"The UK will lower tariffs on Indian clothes, footwear and food products. Ministers said this would give consumers access to cheaper products and more choice."
Not exactly good news for British producers of clothes, footwear and food products.
I'd like to see what crossover food we import from India has with food produced here. I don't think we have a lot of production for Indian spices or exotic fruits. In terms of clothes it's actually going to be a price cut for consumers as we already import a huge amount of clothing from India, realistically it's Bangladesh and Pakistan that lose out because now Indian imports won't have tariffs so UK supply chains will move to exclude those countries rather than the very high end producers of clothes and shoes we have here that won't be competing for the same money as Indian made imports.
This is the worst part: " it was revealed British employers will not have to pay national insurance for Indian workers for three years, making it cheaper to employ Indians than anybody else." So it will be cheaper to employ Indian workers over British ones? This is a betrayal. No other government would put their own workers at a disadvantage like this.
Our government loathe us. They absolutely despise us.They learnt nothing from REFORM gains.
Are we sure it applies to Employer's NI? If it does then yes, it's actually suicidal by Labour. I can sort of see the argument for a mutual cancelling of employee contributions but this would give Indian workers a systematic advantage of domestic ones. While in practice I don't think it will amount to much because of the income thresholds, it just sends a completely terrible message and is absolutely awful optics for the government which is already struggling with immigration.
The deal is so blatantly bad for Brits, others cannot believe it. Here is a tweet from a Pakistani
"Can't Brits go to court against this obviously discriminatory rule?"
..Under the terms of the deal, some Indian and British workers gain from a three year National Insurance exemption, which the Indian government called "an unprecedented achievement". The exemption applies to the staff of Indian companies temporarily transferred to the UK, and UK firms' workers transferred to India. The agreement means they will only pay social security contributions in their home country, rather than in both places. The UK already has similar "double contribution convention" agreements with 17 other countries including the EU, the US and South Korea, the government said...
I want to see more clarity on this before getting excited.
So, basically, it's nothing like some of the descriptions from the radical right trolls on social media.
If you cannot see how toxic this is for the government then I am surprised
I see a shit load of toxic lies from the radical right. Some of them stick and harm the government. That doesn't make them true.
Basically, it's not about the building or the rooms largely, it's about the other stuff. That other stuff is not provided to asylum seekers. The contract for housing asylum seekers is not a 4-star level of quality. Asylum seekers are sometimes housed in hotels that previously offered a 4-star service to guests. They are not housed in 4-star hotels. Anyone repeatedly claiming this is lying or stupid (or both). It is just radical right propaganda.
Remember to hammer that home in the election. "They are just luxurious buildings with free food, free laundry, free private healthcare, free private dentistry, that YOU are paying for, but they are NOT four star hotels they just USED to be four star hotels very recently, don't listen to the radical right proaganda, and remember the Fascists won't tell you that often these places are quite near motorways, that's typical Nazi spin OK they are near rivers and castles"
The free dentistry will possibly rile folks the most.
Expect Reform posters to feature pictures of laughing happy asylum seekers - with a perfect smile.
"The UK will lower tariffs on Indian clothes, footwear and food products. Ministers said this would give consumers access to cheaper products and more choice."
Not exactly good news for British producers of clothes, footwear and food products.
I'd like to see what crossover food we import from India has with food produced here. I don't think we have a lot of production for Indian spices or exotic fruits. In terms of clothes it's actually going to be a price cut for consumers as we already import a huge amount of clothing from India, realistically it's Bangladesh and Pakistan that lose out because now Indian imports won't have tariffs so UK supply chains will move to exclude those countries rather than the very high end producers of clothes and shoes we have here that won't be competing for the same money as Indian made imports.
This is the worst part: " it was revealed British employers will not have to pay national insurance for Indian workers for three years, making it cheaper to employ Indians than anybody else." So it will be cheaper to employ Indian workers over British ones? This is a betrayal. No other government would put their own workers at a disadvantage like this.
Our government loathe us. They absolutely despise us.They learnt nothing from REFORM gains.
Are we sure it applies to Employer's NI? If it does then yes, it's actually suicidal by Labour. I can sort of see the argument for a mutual cancelling of employee contributions but this would give Indian workers a systematic advantage of domestic ones. While in practice I don't think it will amount to much because of the income thresholds, it just sends a completely terrible message and is absolutely awful optics for the government which is already struggling with immigration.
The deal is so blatantly bad for Brits, others cannot believe it. Here is a tweet from a Pakistani
"Can't Brits go to court against this obviously discriminatory rule?"
Yes, if this does include employer's NI then it's going to become a PR disaster for the government while actually meaning basically nothing for Indian workers because most of them don't meet the skill barrier for a £39k per year job plus visa costs anyway and it's highly likely Labour will be pushing that skilled worker threshold up as well to bring legal immigration down.
Massive, massive own goal IMO.
Let's presume the employer's NIC thing is true - it seems to be
If you're, say, a big British tech company, who do you hire for three years, the Brit, or the equally qualified Indian who is now 15% cheaper? The Indian, of course. So Labour have just potentially fucked over a lot of white collar Brits
It's not as simple as that and I say that as someone who has hired a lot of people into tech roles. A 15% reduction is an advantage, however the quality of Indian workers is quite poor and at the margin you'd rather have someone who's right for the job with a slightly higher seat cost than save the money and get a worse candidate. The bigger draw for companies to imported workers is that they usually struggle to leave the company while British workers are much more flighty, that plus the NI cost might make some difference but I don't see it actually being a big deal in practice. Any day of the week I'd take a UK worker at £45k cost over an Indian worker £39k cost, it's really not even close.
I'm going to wait until we have a proper source on this but, if true.... 👀
It's a shame really, because it's exactly the kind of work we do want the government to be doing. Another danger lurks - who agreed or suggested it first. It's three years in the making...
Do you mean the Indian trade deal debacle?
We don't know it's a debacle yet. It might well be a cunning diplomatic delight of hand, but simultaneously dreadful domestic politics.
These double contribution conventions are common for temporary workers so you don’t pay contributions in two countries .
It’s no big deal but of course Kemi useless is hacked off that Labour got the deal that her government couldn’t .
As I said to @bondegezou if you cannot see how toxic this is for Labour then I am surprised
It’s only toxic to those who want it to be . All trade deals have compromises and the convention is common place when you have temporary workers . Indian temporary workers still have to pay the NHS surcharge .
"The UK will lower tariffs on Indian clothes, footwear and food products. Ministers said this would give consumers access to cheaper products and more choice."
Not exactly good news for British producers of clothes, footwear and food products.
I'd like to see what crossover food we import from India has with food produced here. I don't think we have a lot of production for Indian spices or exotic fruits. In terms of clothes it's actually going to be a price cut for consumers as we already import a huge amount of clothing from India, realistically it's Bangladesh and Pakistan that lose out because now Indian imports won't have tariffs so UK supply chains will move to exclude those countries rather than the very high end producers of clothes and shoes we have here that won't be competing for the same money as Indian made imports.
This is the worst part: " it was revealed British employers will not have to pay national insurance for Indian workers for three years, making it cheaper to employ Indians than anybody else." So it will be cheaper to employ Indian workers over British ones? This is a betrayal. No other government would put their own workers at a disadvantage like this.
Our government loathe us. They absolutely despise us.They learnt nothing from REFORM gains.
Are we sure it applies to Employer's NI? If it does then yes, it's actually suicidal by Labour. I can sort of see the argument for a mutual cancelling of employee contributions but this would give Indian workers a systematic advantage of domestic ones. While in practice I don't think it will amount to much because of the income thresholds, it just sends a completely terrible message and is absolutely awful optics for the government which is already struggling with immigration.
The deal is so blatantly bad for Brits, others cannot believe it. Here is a tweet from a Pakistani
"Can't Brits go to court against this obviously discriminatory rule?"
..Under the terms of the deal, some Indian and British workers gain from a three year National Insurance exemption, which the Indian government called "an unprecedented achievement". The exemption applies to the staff of Indian companies temporarily transferred to the UK, and UK firms' workers transferred to India. The agreement means they will only pay social security contributions in their home country, rather than in both places. The UK already has similar "double contribution convention" agreements with 17 other countries including the EU, the US and South Korea, the government said...
I want to see more clarity on this before getting excited.
So, basically, it's nothing like some of the descriptions from the radical right trolls on social media.
Claims £500 / annum. Which is much less than “all of the NI”. If it’s just the social security element which is being forgiven then it’s less obnoxious.
Are the years under such schemes going to qualify for the number of years you need for ILR would be my other question.
"An incredible development has taken place under the India-UK trade deal. The UK government has granted a major concession for Indian nationals working on work visas in the UK by virtue of which Indian nationals and their employers will not have to pay National Insurance Contributions (NIC) taxes. This makes Indian nationals an attractive hire compared to British and non British nationalities for almost any company, as they won't have to pay NIC on behalf of Indian nationals thereby benefit from cost reductions."
You know what, I reckon British voters might not find this so "incredible", or maybe they will, but in a baaaaaad way
Yeah this is a poor idea. It's going to look terrible for the government and will make little difference in practice for Indian workers who are still subject to the £39k income threshold which is surely going to rise in the next year or so.
It is absolutely insane frankly.
Labour has just comprehensively lost a local election where the electorate was very clear that immigration was their top priority and /this/ is the bullshit they come up with as their next policy announcement?
It might actually force Labour to put the threshold up to £50k to deter companies from taking advantage of this as that will raise the skill barrier. I could also see the visa charge go up to £2k per year or something as well, but overall it's a seriously stupid from Labour. They clearly haven't got any political sense.
The threshold is fine where it is, just get rid of all the exemptions to it.
Currently if you want to pay someone minimum wage to act as a carer you can sponsor a visa for that, but you can't get hire a young, skilled graduate on £35k.
Just eliminate all the exemptions to the threshold, and say anyone working on a visa needs to be on that salary or above. Any employer who complains they can't fill their vacancies can still sponsor someone, they just need to do so at threshold or above - or raise what they're willing to pay people locally, if the market rate is then less than that.
These double contribution conventions are common for temporary workers so you don’t pay contributions in two countries .
It’s no big deal but of course Kemi useless is hacked off that Labour got the deal that her government couldn’t .
it is a fairly big deal in the way it will affect the operation of local labour markets, if it means overseas staff are 20% cheaper purely by dint of the operation of the tax system.
Meanwhile this vile government is moving its vile anti-farmer legislation in the House of Lords today. Legislation so vile, so evil that no former Labour Agriculture minister is prepared to stay around for the vote.
There used to be a contract between agriculture and the wider public. No more as long as this most evil government since 1685 marches on to its own eventual unlamented end.
