 big 3
It is ok for UKIP to criticise the budget. You miss my point, which was that Cameroons on here now speak in unison with the Guardian and the Blairite wing of Labour
What it boils down to is that you can't make any change which adversely affects anyone without mass hysteria breaking out.
The sums involved are so small that I doubt any self-employed person would even notice them if they weren't told.
If they are genuinely self-employed then their income will be varying anyway so an extra 1% (only above the threshold) is barely noticeable and of course it's partially offset by the abolition of Class 2 anyway (and low earners will actually gain more by the abolition of Class 2).
The whole thing is laughable but that's the society we now live in.
It's only laughable in a "ha ha, no wonder this country is so f*cked up" sense. It's a reasonably small change to taxation, partly due to changes in future state pensions, to raise a modest amount of money, to partly pay for social care which essentially everybody agrees needs more money. If the press are up in arms about this then any prospect of substantive change to our taxation system (which is a total mess) will prove impossible.
It's not complicated, if you want to spend more money you have to raise/earn more money, you can't simply borrow more and more, forever and ever.
The press need to be somewhat ignored. Trump has proven they aren't "all that" in the USA.
But what really did stick in the throat was Hammond's inference that the self-employed are spongers and have been fiddling the system while those brave workers in the private sector and the multi-national corporations have been paying their dues...
.
What did he say about self employed during the speech? Did he really infer that self-employed are spongers. I'd be suprised.
Can't remember the exact phraseology but the inference was that public and self-employed take out equal amounts from the State but the self employed haven't been paying their way.
oh OK. Well that's nowhere near true. Thats why likes of Uber, Amazon etc love people being on self employed contracts so much cheaper for them in terms of benefits etc.
Tax raid, what a ridiculous phrase. Mike L nails it by saying any change which adversely affects someone is reacted to with hysteria. Like NHS crises it means it's hard for me as someone not affected to get an impression of the situation.
What it boils down to is that you can't make any change which adversely affects anyone without mass hysteria breaking out.
The sums involved are so small that I doubt any self-employed person would even notice them if they weren't told.
If they are genuinely self-employed then their income will be varying anyway so an extra 1% (only above the threshold) is barely noticeable and of course it's partially offset by the abolition of Class 2 anyway (and low earners will actually gain more by the abolition of Class 2).
The whole thing is laughable but that's the society we now live in.
It's only laughable in a "ha ha, no wonder this country is so f*cked up" sense. It's a reasonably small change to taxation, partly due to changes in future state pensions, to raise a modest amount of money, to partly pay for social care which essentially everybody agrees needs more money. If the press are up in arms about this then any prospect of substantive change to our taxation system (which is a total mess) will prove impossible.
It's not complicated, if you want to spend more money you have to raise/earn more money, you can't simply borrow more and more, forever and ever.
Indeed - I agree with every word of your post.
Not sure if you misunderstood mine - my point is that the outcry is laughable.
When Hammond cut Business rates for pubs by £1,000 he probably thought "good, I'll get a good headline out of this, the working man will lap it up" little did he know he'd have headlines in the sun such as "Spite Van Man".
When I think of the money the government made out of him (there was also income tax, VAT, etc.) compared to what he got back... Who says the self employed don't pay their way?
Of course there are self employed who pay their way, but there are also people who claim fish tanks and the fish in them as "office furniture", which is one I remember being told.
Well, it's clear from what we've seen tonight that the hard Right's love affair with the British working class is well and truly at an end - over the last year they were the noble but neglected majority whose concerns and hardships were sneered at by a lofty elite; now they're a bunch of chancers who should pay their dues, learn what sacrifice is all about and be grateful. But that was always going to happen.
I can actually see some merit in putting up NI for the self-employed and I don't really see why this government should be bound by the manifesto that the last government was elected on.
You make a very good argument for a General Election when a PM resigns.
If T May did not want to honour the manifesto commitments that the Conservatives were elected upon (even though she was part of the shadow cabinet which presumably agreed to them) then she should have sparked an election and run on a revised manifesto.
Well, it's clear from what we've seen tonight that the hard Right's love affair with the British working class is well and truly at an end - over the last year they were the noble but neglected majority whose concerns and hardships were sneered at by a lofty elite; now they're a bunch of chancers who should pay their dues, learn what sacrifice is all about and be grateful. But that was always going to happen.
The Tories are the hard right now not UKIP?
... and the British Working Class are the self employed???
As for the self -employed now voting UKIP - well, they'll have to consider the consequences.
If they waste their vote on UKIP and get Corbyn as PM they won't be worrying about this Mickey Mouse NI rise - they'll be paying really serious amounts more tax to fund Corbyn's spending wishes.
Which is why - when it comes to the crunch - most people won't risk it - just like they didn't in 2015 - when the risk was only EdM.