This money will have to be recovered, probably from the pension pots of former Labour front benchers. It is malfeasance in public office.
It is theft.
🎻
Abolishing a tax break that didn't even exist a few decades ago is theft and evil on a level not seen since 1685? Hyperbole much?
Taxes should be low, consistent and equally applied to all. If the tax should be abolished, it should be abolished for all. If it should be levied, it should be levied on all, including farmers.
Equally applied to all? Well now Indian workers coming here will have a tax advantage, thanks to Starmer.
But no state pension entitlement.
And they have to pay the NHS surcharge and their employers the visa sponsorship costs. I can’t imagine many Reform voters in Grimsby are going to lose out.
It’s the headline that matters though, isn’t it. And one question which will be asked is “what happens if they just do a runner after the contract; can they get asylum?”. Case as stated so far makes it highly unlikely I’d vote Labour again. And I’ve often done so, as in 2024.
I'm going to wait until we have a proper source on this but, if true.... 👀
It's a shame really, because it's exactly the kind of work we do want the government to be doing. Another danger lurks - who agreed or suggested it first. It's three years in the making...
Do you mean the Indian trade deal debacle?
We don't know it's a debacle yet. It might well be a cunning diplomatic delight of hand, but simultaneously dreadful domestic politics.
These double contribution conventions are common for temporary workers so you don’t pay contributions in two countries .
It’s no big deal but of course Kemi useless is hacked off that Labour got the deal that her government couldn’t .
As I said to @bondegezou if you cannot see how toxic this is for Labour then I am surprised
It’s only toxic to those who want it to be . All trade deals have compromises and the convention is common place when you have temporary workers . Indian temporary workers still have to pay the NHS surcharge .
Good luck trying to win that argument in this climate
"The UK will lower tariffs on Indian clothes, footwear and food products. Ministers said this would give consumers access to cheaper products and more choice."
Not exactly good news for British producers of clothes, footwear and food products.
I'd like to see what crossover food we import from India has with food produced here. I don't think we have a lot of production for Indian spices or exotic fruits. In terms of clothes it's actually going to be a price cut for consumers as we already import a huge amount of clothing from India, realistically it's Bangladesh and Pakistan that lose out because now Indian imports won't have tariffs so UK supply chains will move to exclude those countries rather than the very high end producers of clothes and shoes we have here that won't be competing for the same money as Indian made imports.
This is the worst part: " it was revealed British employers will not have to pay national insurance for Indian workers for three years, making it cheaper to employ Indians than anybody else." So it will be cheaper to employ Indian workers over British ones? This is a betrayal. No other government would put their own workers at a disadvantage like this.
Our government loathe us. They absolutely despise us.They learnt nothing from REFORM gains.
Are we sure it applies to Employer's NI? If it does then yes, it's actually suicidal by Labour. I can sort of see the argument for a mutual cancelling of employee contributions but this would give Indian workers a systematic advantage of domestic ones. While in practice I don't think it will amount to much because of the income thresholds, it just sends a completely terrible message and is absolutely awful optics for the government which is already struggling with immigration.
The deal is so blatantly bad for Brits, others cannot believe it. Here is a tweet from a Pakistani
"Can't Brits go to court against this obviously discriminatory rule?"
Yes, if this does include employer's NI then it's going to become a PR disaster for the government while actually meaning basically nothing for Indian workers because most of them don't meet the skill barrier for a £39k per year job plus visa costs anyway and it's highly likely Labour will be pushing that skilled worker threshold up as well to bring legal immigration down.
Massive, massive own goal IMO.
Let's presume the employer's NIC thing is true - it seems to be
If you're, say, a big British tech company, who do you hire for three years, the Brit, or the equally qualified Indian who is now 15% cheaper? The Indian, of course. So Labour have just potentially fucked over a lot of white collar Brits
It's not as simple as that and I say that as someone who has hired a lot of people into tech roles. A 15% reduction is an advantage, however the quality of Indian workers is quite poor and at the margin you'd rather have someone who's right for the job with a slightly higher seat cost than save the money and get a worse candidate. The bigger draw for companies to imported workers is that they usually struggle to leave the company while British workers are much more flighty, that plus the NI cost might make some difference but I don't see it actually being a big deal in practice. Any day of the week I'd take a UK worker at £45k cost over an Indian worker £39k cost, it's really not even close.
I imagine many voters will view it differently, but let's wait and see the deets
Today was bad enough for the Left with them being reduced to arguing "we're only housing illegal migrants on your money in four star hotels without a sauna, so it's fine", now this as well?
Immigration is not the story, or not the whole story. PBers arguing about small boats vs the Boriswave, or asylum seekers vs illegal immigrants, are getting hung up on the precise number on the side of a bus. It matters a bit but it's not really the point.
‘Dislike of other parties’ is pollster-speak for NOTA. Reform is NOTA.
It's very simple: the mainstream parties get a grip on crime, law and order and immigration and all these fringe parties go away.
If they don't, then they'll win instead.
I'm not so sure. They will partially go away, but a proportion will just flit to the next fringe theory or issue.
Oh my God.
It's quite shocking how complacent the ultra liberals are.
I mean, is it just fucking me?
There's almost two dozen of them on here.
I mean, FUCK ME.
How dumb do you have to be?!
I expect this is how the Roman elites acted during the end days.
I don't want to facilitate the end days. Don't need that on my conscience.
But this is how people are driven to Trump and Farage. Absolute vanity, pompousity and arrogance and absolutely refusing to listen or compromise.
We've lost the art of engaging as a democracy, so people are just driven to make a very binary choice.
Because they don't like Nige they want him to be wrong so will disagree with him when he's right. The Dems had the same experience with Trump on immigration and border control as well as transgenders in sports. They shot the messenger, told Americans that millions of people crossing the border illegals was a good thing and anyone against it was racist, told Americans that anyone who said that biological men should be excluded from women's spaces and sports was a bigot and they got Trump.
Biden had 4 years to close the border and deport illegals. Obama was very strong on both of these and deported millions of illegals during his time so it just shows how far to the left the Dems went and why so many people who voted for Obama twice went and voted for Trump.
My views today aren't dissimilar to where they were 5 years ago, I want to reduce immigration to under 100k per year, I want to deport illegal immigrants and I want an end to fake asylum seeking by economic migrants.
I've been on PB saying this for probably 10 years as many people on here can attest to, and 10 years ago this was the policy of the Tory party and the policy of the Labour party. Now it's the policy of Reform and I'm being told I'm wrong but the reality is that the major parties moved away from me. I don't want to vote for Reform and I don't want Nige to be PM, it needs for one of the major parties (probably Labour) to compromise and adopt the Reform position on immigration which was their own policy just 10 years ago.
This is the problem with progressivism, it always needs to move "forwards" and make "progress" regardless of what that actually means in practice. I don't understand why the Tories adopted this too but it's been a disaster.
Exactly. Blair, Brown, Clinton & Obama all made similar noises to those Farage is now making about illegal immigrants, and the people now arguing against him are only really doing so because they can't be seen to be on the same side. You can see by how often centrists try guilt by association tactics that they think this way.
As I said yesterday, the centrists anti-Faragists at some point were behind the deportation of illegal immigrants and would have scoffed at migration figures north of 300,000... yet now they argue against thos who want something done. What changed and when?
I'm going to wait until we have a proper source on this but, if true.... 👀
It's a shame really, because it's exactly the kind of work we do want the government to be doing. Another danger lurks - who agreed or suggested it first. It's three years in the making...
Do you mean the Indian trade deal debacle?
We don't know it's a debacle yet. It might well be a cunning diplomatic delight of hand, but simultaneously dreadful domestic politics.
These double contribution conventions are common for temporary workers so you don’t pay contributions in two countries .
It’s no big deal but of course Kemi useless is hacked off that Labour got the deal that her government couldn’t .
As I said to @bondegezou if you cannot see how toxic this is for Labour then I am surprised
It’s only toxic to those who want it to be . All trade deals have compromises and the convention is common place when you have temporary workers . Indian temporary workers still have to pay the NHS surcharge .
Good luck trying to win that argument in this climate
Farage must be in dreamland
If he wins on a pack of lies then good luck to him - he’ll face the same problems any Government faces.
Don’t know what the fuss is about. If someone made me stay in a 4* hotel I would immediately raise a case at the ECHR. I mean, is there even a pillow menu?
"The UK will lower tariffs on Indian clothes, footwear and food products. Ministers said this would give consumers access to cheaper products and more choice."
Not exactly good news for British producers of clothes, footwear and food products.
I'd like to see what crossover food we import from India has with food produced here. I don't think we have a lot of production for Indian spices or exotic fruits. In terms of clothes it's actually going to be a price cut for consumers as we already import a huge amount of clothing from India, realistically it's Bangladesh and Pakistan that lose out because now Indian imports won't have tariffs so UK supply chains will move to exclude those countries rather than the very high end producers of clothes and shoes we have here that won't be competing for the same money as Indian made imports.
This is the worst part: " it was revealed British employers will not have to pay national insurance for Indian workers for three years, making it cheaper to employ Indians than anybody else." So it will be cheaper to employ Indian workers over British ones? This is a betrayal. No other government would put their own workers at a disadvantage like this.
Our government loathe us. They absolutely despise us.They learnt nothing from REFORM gains.
Are we sure it applies to Employer's NI? If it does then yes, it's actually suicidal by Labour. I can sort of see the argument for a mutual cancelling of employee contributions but this would give Indian workers a systematic advantage of domestic ones. While in practice I don't think it will amount to much because of the income thresholds, it just sends a completely terrible message and is absolutely awful optics for the government which is already struggling with immigration.
The deal is so blatantly bad for Brits, others cannot believe it. Here is a tweet from a Pakistani
"Can't Brits go to court against this obviously discriminatory rule?"
..Under the terms of the deal, some Indian and British workers gain from a three year National Insurance exemption, which the Indian government called "an unprecedented achievement". The exemption applies to the staff of Indian companies temporarily transferred to the UK, and UK firms' workers transferred to India. The agreement means they will only pay social security contributions in their home country, rather than in both places. The UK already has similar "double contribution convention" agreements with 17 other countries including the EU, the US and South Korea, the government said...
I want to see more clarity on this before getting excited.
So, basically, it's nothing like some of the descriptions from the radical right trolls on social media.
If you cannot see how toxic this is for the government then I am surprised
I see a shit load of toxic lies from the radical right. Some of them stick and harm the government. That doesn't make them true.
Please explain where the lies are as it has been confirmed in the HOC by Alexander for the government
"An incredible development has taken place under the India-UK trade deal. The UK government has granted a major concession for Indian nationals working on work visas in the UK by virtue of which Indian nationals and their employers will not have to pay National Insurance Contributions (NIC) taxes. This makes Indian nationals an attractive hire compared to British and non British nationalities for almost any company, as they won't have to pay NIC on behalf of Indian nationals thereby benefit from cost reductions."
You know what, I reckon British voters might not find this so "incredible", or maybe they will, but in a baaaaaad way
Yeah this is a poor idea. It's going to look terrible for the government and will make little difference in practice for Indian workers who are still subject to the £39k income threshold which is surely going to rise in the next year or so.
It is absolutely insane frankly.
Labour has just comprehensively lost a local election where the electorate was very clear that immigration was their top priority and /this/ is the bullshit they come up with as their next policy announcement?
It might actually force Labour to put the threshold up to £50k to deter companies from taking advantage of this as that will raise the skill barrier. I could also see the visa charge go up to £2k per year or something as well, but overall it's a seriously stupid from Labour. They clearly haven't got any political sense.
The threshold is fine where it is, just get rid of all the exemptions to it.
Currently if you want to pay someone minimum wage to act as a carer you can sponsor a visa for that, but you can't get hire a young, skilled graduate on £35k.
Just eliminate all the exemptions to the threshold, and say anyone working on a visa needs to be on that salary or above. Any employer who complains they can't fill their vacancies can still sponsor someone, they just need to do so at threshold or above - or raise what they're willing to pay people locally, if the market rate is then less than that.
No the threshold needs to go up, £60k for London and the South East and £50k for the rest of the country and also no exempted industries. £39k just isn't a skilled salary now, it's actually lower than what a junior tech/media worker will get which is why it needs to go up to reflect what a mid-level salary would be, you know someone with skills.
Basically, it's not about the building or the rooms largely, it's about the other stuff. That other stuff is not provided to asylum seekers. The contract for housing asylum seekers is not a 4-star level of quality. Asylum seekers are sometimes housed in hotels that previously offered a 4-star service to guests. They are not housed in 4-star hotels. Anyone repeatedly claiming this is lying or stupid (or both). It is just radical right propaganda.
Remember to hammer that home in the election. "They are just luxurious buildings with free food, free laundry, free private healthcare, free private dentistry, that YOU are paying for, but they are NOT four star hotels they just USED to be four star hotels very recently, don't listen to the radical right proaganda, and remember the Fascists won't tell you that often these places are quite near motorways, that's typical Nazi spin OK they are near rivers and castles"
The free dentistry will possibly rile folks the most.
Expect Reform posters to feature pictures of laughing happy asylum seekers - with a perfect smile.
As far as I know, asylum seekers get the same NHS dentistry as citizens. They do not get "free private dentistry". Don't believe anything Leon or Reform UK says.
These double contribution conventions are common for temporary workers so you don’t pay contributions in two countries .
It’s no big deal but of course Kemi useless is hacked off that Labour got the deal that her government couldn’t .
it is a fairly big deal in the way it will affect the operation of local labour markets, if it means overseas staff are 20% cheaper purely by dint of the operation of the tax system.
Temporary workers from abroad are a tiny proportion of the workforce . I really don’t get the controversy .
"The UK will lower tariffs on Indian clothes, footwear and food products. Ministers said this would give consumers access to cheaper products and more choice."
Not exactly good news for British producers of clothes, footwear and food products.
I'd like to see what crossover food we import from India has with food produced here. I don't think we have a lot of production for Indian spices or exotic fruits. In terms of clothes it's actually going to be a price cut for consumers as we already import a huge amount of clothing from India, realistically it's Bangladesh and Pakistan that lose out because now Indian imports won't have tariffs so UK supply chains will move to exclude those countries rather than the very high end producers of clothes and shoes we have here that won't be competing for the same money as Indian made imports.
This is the worst part: " it was revealed British employers will not have to pay national insurance for Indian workers for three years, making it cheaper to employ Indians than anybody else." So it will be cheaper to employ Indian workers over British ones? This is a betrayal. No other government would put their own workers at a disadvantage like this.
Our government loathe us. They absolutely despise us.They learnt nothing from REFORM gains.
Are we sure it applies to Employer's NI? If it does then yes, it's actually suicidal by Labour. I can sort of see the argument for a mutual cancelling of employee contributions but this would give Indian workers a systematic advantage of domestic ones. While in practice I don't think it will amount to much because of the income thresholds, it just sends a completely terrible message and is absolutely awful optics for the government which is already struggling with immigration.
The deal is so blatantly bad for Brits, others cannot believe it. Here is a tweet from a Pakistani
"Can't Brits go to court against this obviously discriminatory rule?"
Yes, if this does include employer's NI then it's going to become a PR disaster for the government while actually meaning basically nothing for Indian workers because most of them don't meet the skill barrier for a £39k per year job plus visa costs anyway and it's highly likely Labour will be pushing that skilled worker threshold up as well to bring legal immigration down.
Massive, massive own goal IMO.
Let's presume the employer's NIC thing is true - it seems to be
If you're, say, a big British tech company, who do you hire for three years, the Brit, or the equally qualified Indian who is now 15% cheaper? The Indian, of course. So Labour have just potentially fucked over a lot of white collar Brits
It's not as simple as that and I say that as someone who has hired a lot of people into tech roles. A 15% reduction is an advantage, however the quality of Indian workers is quite poor and at the margin you'd rather have someone who's right for the job with a slightly higher seat cost than save the money and get a worse candidate. The bigger draw for companies to imported workers is that they usually struggle to leave the company while British workers are much more flighty, that plus the NI cost might make some difference but I don't see it actually being a big deal in practice. Any day of the week I'd take a UK worker at £45k cost over an Indian worker £39k cost, it's really not even close.
I imagine many voters will view it differently, but let's wait and see the deets
Today was bad enough for the Left with them being reduced to arguing "we're only housing illegal migrants on your money in four star hotels without a sauna, so it's fine", now this as well?
lol.
OK off to the shops, nursing my cold
I think voters will view it very poorly, it plays into the two tier Kier narrative and it's awful optics for the government struggling with immigration.
I just think in reality the result of it will be severely limited, if it makes a difference to more than 1,000 job decisions I'd be shocked.
"The UK will lower tariffs on Indian clothes, footwear and food products. Ministers said this would give consumers access to cheaper products and more choice."
Not exactly good news for British producers of clothes, footwear and food products.
I'd like to see what crossover food we import from India has with food produced here. I don't think we have a lot of production for Indian spices or exotic fruits. In terms of clothes it's actually going to be a price cut for consumers as we already import a huge amount of clothing from India, realistically it's Bangladesh and Pakistan that lose out because now Indian imports won't have tariffs so UK supply chains will move to exclude those countries rather than the very high end producers of clothes and shoes we have here that won't be competing for the same money as Indian made imports.
This is the worst part: " it was revealed British employers will not have to pay national insurance for Indian workers for three years, making it cheaper to employ Indians than anybody else." So it will be cheaper to employ Indian workers over British ones? This is a betrayal. No other government would put their own workers at a disadvantage like this.
Our government loathe us. They absolutely despise us.They learnt nothing from REFORM gains.
Are we sure it applies to Employer's NI? If it does then yes, it's actually suicidal by Labour. I can sort of see the argument for a mutual cancelling of employee contributions but this would give Indian workers a systematic advantage of domestic ones. While in practice I don't think it will amount to much because of the income thresholds, it just sends a completely terrible message and is absolutely awful optics for the government which is already struggling with immigration.
The deal is so blatantly bad for Brits, others cannot believe it. Here is a tweet from a Pakistani
"Can't Brits go to court against this obviously discriminatory rule?"
Yes, if this does include employer's NI then it's going to become a PR disaster for the government while actually meaning basically nothing for Indian workers because most of them don't meet the skill barrier for a £39k per year job plus visa costs anyway and it's highly likely Labour will be pushing that skilled worker threshold up as well to bring legal immigration down.
Massive, massive own goal IMO.
Let's presume the employer's NIC thing is true - it seems to be
If you're, say, a big British tech company, who do you hire for three years, the Brit, or the equally qualified Indian who is now 15% cheaper? The Indian, of course. So Labour have just potentially fucked over a lot of white collar Brits
It's not as simple as that and I say that as someone who has hired a lot of people into tech roles. A 15% reduction is an advantage, however the quality of Indian workers is quite poor and at the margin you'd rather have someone who's right for the job with a slightly higher seat cost than save the money and get a worse candidate. The bigger draw for companies to imported workers is that they usually struggle to leave the company while British workers are much more flighty, that plus the NI cost might make some difference but I don't see it actually being a big deal in practice. Any day of the week I'd take a UK worker at £45k cost over an Indian worker £39k cost, it's really not even close.
The real problem here from the government's point of view is that they've done a very poor job of explaining the benefits versus the costs - and the full implications of the NI exemption.
You have just provided far more perspective than has the minister responsible, trying to explain it in the Commons.
How many workers is this like to apply to, for example ? I still have absolutely no idea.
Basically, it's not about the building or the rooms largely, it's about the other stuff. That other stuff is not provided to asylum seekers. The contract for housing asylum seekers is not a 4-star level of quality. Asylum seekers are sometimes housed in hotels that previously offered a 4-star service to guests. They are not housed in 4-star hotels. Anyone repeatedly claiming this is lying or stupid (or both). It is just radical right propaganda.
Remember to hammer that home in the election. "They are just luxurious buildings with free food, free laundry, free private healthcare, free private dentistry, that YOU are paying for, but they are NOT four star hotels they just USED to be four star hotels very recently, don't listen to the radical right proaganda, and remember the Fascists won't tell you that often these places are quite near motorways, that's typical Nazi spin OK they are near rivers and castles"
The free dentistry will possibly rile folks the most.
Expect Reform posters to feature pictures of laughing happy asylum seekers - with a perfect smile.
As far as I know, asylum seekers get the same NHS dentistry as citizens. They do not get "free private dentistry". Don't believe anything Leon or Reform UK says.
If they're getting an NHS dentist, then that's more than many citizens get.
I'm going to wait until we have a proper source on this but, if true.... 👀
It's a shame really, because it's exactly the kind of work we do want the government to be doing. Another danger lurks - who agreed or suggested it first. It's three years in the making...
Do you mean the Indian trade deal debacle?
We don't know it's a debacle yet. It might well be a cunning diplomatic delight of hand, but simultaneously dreadful domestic politics.
These double contribution conventions are common for temporary workers so you don’t pay contributions in two countries .
It’s no big deal but of course Kemi useless is hacked off that Labour got the deal that her government couldn’t .
As I said to @bondegezou if you cannot see how toxic this is for Labour then I am surprised
It’s only toxic to those who want it to be . All trade deals have compromises and the convention is common place when you have temporary workers . Indian temporary workers still have to pay the NHS surcharge .