Well, it's clear from what we've seen tonight that the hard Right's love affair with the British working class is well and truly at an end - over the last year they were the noble but neglected majority whose concerns and hardships were sneered at by a lofty elite; now they're a bunch of chancers who should pay their dues, learn what sacrifice is all about and be grateful. But that was always going to happen.
Clearly you think the British working class are all self-employed.
Tax raid, what a ridiculous phrase. Mike L nails it by saying any change which adversely affects someone is reacted to with hysteria. Like NHS crises it means it's hard for me as someone not affected to get an impression of the situation.
I don't see how taxes could be raised without adversely affecting somebody. So if that's to be avoided at all costs the remaining ways to raise more money are by accelerating economic growth which is very tricky, efficiency savings which are called "Cuts!" in journo speak, or reducing evasion/avoidance which the press tends to both like "get the fat cats" and dislike "more form filling" as is their wont.
I can actually see some merit in putting up NI for the self-employed and I don't really see why this government should be bound by the manifesto that the last government was elected on.
You make a very good argument for a General Election when a PM resigns.
If T May did not want to honour the manifesto commitments that the Conservatives were elected upon (even though she was part of the shadow cabinet which presumably agreed to them) then she should have sparked an election and run on a revised manifesto.
Except if Cameron had not wanted to honour the manifesto commitments he would not have needed to get a new mandate Sometimes, even if a policy was a good idea when proposed, it may not be a good idea later through no fault of the proposer (not that I am saying that is the case here). Governments need and should be permitted sone leeway, and they are not legally bound.
The consequences are electoral - if you break pledge without adequate explanations, or due to incompetence, you will eventually be made to suffer for it, not least when people don't believe you next time. That seems an appropriate reaction to changing policy, rather than the idea a new pm needs to fight on a new manifesto, particularly as it might be only marginally different.
Some posters underate hubris in Hammond's Budget blunders. If Labour is no threat then you can do as you please - try you hand, tell a few jokes and let them suck it up.
The problem is pride comes before a fall and when faced by the triple threat of Ireland, Scotland and Brexit they shall be humbled.
Comments
Currently
Self Employed Class 4
9% on profits between £8,060 and £43,000
2% on profits over £43,000
9% goes up to 10% then 11%
Interestingly Class 4 NIC still payable after you reach state pension age, unlike employees
https://twitter.com/SkyNewsBreak/status/839554307066368005
https://twitter.com/SuzanneEvans1/status/839610369014378497
https://twitter.com/paulnuttallukip/status/839482396860874753
It's not complicated, if you want to spend more money you have to raise/earn more money, you can't simply borrow more and more, forever and ever.
1. The policy. Which is understandable and possibly even desirable.
2. Mr Hammond's snide little comment about small business owners not paying their way.
My father was a builder and small business owner from when he left school (and started working with his dad) in 1965 to his death at 67 last year.
In all that time he paid his NI until his retirement age in April 2013. Out of that money he paid in he got back two years and 8 months in the state pension... And the government get's to keep the rest.
He worked himself to the bone every day of his life until he literally dropped down dead.
When I think of the money the government made out of him (there was also income tax, VAT, etc.) compared to what he got back... Who says the self employed don't pay their way?
It is ok for UKIP to criticise the budget. You miss my point, which was that Cameroons on here now speak in unison with the Guardian and the Blairite wing of Labour
Not sure if you misunderstood mine - my point is that the outcry is laughable.
https://twitter.com/thepunningman/status/545910621297205249
If T May did not want to honour the manifesto commitments that the Conservatives were elected upon (even though she was part of the shadow cabinet which presumably agreed to them) then she should have sparked an election and run on a revised manifesto.
... and the British Working Class are the self employed???
If they waste their vote on UKIP and get Corbyn as PM they won't be worrying about this Mickey Mouse NI rise - they'll be paying really serious amounts more tax to fund Corbyn's spending wishes.
Which is why - when it comes to the crunch - most people won't risk it - just like they didn't in 2015 - when the risk was only EdM.
NEW THREAD
Perhaps you should try meeting some of them.
The consequences are electoral - if you break pledge without adequate explanations, or due to incompetence, you will eventually be made to suffer for it, not least when people don't believe you next time. That seems an appropriate reaction to changing policy, rather than the idea a new pm needs to fight on a new manifesto, particularly as it might be only marginally different.
Some posters underate hubris in Hammond's Budget blunders. If Labour is no threat then you can do as you please - try you hand, tell a few jokes and let them suck it up.
The problem is pride comes before a fall and when faced by the triple threat of Ireland, Scotland and Brexit they shall be humbled.
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/uttar-pradesh-election-news-bookies-betting-market-gambling-bjp-samajwadi-party-congress/1/895650.html
Exit polls due out in the next couple of hours.