Good luck trying to win that argument in this climate
Farage must be in dreamland
If he wins on a pack of lies then good luck to him - he’ll face the same problems any Government faces.
These double contribution conventions are common for temporary workers so you don’t pay contributions in two countries .
It’s no big deal but of course Kemi useless is hacked off that Labour got the deal that her government couldn’t .
it is a fairly big deal in the way it will affect the operation of local labour markets, if it means overseas staff are 20% cheaper purely by dint of the operation of the tax system.
Temporary workers from abroad are a tiny proportion of the workforce . I really don’t get the controversy .
I'm going to wait until we have a proper source on this but, if true.... 👀
It's a shame really, because it's exactly the kind of work we do want the government to be doing. Another danger lurks - who agreed or suggested it first. It's three years in the making...
Do you mean the Indian trade deal debacle?
We don't know it's a debacle yet. It might well be a cunning diplomatic delight of hand, but simultaneously dreadful domestic politics.
These double contribution conventions are common for temporary workers so you don’t pay contributions in two countries .
It’s no big deal but of course Kemi useless is hacked off that Labour got the deal that her government couldn’t .
As I said to @bondegezou if you cannot see how toxic this is for Labour then I am surprised
It’s only toxic to those who want it to be . All trade deals have compromises and the convention is common place when you have temporary workers . Indian temporary workers still have to pay the NHS surcharge .
Good luck trying to win that argument in this climate
Farage must be in dreamland
If he wins on a pack of lies then good luck to him - he’ll face the same problems any Government faces.
On the Indian trade deal what are the lies ?
I don’t know - I don’t know what Farage has said. I am talking more generally. A bit like Brexit.
Basically, it's not about the building or the rooms largely, it's about the other stuff. That other stuff is not provided to asylum seekers. The contract for housing asylum seekers is not a 4-star level of quality. Asylum seekers are sometimes housed in hotels that previously offered a 4-star service to guests. They are not housed in 4-star hotels. Anyone repeatedly claiming this is lying or stupid (or both). It is just radical right propaganda.
Remember to hammer that home in the election. "They are just luxurious buildings with free food, free laundry, free private healthcare, free private dentistry, that YOU are paying for, but they are NOT four star hotels they just USED to be four star hotels very recently, don't listen to the radical right proaganda, and remember the Fascists won't tell you that often these places are quite near motorways, that's typical Nazi spin OK they are near rivers and castles"
The free dentistry will possibly rile folks the most.
Expect Reform posters to feature pictures of laughing happy asylum seekers - with a perfect smile.
As far as I know, asylum seekers get the same NHS dentistry as citizens. They do not get "free private dentistry". Don't believe anything Leon or Reform UK says.
No, they often get better, dedicated dental care
"The project grew to provide oral healthcare for refugees and asylum seekers being accommodated at hotels across the UK. We regularly run clinics at hotels near Gatwick Airport and at accommodation centres in the South West and Essex. Some of our patients have been children.
"Every month our volunteer dentists provide dental services for families experiencing poverty on the South Coast. This includes several Ukrainian refugee families. We are also planning new clinics for asylum seekers in the north of England, working with local councils, charities and healthcare providers to identify and reach those in greatest need."
Nice for them. A really good dentist and full clinic comes to your four star hotel and sorts you out, and why not, given that you've made all that effort to get here illegally from - checks notes - France, which is known for its intolerable horrors
Meanwhile I've got British friends who literally can't find an NHS dentist and can't afford to go private
Basically, it's not about the building or the rooms largely, it's about the other stuff. That other stuff is not provided to asylum seekers. The contract for housing asylum seekers is not a 4-star level of quality. Asylum seekers are sometimes housed in hotels that previously offered a 4-star service to guests. They are not housed in 4-star hotels. Anyone repeatedly claiming this is lying or stupid (or both). It is just radical right propaganda.
Remember to hammer that home in the election. "They are just luxurious buildings with free food, free laundry, free private healthcare, free private dentistry, that YOU are paying for, but they are NOT four star hotels they just USED to be four star hotels very recently, don't listen to the radical right proaganda, and remember the Fascists won't tell you that often these places are quite near motorways, that's typical Nazi spin OK they are near rivers and castles"
The free dentistry will possibly rile folks the most.
Expect Reform posters to feature pictures of laughing happy asylum seekers - with a perfect smile.
As far as I know, asylum seekers get the same NHS dentistry as citizens. They do not get "free private dentistry". Don't believe anything Leon or Reform UK says.
If they're getting an NHS dentist, then that's more than many citizens get.
The larger asylum centres have a dedicated dentist and GP IIRC.
Some asylum seekers have been quite put out to discover that on being granted asylum they are suddenly no longer eligible for the care of the GP in their asylum centre & are forced to deal with the same system as the rest of us, long waits for GP appointments & all.
Basically, it's not about the building or the rooms largely, it's about the other stuff. That other stuff is not provided to asylum seekers. The contract for housing asylum seekers is not a 4-star level of quality. Asylum seekers are sometimes housed in hotels that previously offered a 4-star service to guests. They are not housed in 4-star hotels. Anyone repeatedly claiming this is lying or stupid (or both). It is just radical right propaganda.
Wait a minute, so you are telling me that all the rooms whether 1*, 3*, 4* to 5* are all the same? The fabric of the buildings and views, space and location?
I didn’t realise that all the times I have chosen a 5* hotel on, say business, when I wasn’t going to be using much more than the room, I should have just stayed in a 1* and saved a fortune and got the same bed, linen, bathroom, entertainment system.
That time I stayed at the Oberoi Agra I may as well have just booked into the local 2* because apart from the facilities, again which I didn’t have time to use, the rooms and experience would be exactly the same.
"The UK will lower tariffs on Indian clothes, footwear and food products. Ministers said this would give consumers access to cheaper products and more choice."
Not exactly good news for British producers of clothes, footwear and food products.
I'd like to see what crossover food we import from India has with food produced here. I don't think we have a lot of production for Indian spices or exotic fruits. In terms of clothes it's actually going to be a price cut for consumers as we already import a huge amount of clothing from India, realistically it's Bangladesh and Pakistan that lose out because now Indian imports won't have tariffs so UK supply chains will move to exclude those countries rather than the very high end producers of clothes and shoes we have here that won't be competing for the same money as Indian made imports.
This is the worst part: " it was revealed British employers will not have to pay national insurance for Indian workers for three years, making it cheaper to employ Indians than anybody else." So it will be cheaper to employ Indian workers over British ones? This is a betrayal. No other government would put their own workers at a disadvantage like this.
Our government loathe us. They absolutely despise us.They learnt nothing from REFORM gains.
Are we sure it applies to Employer's NI? If it does then yes, it's actually suicidal by Labour. I can sort of see the argument for a mutual cancelling of employee contributions but this would give Indian workers a systematic advantage of domestic ones. While in practice I don't think it will amount to much because of the income thresholds, it just sends a completely terrible message and is absolutely awful optics for the government which is already struggling with immigration.
The deal is so blatantly bad for Brits, others cannot believe it. Here is a tweet from a Pakistani
"Can't Brits go to court against this obviously discriminatory rule?"
..Under the terms of the deal, some Indian and British workers gain from a three year National Insurance exemption, which the Indian government called "an unprecedented achievement". The exemption applies to the staff of Indian companies temporarily transferred to the UK, and UK firms' workers transferred to India. The agreement means they will only pay social security contributions in their home country, rather than in both places. The UK already has similar "double contribution convention" agreements with 17 other countries including the EU, the US and South Korea, the government said...
I want to see more clarity on this before getting excited.
So, basically, it's nothing like some of the descriptions from the radical right trolls on social media.
well it is, because Indian pay compared to British pay is shite. and so the "reciprocal" part of it doesn't mount to a row of beans.
These double contribution conventions are common for temporary workers so you don’t pay contributions in two countries .
It’s no big deal but of course Kemi useless is hacked off that Labour got the deal that her government couldn’t .
it is a fairly big deal in the way it will affect the operation of local labour markets, if it means overseas staff are 20% cheaper purely by dint of the operation of the tax system.
Temporary workers from abroad are a tiny proportion of the workforce . I really don’t get the controversy .
So Accenture India hires 10k developers there and seconds them to the UK temporarily for three years and rinses and repeats that cycle indefinitely which means for 10k workers the government is losing £90m per year in tax vs if those workers were hired locally.
We need to see the detail and limitations on this policy but on the face of it, I think it's a poor idea and no trade deal at all would be preferable.
It’s also broken windows theory in action. With every shoplift tolerated, every ticket easily dodged, every tag of graffiti met with a shrug, the social contract frays. The law abiding citizens ask themselves - why the fuck am I paying? Am I the sucker here?
Ditto dodgy asylum seekers in 4 star hotels as honest people spend years trying to get the right to remain
Meanwhile tax payers are quietly enraged, and very high taxpayers simply leave
This is the frog boiling of an entire nation and it will end with a reform government and then something worse if we don’t change course
I think it might have been Barty who called out your 4* hotel lie last week, citing Copthorne who were undergoing difficult trading prior to COVID and latterly asylum. Whoever it was specified the requirements for a hotel to be 4* and explained that all the 4*edness had been stripped out of Copthorne locations for our asylum seeking friends.
Yet you are still allowed to post nonsense unchallenged. What next? Quoting Andrew Tate's X account as source material. Oh wait, apologies, that was Nigel Farage.
Good luck in going to the voters while saying “it WAS a four star hotel when we took it over and gave it to asylum seekers, but we closed the gym and they only get laundry done twice a week, and free heath care, and immediate dental work, and you’re paying for it all, and you can’t use the hotel. So it’s really only like a weird 3 star with a private hospital. That you are paying for. So that these men can wander around your town freaking you out. Vote for more of this!”
I'm not enthusiastic about my tax pounds going to a series of failing hotel groups. The boats need to be stopped for safety issues as much as for anything else. I am simply calling out your lies (sorry about the unparliamentary language, but I'm not sure what else to call it) to elicit a reaction from certain fragile on this subject posters
It's not really a lie, though is it? These are 4-star hotels. The fact that some of the facilities are unavailable doesn't massively change this unless you're, er, whichever body is responsible for awarding stars to hotels.
Yes it is. They are no longer regarded as 4* so you and Leon suggesting they are is a mechanism to make a political point. Or in other words it's inflammatory bollocks.
This is a ridiculous hill to die on. It is simply a fact that asylum seekers are being housed in four star hotels.
It's currently unavailable to book and closed to the public because it's being used to house male asylum seekers under a government contract.
lol. The PB left is skewered and helpless. It is quite a spectacle
So the question is when did it become a hostel for male asylum seekers im guessing 2022 but unless it was after July 2024 it’s not Labour’s fault merely Labour’s problem because the Tories were incompetent and did realise that if you don’t do the paperwork the paperwork has a habit of not disappearing
Looks like it WAS after the election, as there are public reviews of the place til about 6 months ago
Ouch, if so
One other thing being missed here is that relatively affluent (often VERY affluent) PB-ers don't know how poor many Brits are, and how staying in a medium nice business hotel like a 4 star Marriot Delta, in the Warwickshire countryside, with rooms being cleaned and free food and free laundry - and this for weeks or months and it's all paid, is an absolute dream. A dream that will never happen for them
And even if the gym is shut and the breakfast buffet is sketchy, it is still dreamlike. And then you have to tell these British voters that THEY are paying for this, but not for Brits, they are paying to house illegal migrants who only came over cause they didn't fancy France that much, and now these migrants wander around the town scaring people
It is difficult to think of a policy better designed to drive an electorate, especially poorer native workers, to the populist right
It’s actually right next to the M40, not exactly scenic Warwickshire countryside
Again, another brilliant point for Labour's 2028 election campaign
"Yes, you're paying to put illegal migrants in four star hotels with private healthcare, hotels which are then closed to you, but OFTEN thse hotels have good access to nearby motorways, so it's all great. Vote Labour for more of this!"
Slap it on a poster
It’s ok, I don’t work for the Labour Party. I was merely correcting you.
You see, this I find fascinating: you're more interested in pedantically correcting an "opponent" than accepting or engaging in the central point.
My theory: the defining feature of a Liberal is their education, and their greatest fear is to be seen as unsophisticated or narrow-minded by their peers. And, if they're unsure they've done enough to demonstrate that then they will triangulate and create a straw-man to underline it instead.
This drives all this behaviour, even though it is having catastrophic political consequences.
"The UK will lower tariffs on Indian clothes, footwear and food products. Ministers said this would give consumers access to cheaper products and more choice."
Not exactly good news for British producers of clothes, footwear and food products.
I'd like to see what crossover food we import from India has with food produced here. I don't think we have a lot of production for Indian spices or exotic fruits. In terms of clothes it's actually going to be a price cut for consumers as we already import a huge amount of clothing from India, realistically it's Bangladesh and Pakistan that lose out because now Indian imports won't have tariffs so UK supply chains will move to exclude those countries rather than the very high end producers of clothes and shoes we have here that won't be competing for the same money as Indian made imports.
This is the worst part: " it was revealed British employers will not have to pay national insurance for Indian workers for three years, making it cheaper to employ Indians than anybody else." So it will be cheaper to employ Indian workers over British ones? This is a betrayal. No other government would put their own workers at a disadvantage like this.
Our government loathe us. They absolutely despise us.They learnt nothing from REFORM gains.
Are we sure it applies to Employer's NI? If it does then yes, it's actually suicidal by Labour. I can sort of see the argument for a mutual cancelling of employee contributions but this would give Indian workers a systematic advantage of domestic ones. While in practice I don't think it will amount to much because of the income thresholds, it just sends a completely terrible message and is absolutely awful optics for the government which is already struggling with immigration.
The deal is so blatantly bad for Brits, others cannot believe it. Here is a tweet from a Pakistani
"Can't Brits go to court against this obviously discriminatory rule?"
..Under the terms of the deal, some Indian and British workers gain from a three year National Insurance exemption, which the Indian government called "an unprecedented achievement". The exemption applies to the staff of Indian companies temporarily transferred to the UK, and UK firms' workers transferred to India. The agreement means they will only pay social security contributions in their home country, rather than in both places. The UK already has similar "double contribution convention" agreements with 17 other countries including the EU, the US and South Korea, the government said...
I want to see more clarity on this before getting excited.
So, basically, it's nothing like some of the descriptions from the radical right trolls on social media.
well it is, because Indian pay compared to British pay is shite. and so the "reciprocal" part of it doesn't mount to a row of beans.
I thought it was a Brexit benefit to sign these kind of trade deals. I mean good grief this country is impossible to govern – people will complain about everything and anything and blame it all on other people, be it immigrants or foreigners or “woke” liberals.
Meanwhile this vile government is moving its vile anti-farmer legislation in the House of Lords today. Legislation so vile, so evil that no former Labour Agriculture minister is prepared to stay around for the vote.
There used to be a contract between agriculture and the wider public. No more as long as this most evil government since 1685 marches on to its own eventual unlamented end.
This money will have to be recovered, probably from the pension pots of former Labour front benchers. It is malfeasance in public office.
It is theft.
🎻
Abolishing a tax break that didn't even exist a few decades ago is theft and evil on a level not seen since 1685? Hyperbole much?
Taxes should be low, consistent and equally applied to all. If the tax should be abolished, it should be abolished for all. If it should be levied, it should be levied on all, including farmers.
Equally applied to all? Well now Indian workers coming here will have a tax advantage, thanks to Starmer.
But no state pension entitlement.
Has that been confirmed, or can they just pay a lump sum to fill in this gap, as well as qualify on future NI contributions (assuming they are not all coming over as 64-year-olds)?
As an aside, it does seem odd that the Indian nationalist Modi's top priority is facilitating an Indian brain drain.
It's not - remember they are coming here temporarily and will be saving as much as possible to build something massive back at home when they return to India 3-5 years hence.
These double contribution conventions are common for temporary workers so you don’t pay contributions in two countries .
It’s no big deal but of course Kemi useless is hacked off that Labour got the deal that her government couldn’t .
it is a fairly big deal in the way it will affect the operation of local labour markets, if it means overseas staff are 20% cheaper purely by dint of the operation of the tax system.
Temporary workers from abroad are a tiny proportion of the workforce . I really don’t get the controversy .
So Accenture India hires 10k developers there and seconds them to the UK temporarily for three years and rinses and repeats that cycle indefinitely which means for 10k workers the government is losing £90m per year in tax vs if those workers were hired locally.
We need to see the detail and limitations on this policy but on the face of it, I think it's a poor idea and no trade deal at all would be preferable.
For the optics alone, they shouldn't have signed it, not now, not in this atmosphere. They are SO politically clueless, for a start, it is astoniishing. Total clownshow
I'm going to wait until we have a proper source on this but, if true.... 👀
It's a shame really, because it's exactly the kind of work we do want the government to be doing. Another danger lurks - who agreed or suggested it first. It's three years in the making...
Do you mean the Indian trade deal debacle?
We don't know it's a debacle yet. It might well be a cunning diplomatic delight of hand, but simultaneously dreadful domestic politics.
These double contribution conventions are common for temporary workers so you don’t pay contributions in two countries .
It’s no big deal but of course Kemi useless is hacked off that Labour got the deal that her government couldn’t .
As I said to @bondegezou if you cannot see how toxic this is for Labour then I am surprised
It’s only toxic to those who want it to be . All trade deals have compromises and the convention is common place when you have temporary workers . Indian temporary workers still have to pay the NHS surcharge .
the convention makes sense with a country like South Korea, it does not make sense with a massive poor country like India, who could flood our country with cheaper workers.
These double contribution conventions are common for temporary workers so you don’t pay contributions in two countries .
It’s no big deal but of course Kemi useless is hacked off that Labour got the deal that her government couldn’t .
it is a fairly big deal in the way it will affect the operation of local labour markets, if it means overseas staff are 20% cheaper purely by dint of the operation of the tax system.
Temporary workers from abroad are a tiny proportion of the workforce . I really don’t get the controversy .
So Accenture India hires 10k developers there and seconds them to the UK temporarily for three years and rinses and repeats that cycle indefinitely which means for 10k workers the government is losing £90m per year in tax vs if those workers were hired locally.
We need to see the detail and limitations on this policy but on the face of it, I think it's a poor idea and no trade deal at all would be preferable.
Aren’t there still limits on the amount of temporary workers . It’s reciprocal though and this applies to UK workers in India .
These double contribution conventions are common for temporary workers so you don’t pay contributions in two countries .
It’s no big deal but of course Kemi useless is hacked off that Labour got the deal that her government couldn’t .
it is a fairly big deal in the way it will affect the operation of local labour markets, if it means overseas staff are 20% cheaper purely by dint of the operation of the tax system.
Temporary workers from abroad are a tiny proportion of the workforce . I really don’t get the controversy .
So Accenture India hires 10k developers there and seconds them to the UK temporarily for three years and rinses and repeats that cycle indefinitely which means for 10k workers the government is losing £90m per year in tax vs if those workers were hired locally.
We need to see the detail and limitations on this policy but on the face of it, I think it's a poor idea and no trade deal at all would be preferable.
If it’s the same as the other similar double contribution convention deals, then the “exchange” is that the Indian employees don’t accrue pension rights, nor qualify for any other benefits that are notionally funded from NI (unemployment benefit for instance). Not sure about access to the NHS - They might still be subject to the NHS surcharge?
How big a deal this is really depends on how much NI they are not paying - if it’s just the social security part then there’s at least an element of fairness. If it’s the entirety of both employee & employer NI then it’s a huge incentive for employers to import Indians for ordinary jobs in the UK - that’s something like 20-25% of income.
It’s also broken windows theory in action. With every shoplift tolerated, every ticket easily dodged, every tag of graffiti met with a shrug, the social contract frays. The law abiding citizens ask themselves - why the fuck am I paying? Am I the sucker here?
Ditto dodgy asylum seekers in 4 star hotels as honest people spend years trying to get the right to remain
Meanwhile tax payers are quietly enraged, and very high taxpayers simply leave
This is the frog boiling of an entire nation and it will end with a reform government and then something worse if we don’t change course
I think it might have been Barty who called out your 4* hotel lie last week, citing Copthorne who were undergoing difficult trading prior to COVID and latterly asylum. Whoever it was specified the requirements for a hotel to be 4* and explained that all the 4*edness had been stripped out of Copthorne locations for our asylum seeking friends.
Yet you are still allowed to post nonsense unchallenged. What next? Quoting Andrew Tate's X account as source material. Oh wait, apologies, that was Nigel Farage.
Good luck in going to the voters while saying “it WAS a four star hotel when we took it over and gave it to asylum seekers, but we closed the gym and they only get laundry done twice a week, and free heath care, and immediate dental work, and you’re paying for it all, and you can’t use the hotel. So it’s really only like a weird 3 star with a private hospital. That you are paying for. So that these men can wander around your town freaking you out. Vote for more of this!”
I'm not enthusiastic about my tax pounds going to a series of failing hotel groups. The boats need to be stopped for safety issues as much as for anything else. I am simply calling out your lies (sorry about the unparliamentary language, but I'm not sure what else to call it) to elicit a reaction from certain fragile on this subject posters
It's not really a lie, though is it? These are 4-star hotels. The fact that some of the facilities are unavailable doesn't massively change this unless you're, er, whichever body is responsible for awarding stars to hotels.
Yes it is. They are no longer regarded as 4* so you and Leon suggesting they are is a mechanism to make a political point. Or in other words it's inflammatory bollocks.
This is a ridiculous hill to die on. It is simply a fact that asylum seekers are being housed in four star hotels.
It's currently unavailable to book and closed to the public because it's being used to house male asylum seekers under a government contract.
lol. The PB left is skewered and helpless. It is quite a spectacle
So the question is when did it become a hostel for male asylum seekers im guessing 2022 but unless it was after July 2024 it’s not Labour’s fault merely Labour’s problem because the Tories were incompetent and did realise that if you don’t do the paperwork the paperwork has a habit of not disappearing
Looks like it WAS after the election, as there are public reviews of the place til about 6 months ago
Ouch, if so
One other thing being missed here is that relatively affluent (often VERY affluent) PB-ers don't know how poor many Brits are, and how staying in a medium nice business hotel like a 4 star Marriot Delta, in the Warwickshire countryside, with rooms being cleaned and free food and free laundry - and this for weeks or months and it's all paid, is an absolute dream. A dream that will never happen for them
And even if the gym is shut and the breakfast buffet is sketchy, it is still dreamlike. And then you have to tell these British voters that THEY are paying for this, but not for Brits, they are paying to house illegal migrants who only came over cause they didn't fancy France that much, and now these migrants wander around the town scaring people
It is difficult to think of a policy better designed to drive an electorate, especially poorer native workers, to the populist right
It’s actually right next to the M40, not exactly scenic Warwickshire countryside
Again, another brilliant point for Labour's 2028 election campaign
"Yes, you're paying to put illegal migrants in four star hotels with private healthcare, hotels which are then closed to you, but OFTEN thse hotels have good access to nearby motorways, so it's all great. Vote Labour for more of this!"
Slap it on a poster
It’s ok, I don’t work for the Labour Party. I was merely correcting you.
You see, this I find fascinating: you're more interested in pedantically correcting an "opponent" than accepting or engaging in the central point.
My theory: the defining feature of a Liberal is their education, and their greatest fear is to be seen as unsophisticated or narrow-minded by their peers. And, if they're unsure they've done enough to demonstrate that then they will triangulate and create a straw-man to underline it instead.
This drives all this behaviour, even though it is having catastrophic political consequences.
My education is neither particularly impressive nor comprehensive so I don’t think that’s particularly true. Nor do I care about sophistication while I chow down on my Greggs or Mcdonalds. To be frank you know little about me and trying to typecast all “liberals” as one thing is doomed to be inaccurate.
Ultimately it isn’t for me, or anyone else, to care about “political consequences”. All I can do is support and advocate for the causes I believe in and try to make a life and a living for me and my family as best I can without bothering other people.
"The UK will lower tariffs on Indian clothes, footwear and food products. Ministers said this would give consumers access to cheaper products and more choice."
Not exactly good news for British producers of clothes, footwear and food products.
I'd like to see what crossover food we import from India has with food produced here. I don't think we have a lot of production for Indian spices or exotic fruits. In terms of clothes it's actually going to be a price cut for consumers as we already import a huge amount of clothing from India, realistically it's Bangladesh and Pakistan that lose out because now Indian imports won't have tariffs so UK supply chains will move to exclude those countries rather than the very high end producers of clothes and shoes we have here that won't be competing for the same money as Indian made imports.
This is the worst part: " it was revealed British employers will not have to pay national insurance for Indian workers for three years, making it cheaper to employ Indians than anybody else." So it will be cheaper to employ Indian workers over British ones? This is a betrayal. No other government would put their own workers at a disadvantage like this.
Our government loathe us. They absolutely despise us.They learnt nothing from REFORM gains.
Are we sure it applies to Employer's NI? If it does then yes, it's actually suicidal by Labour. I can sort of see the argument for a mutual cancelling of employee contributions but this would give Indian workers a systematic advantage of domestic ones. While in practice I don't think it will amount to much because of the income thresholds, it just sends a completely terrible message and is absolutely awful optics for the government which is already struggling with immigration.
The deal is so blatantly bad for Brits, others cannot believe it. Here is a tweet from a Pakistani
"Can't Brits go to court against this obviously discriminatory rule?"
..Under the terms of the deal, some Indian and British workers gain from a three year National Insurance exemption, which the Indian government called "an unprecedented achievement". The exemption applies to the staff of Indian companies temporarily transferred to the UK, and UK firms' workers transferred to India. The agreement means they will only pay social security contributions in their home country, rather than in both places. The UK already has similar "double contribution convention" agreements with 17 other countries including the EU, the US and South Korea, the government said...
I want to see more clarity on this before getting excited.
So, basically, it's nothing like some of the descriptions from the radical right trolls on social media.
well it is, because Indian pay compared to British pay is shite. and so the "reciprocal" part of it doesn't mount to a row of beans.
I thought it was a Brexit benefit to sign these kind of trade deals. I mean good grief this country is impossible to govern – people will complain about everything and anything and blame it all on other people, be it immigrants or foreigners or “woke” liberals.
It’s pathetic really.
So true . The constant whining is grating. All trade deals involve compromises.
As I posted above, this appears to be a common provision in our trade deals, including recent Chilean, Korean and Japanese ones. Happy to be corrected.
Also as a reciprocal arrangement for temporary workers, I'd be surprised if it wasn't common.
Problem for Labour is that nobody cares about a bit of hypocrisy these days. If it turns out to be standard in the deals the Tories have signed/worked with, for the last 14 years, then Kemi will no doubt come to grief at PMQs. But the two-tier stuff will have already worked its way into the minds of Conservative Reform voters.
think about this logically for a minute. The reciprocal deal doesn't mean shite when British wages are much higher, and those other countries are either much smaller than India or much richer or both. This is a uniquely bad deal for British workers. But hey it might add another 0.1% to gdp
"The UK will lower tariffs on Indian clothes, footwear and food products. Ministers said this would give consumers access to cheaper products and more choice."
Not exactly good news for British producers of clothes, footwear and food products.
I'd like to see what crossover food we import from India has with food produced here. I don't think we have a lot of production for Indian spices or exotic fruits. In terms of clothes it's actually going to be a price cut for consumers as we already import a huge amount of clothing from India, realistically it's Bangladesh and Pakistan that lose out because now Indian imports won't have tariffs so UK supply chains will move to exclude those countries rather than the very high end producers of clothes and shoes we have here that won't be competing for the same money as Indian made imports.
This is the worst part: " it was revealed British employers will not have to pay national insurance for Indian workers for three years, making it cheaper to employ Indians than anybody else." So it will be cheaper to employ Indian workers over British ones? This is a betrayal. No other government would put their own workers at a disadvantage like this.
Our government loathe us. They absolutely despise us.They learnt nothing from REFORM gains.
Are we sure it applies to Employer's NI? If it does then yes, it's actually suicidal by Labour. I can sort of see the argument for a mutual cancelling of employee contributions but this would give Indian workers a systematic advantage of domestic ones. While in practice I don't think it will amount to much because of the income thresholds, it just sends a completely terrible message and is absolutely awful optics for the government which is already struggling with immigration.
The deal is so blatantly bad for Brits, others cannot believe it. Here is a tweet from a Pakistani
"Can't Brits go to court against this obviously discriminatory rule?"
..Under the terms of the deal, some Indian and British workers gain from a three year National Insurance exemption, which the Indian government called "an unprecedented achievement". The exemption applies to the staff of Indian companies temporarily transferred to the UK, and UK firms' workers transferred to India. The agreement means they will only pay social security contributions in their home country, rather than in both places. The UK already has similar "double contribution convention" agreements with 17 other countries including the EU, the US and South Korea, the government said...
I want to see more clarity on this before getting excited.
So, basically, it's nothing like some of the descriptions from the radical right trolls on social media.
well it is, because Indian pay compared to British pay is shite. and so the "reciprocal" part of it doesn't mount to a row of beans.
I thought it was a Brexit benefit to sign these kind of trade deals. I mean good grief this country is impossible to govern – people will complain about everything and anything and blame it all on other people, be it immigrants or foreigners or “woke” liberals.
It’s pathetic really.
It will be another WFA. The right thing to do, but...
These double contribution conventions are common for temporary workers so you don’t pay contributions in two countries .
It’s no big deal but of course Kemi useless is hacked off that Labour got the deal that her government couldn’t .
it is a fairly big deal in the way it will affect the operation of local labour markets, if it means overseas staff are 20% cheaper purely by dint of the operation of the tax system.
Temporary workers from abroad are a tiny proportion of the workforce . I really don’t get the controversy .
So Accenture India hires 10k developers there and seconds them to the UK temporarily for three years and rinses and repeats that cycle indefinitely which means for 10k workers the government is losing £90m per year in tax vs if those workers were hired locally.
We need to see the detail and limitations on this policy but on the face of it, I think it's a poor idea and no trade deal at all would be preferable.
If it’s the same as the other similar double contribution convention deals, then the “exchange” is that the Indian employees don’t accrue pension rights, nor qualify for any other benefits that are notionally funded from NI (unemployment benefit for instance). Not sure about access to the NHS - They might still be subject to the NHS surcharge?
How big a deal this is really depends on how much NI they are not paying - if it’s just the social security part then there’s at least an element of fairness. If it’s the entirety of both employee & employer NI then it’s a huge incentive for employers to import Indians for ordinary jobs in the UK - that’s something like 20-25% of income.
Well yes and no, they would still need to meet the income thresholds and it would need to be an intracompany transfer so they'd need to be an established entity in India before they could bring over workers. I think pushing up the income threshold would solve a lot of the issues and frankly it would put the government on the front foot on the immigration debate. This is going to be a field day for Reform, I wouldn't be surprised to see them go 4 or 5 points clear in the polls over the next few weeks.
Basically, it's not about the building or the rooms largely, it's about the other stuff. That other stuff is not provided to asylum seekers. The contract for housing asylum seekers is not a 4-star level of quality. Asylum seekers are sometimes housed in hotels that previously offered a 4-star service to guests. They are not housed in 4-star hotels. Anyone repeatedly claiming this is lying or stupid (or both). It is just radical right propaganda.
Remember to hammer that home in the election. "They are just luxurious buildings with free food, free laundry, free private healthcare, free private dentistry, that YOU are paying for, but they are NOT four star hotels they just USED to be four star hotels very recently, don't listen to the radical right proaganda, and remember the Fascists won't tell you that often these places are quite near motorways, that's typical Nazi spin OK they are near rivers and castles"
You're completely right. If this argument is allowed to take place in a tv debate between Farage and Starmer it will end with Sir Keir falling into the trap of vehemently denying that illegal immigrants are being treated to 4* conditions, saying only that what was once a 4* hotel in the town centre is now a holding pen for upwards of fifty Afghan, Syrian, and Somalian men at the taxpayers expense. I can see Farage's grin now
@KemiBadenoch · 59m This is two-tier taxes from two-tier Keir. I refused to sign this deal because:
1️⃣ Tax refunds for Indians not available to us
2️⃣ Visa requests too high
3️⃣ Ceramics and Aluminium industries would be screwed.
What was left of our ceramics industry closed down last week when Moorcroft gave up attempting to stay open.
I hate to go all Mary Whitehouse but "screwed" Kemi? Not as bad as the odious LibDems putting "Bollocks" on posters small children could see, but come on.
Basically, it's not about the building or the rooms largely, it's about the other stuff. That other stuff is not provided to asylum seekers. The contract for housing asylum seekers is not a 4-star level of quality. Asylum seekers are sometimes housed in hotels that previously offered a 4-star service to guests. They are not housed in 4-star hotels. Anyone repeatedly claiming this is lying or stupid (or both). It is just radical right propaganda.
Remember to hammer that home in the election. "They are just luxurious buildings with free food, free laundry, free private healthcare, free private dentistry, that YOU are paying for, but they are NOT four star hotels they just USED to be four star hotels very recently, don't listen to the radical right proaganda, and remember the Fascists won't tell you that often these places are quite near motorways, that's typical Nazi spin OK they are near rivers and castles"
The free dentistry will possibly rile folks the most.
Expect Reform posters to feature pictures of laughing happy asylum seekers - with a perfect smile.
As far as I know, asylum seekers get the same NHS dentistry as citizens. They do not get "free private dentistry". Don't believe anything Leon or Reform UK says.
No, they often get better, dedicated dental care
"The project grew to provide oral healthcare for refugees and asylum seekers being accommodated at hotels across the UK. We regularly run clinics at hotels near Gatwick Airport and at accommodation centres in the South West and Essex. Some of our patients have been children.
"Every month our volunteer dentists provide dental services for families experiencing poverty on the South Coast. This includes several Ukrainian refugee families. We are also planning new clinics for asylum seekers in the north of England, working with local councils, charities and healthcare providers to identify and reach those in greatest need."
Nice for them. A really good dentist and full clinic comes to your four star hotel and sorts you out, and why not, given that you've made all that effort to get here illegally from - checks notes - France, which is known for its intolerable horrors
Meanwhile I've got British friends who literally can't find an NHS dentist and can't afford to go private
Which goes back to my earlier point that Reform is NOTA.
Asylum is a distraction because even without charitable, effectively private dentists in 4-star hotels, the underlying problem is many Britons can't find an NHS dentist and can't afford a private one. And that is why they vote Reform.
These double contribution conventions are common for temporary workers so you don’t pay contributions in two countries .
It’s no big deal but of course Kemi useless is hacked off that Labour got the deal that her government couldn’t .
it is a fairly big deal in the way it will affect the operation of local labour markets, if it means overseas staff are 20% cheaper purely by dint of the operation of the tax system.
Temporary workers from abroad are a tiny proportion of the workforce . I really don’t get the controversy .
So Accenture India hires 10k developers there and seconds them to the UK temporarily for three years and rinses and repeats that cycle indefinitely which means for 10k workers the government is losing £90m per year in tax vs if those workers were hired locally.
We need to see the detail and limitations on this policy but on the face of it, I think it's a poor idea and no trade deal at all would be preferable.
Aren’t there still limits on the amount of temporary workers . It’s reciprocal though and this applies to UK workers in India .
Let's see what the limits actually are though, if it's a few hundred or a couple of thousand per year then big deal. If it's unlimited then I think there's going to be a lot of abuse.
These double contribution conventions are common for temporary workers so you don’t pay contributions in two countries .
It’s no big deal but of course Kemi useless is hacked off that Labour got the deal that her government couldn’t .
it is a fairly big deal in the way it will affect the operation of local labour markets, if it means overseas staff are 20% cheaper purely by dint of the operation of the tax system.
Temporary workers from abroad are a tiny proportion of the workforce . I really don’t get the controversy .
So Accenture India hires 10k developers there and seconds them to the UK temporarily for three years and rinses and repeats that cycle indefinitely which means for 10k workers the government is losing £90m per year in tax vs if those workers were hired locally.
We need to see the detail and limitations on this policy but on the face of it, I think it's a poor idea and no trade deal at all would be preferable.
Aren’t there still limits on the amount of temporary workers . It’s reciprocal though and this applies to UK workers in India .
Let's see what the limits actually are though, if it's a few hundred or a couple of thousand per year then big deal. If it's unlimited then I think there's going to be a lot of abuse.
Reform 2024 voters have a net positive opinion of Tommy Robinson, but its "not a racist party" ...
all any government has to do to kill off REFORM is reduce immigration to sustainable levels. But no government will do it. Why?
Probably because there are a lot of vested interests that depend on it and if you cut it to zero there would be a load of negative consequences. See the nashing of teeth after COVID about how nobody was willing to work for shit wages.
Spoiler: those vested interests are not woke millennials who wave pride flags.
Basically, it's not about the building or the rooms largely, it's about the other stuff. That other stuff is not provided to asylum seekers. The contract for housing asylum seekers is not a 4-star level of quality. Asylum seekers are sometimes housed in hotels that previously offered a 4-star service to guests. They are not housed in 4-star hotels. Anyone repeatedly claiming this is lying or stupid (or both). It is just radical right propaganda.
Remember to hammer that home in the election. "They are just luxurious buildings with free food, free laundry, free private healthcare, free private dentistry, that YOU are paying for, but they are NOT four star hotels they just USED to be four star hotels very recently, don't listen to the radical right proaganda, and remember the Fascists won't tell you that often these places are quite near motorways, that's typical Nazi spin OK they are near rivers and castles"
You're completely right. If this argument is allowed to take place in a tv debate between Farage and Starmer it will end with Sir Keir falling into the trap of vehemently denying that illegal immigrants are being treated to 4* conditions, saying only that what was once a 4* hotel in the town centre is now a holding pen for upwards of fifty Afghan, Syrian, and Somalian men at the taxpayers expense. I can see Farage's grin now
It’s so bad @bondegezou is reduced to calling the plain and obvious truth “radical right propaganda”
It is both abject and hilarious, which neatly summarises @bondegezou
These double contribution conventions are common for temporary workers so you don’t pay contributions in two countries .
It’s no big deal but of course Kemi useless is hacked off that Labour got the deal that her government couldn’t .
it is a fairly big deal in the way it will affect the operation of local labour markets, if it means overseas staff are 20% cheaper purely by dint of the operation of the tax system.
Temporary workers from abroad are a tiny proportion of the workforce . I really don’t get the controversy .
So Accenture India hires 10k developers there and seconds them to the UK temporarily for three years and rinses and repeats that cycle indefinitely which means for 10k workers the government is losing £90m per year in tax vs if those workers were hired locally.
We need to see the detail and limitations on this policy but on the face of it, I think it's a poor idea and no trade deal at all would be preferable.
Aren’t there still limits on the amount of temporary workers . It’s reciprocal though and this applies to UK workers in India .
Let's see what the limits actually are though, if it's a few hundred or a couple of thousand per year then big deal. If it's unlimited then I think there's going to be a lot of abuse.
The full deal hasn’t been published so we can’t see all the detail . India is a huge growing market and given what’s happening with the USA I think many countries will be trying to do deals to mitigate that .
These double contribution conventions are common for temporary workers so you don’t pay contributions in two countries .
It’s no big deal but of course Kemi useless is hacked off that Labour got the deal that her government couldn’t .
it is a fairly big deal in the way it will affect the operation of local labour markets, if it means overseas staff are 20% cheaper purely by dint of the operation of the tax system.
Temporary workers from abroad are a tiny proportion of the workforce . I really don’t get the controversy .
So Accenture India hires 10k developers there and seconds them to the UK temporarily for three years and rinses and repeats that cycle indefinitely which means for 10k workers the government is losing £90m per year in tax vs if those workers were hired locally.
We need to see the detail and limitations on this policy but on the face of it, I think it's a poor idea and no trade deal at all would be preferable.
If it’s the same as the other similar double contribution convention deals, then the “exchange” is that the Indian employees don’t accrue pension rights, nor qualify for any other benefits that are notionally funded from NI (unemployment benefit for instance). Not sure about access to the NHS - They might still be subject to the NHS surcharge?
How big a deal this is really depends on how much NI they are not paying - if it’s just the social security part then there’s at least an element of fairness. If it’s the entirety of both employee & employer NI then it’s a huge incentive for employers to import Indians for ordinary jobs in the UK - that’s something like 20-25% of income.
Well yes and no, they would still need to meet the income thresholds and it would need to be an intracompany transfer so they'd need to be an established entity in India before they could bring over workers. I think pushing up the income threshold would solve a lot of the issues and frankly it would put the government on the front foot on the immigration debate. This is going to be a field day for Reform, I wouldn't be surprised to see them go 4 or 5 points clear in the polls over the next few weeks.
It’s a gift to the big consulting companies like Tata who can recruit in India & ship people over here for a few years.
On the other hand - we have similar agreements with a swathe of countries including places like Mauritius already without those being the end of the world & if it’s limited to the social security element, which is taxed at much the same rate in India as it is here I believe, then fair enough I guess.
The optics are still ... bad right now. Labour have really failed to consider how this would look to ordinary people who are just going to see “Indians get taxed less than I do” & be very unhappy about it.
(NB, many years ago someone I knew was employed by a gov.uk employer who abused a similar tax equivalence scheme to pay no income taxes whatsoever in either the EU country in question or the UK. Distinctly dodgy, but apparently legal at the time! One of my concerns about this would be large employers working out a way to squeeze through the rules & pay 0 NI in either the UK or India.)
These double contribution conventions are common for temporary workers so you don’t pay contributions in two countries .
It’s no big deal but of course Kemi useless is hacked off that Labour got the deal that her government couldn’t .
it is a fairly big deal in the way it will affect the operation of local labour markets, if it means overseas staff are 20% cheaper purely by dint of the operation of the tax system.
Temporary workers from abroad are a tiny proportion of the workforce . I really don’t get the controversy .
So Accenture India hires 10k developers there and seconds them to the UK temporarily for three years and rinses and repeats that cycle indefinitely which means for 10k workers the government is losing £90m per year in tax vs if those workers were hired locally.
We need to see the detail and limitations on this policy but on the face of it, I think it's a poor idea and no trade deal at all would be preferable.
Aren’t there still limits on the amount of temporary workers . It’s reciprocal though and this applies to UK workers in India .
Let's see what the limits actually are though, if it's a few hundred or a couple of thousand per year then big deal. If it's unlimited then I think there's going to be a lot of abuse.
These double contribution conventions are common for temporary workers so you don’t pay contributions in two countries .
It’s no big deal but of course Kemi useless is hacked off that Labour got the deal that her government couldn’t .
it is a fairly big deal in the way it will affect the operation of local labour markets, if it means overseas staff are 20% cheaper purely by dint of the operation of the tax system.
Temporary workers from abroad are a tiny proportion of the workforce . I really don’t get the controversy .
So Accenture India hires 10k developers there and seconds them to the UK temporarily for three years and rinses and repeats that cycle indefinitely which means for 10k workers the government is losing £90m per year in tax vs if those workers were hired locally.
We need to see the detail and limitations on this policy but on the face of it, I think it's a poor idea and no trade deal at all would be preferable.
Aren’t there still limits on the amount of temporary workers . It’s reciprocal though and this applies to UK workers in India .
Let's see what the limits actually are though, if it's a few hundred or a couple of thousand per year then big deal. If it's unlimited then I think there's going to be a lot of abuse.
Meanwhile this vile government is moving its vile anti-farmer legislation in the House of Lords today. Legislation so vile, so evil that no former Labour Agriculture minister is prepared to stay around for the vote.
There used to be a contract between agriculture and the wider public. No more as long as this most evil government since 1685 marches on to its own eventual unlamented end.
This money will have to be recovered, probably from the pension pots of former Labour front benchers. It is malfeasance in public office.
It is theft.
🎻
Abolishing a tax break that didn't even exist a few decades ago is theft and evil on a level not seen since 1685? Hyperbole much?
Taxes should be low, consistent and equally applied to all. If the tax should be abolished, it should be abolished for all. If it should be levied, it should be levied on all, including farmers.
Equally applied to all? Well now Indian workers coming here will have a tax advantage, thanks to Starmer.
But no state pension entitlement.
Has that been confirmed, or can they just pay a lump sum to fill in this gap, as well as qualify on future NI contributions (assuming they are not all coming over as 64-year-olds)?
As an aside, it does seem odd that the Indian nationalist Modi's top priority is facilitating an Indian brain drain.
It's not - remember they are coming here temporarily and will be saving as much as possible to build something massive back at home when they return to India 3-5 years hence.
These double contribution conventions are common for temporary workers so you don’t pay contributions in two countries .
It’s no big deal but of course Kemi useless is hacked off that Labour got the deal that her government couldn’t .
it is a fairly big deal in the way it will affect the operation of local labour markets, if it means overseas staff are 20% cheaper purely by dint of the operation of the tax system.
Temporary workers from abroad are a tiny proportion of the workforce . I really don’t get the controversy .
So Accenture India hires 10k developers there and seconds them to the UK temporarily for three years and rinses and repeats that cycle indefinitely which means for 10k workers the government is losing £90m per year in tax vs if those workers were hired locally.
We need to see the detail and limitations on this policy but on the face of it, I think it's a poor idea and no trade deal at all would be preferable.
If it’s the same as the other similar double contribution convention deals, then the “exchange” is that the Indian employees don’t accrue pension rights, nor qualify for any other benefits that are notionally funded from NI (unemployment benefit for instance). Not sure about access to the NHS - They might still be subject to the NHS surcharge?
How big a deal this is really depends on how much NI they are not paying - if it’s just the social security part then there’s at least an element of fairness. If it’s the entirety of both employee & employer NI then it’s a huge incentive for employers to import Indians for ordinary jobs in the UK - that’s something like 20-25% of income.
Well yes and no, they would still need to meet the income thresholds and it would need to be an intracompany transfer so they'd need to be an established entity in India before they could bring over workers. I think pushing up the income threshold would solve a lot of the issues and frankly it would put the government on the front foot on the immigration debate. This is going to be a field day for Reform, I wouldn't be surprised to see them go 4 or 5 points clear in the polls over the next few weeks.
It’s a gift to the big consulting companies like Tata who can recruit in India & ship people over here for a few years.
On the other hand - we have similar agreements with a swathe of countries including places like Mauritius already without those being the end of the world
Isn't that the difference though? None of the other countries have Infosys, TCS, Tech Mahindra, etc.
"The UK will lower tariffs on Indian clothes, footwear and food products. Ministers said this would give consumers access to cheaper products and more choice."
Not exactly good news for British producers of clothes, footwear and food products.
I'd like to see what crossover food we import from India has with food produced here. I don't think we have a lot of production for Indian spices or exotic fruits. In terms of clothes it's actually going to be a price cut for consumers as we already import a huge amount of clothing from India, realistically it's Bangladesh and Pakistan that lose out because now Indian imports won't have tariffs so UK supply chains will move to exclude those countries rather than the very high end producers of clothes and shoes we have here that won't be competing for the same money as Indian made imports.
This is the worst part: " it was revealed British employers will not have to pay national insurance for Indian workers for three years, making it cheaper to employ Indians than anybody else." So it will be cheaper to employ Indian workers over British ones? This is a betrayal. No other government would put their own workers at a disadvantage like this.
Our government loathe us. They absolutely despise us.They learnt nothing from REFORM gains.
Are we sure it applies to Employer's NI? If it does then yes, it's actually suicidal by Labour. I can sort of see the argument for a mutual cancelling of employee contributions but this would give Indian workers a systematic advantage of domestic ones. While in practice I don't think it will amount to much because of the income thresholds, it just sends a completely terrible message and is absolutely awful optics for the government which is already struggling with immigration.
The deal is so blatantly bad for Brits, others cannot believe it. Here is a tweet from a Pakistani
"Can't Brits go to court against this obviously discriminatory rule?"
..Under the terms of the deal, some Indian and British workers gain from a three year National Insurance exemption, which the Indian government called "an unprecedented achievement". The exemption applies to the staff of Indian companies temporarily transferred to the UK, and UK firms' workers transferred to India. The agreement means they will only pay social security contributions in their home country, rather than in both places. The UK already has similar "double contribution convention" agreements with 17 other countries including the EU, the US and South Korea, the government said...
I want to see more clarity on this before getting excited.
I agree. I need to see the small print too.
India are very hard to get a trade deal with, so it's something - the economic boost seems rather low for the effort though.
These double contribution conventions are common for temporary workers so you don’t pay contributions in two countries .
It’s no big deal but of course Kemi useless is hacked off that Labour got the deal that her government couldn’t .
it is a fairly big deal in the way it will affect the operation of local labour markets, if it means overseas staff are 20% cheaper purely by dint of the operation of the tax system.
Temporary workers from abroad are a tiny proportion of the workforce . I really don’t get the controversy .
So Accenture India hires 10k developers there and seconds them to the UK temporarily for three years and rinses and repeats that cycle indefinitely which means for 10k workers the government is losing £90m per year in tax vs if those workers were hired locally.
We need to see the detail and limitations on this policy but on the face of it, I think it's a poor idea and no trade deal at all would be preferable.
If it’s the same as the other similar double contribution convention deals, then the “exchange” is that the Indian employees don’t accrue pension rights, nor qualify for any other benefits that are notionally funded from NI (unemployment benefit for instance). Not sure about access to the NHS - They might still be subject to the NHS surcharge?
How big a deal this is really depends on how much NI they are not paying - if it’s just the social security part then there’s at least an element of fairness. If it’s the entirety of both employee & employer NI then it’s a huge incentive for employers to import Indians for ordinary jobs in the UK - that’s something like 20-25% of income.
They are - it's been explicitly stated.
How big of a deal this is really relates to how many workers it's likely to benefit, and how much relative advantage that gives them in local labour markets. That's really not clear at all.
If we merged income tax and NI, it wouldn't matter at all...
The trade deal with India will raise living standards, put more money in the pockets of British working people, and deepen the unique ties between our two nations.
"The UK will lower tariffs on Indian clothes, footwear and food products. Ministers said this would give consumers access to cheaper products and more choice."
Not exactly good news for British producers of clothes, footwear and food products.
I'd like to see what crossover food we import from India has with food produced here. I don't think we have a lot of production for Indian spices or exotic fruits. In terms of clothes it's actually going to be a price cut for consumers as we already import a huge amount of clothing from India, realistically it's Bangladesh and Pakistan that lose out because now Indian imports won't have tariffs so UK supply chains will move to exclude those countries rather than the very high end producers of clothes and shoes we have here that won't be competing for the same money as Indian made imports.
This is the worst part: " it was revealed British employers will not have to pay national insurance for Indian workers for three years, making it cheaper to employ Indians than anybody else." So it will be cheaper to employ Indian workers over British ones? This is a betrayal. No other government would put their own workers at a disadvantage like this.
Our government loathe us. They absolutely despise us.They learnt nothing from REFORM gains.
Are we sure it applies to Employer's NI? If it does then yes, it's actually suicidal by Labour. I can sort of see the argument for a mutual cancelling of employee contributions but this would give Indian workers a systematic advantage of domestic ones. While in practice I don't think it will amount to much because of the income thresholds, it just sends a completely terrible message and is absolutely awful optics for the government which is already struggling with immigration.
The deal is so blatantly bad for Brits, others cannot believe it. Here is a tweet from a Pakistani
"Can't Brits go to court against this obviously discriminatory rule?"
Yes, if this does include employer's NI then it's going to become a PR disaster for the government while actually meaning basically nothing for Indian workers because most of them don't meet the skill barrier for a £39k per year job plus visa costs anyway and it's highly likely Labour will be pushing that skilled worker threshold up as well to bring legal immigration down.
Massive, massive own goal IMO.
Let's presume the employer's NIC thing is true - it seems to be
If you're, say, a big British tech company, who do you hire for three years, the Brit, or the equally qualified Indian who is now 15% cheaper? The Indian, of course. So Labour have just potentially fucked over a lot of white collar Brits
Or, you’re an idiot unable to read…
The UK already has similar "double contribution convention" agreements with 17 other countries including the EU, the US and South Korea, the government said...
These double contribution conventions are common for temporary workers so you don’t pay contributions in two countries .
It’s no big deal but of course Kemi useless is hacked off that Labour got the deal that her government couldn’t .
it is a fairly big deal in the way it will affect the operation of local labour markets, if it means overseas staff are 20% cheaper purely by dint of the operation of the tax system.
Temporary workers from abroad are a tiny proportion of the workforce . I really don’t get the controversy .
So Accenture India hires 10k developers there and seconds them to the UK temporarily for three years and rinses and repeats that cycle indefinitely which means for 10k workers the government is losing £90m per year in tax vs if those workers were hired locally.
We need to see the detail and limitations on this policy but on the face of it, I think it's a poor idea and no trade deal at all would be preferable.
Aren’t there still limits on the amount of temporary workers . It’s reciprocal though and this applies to UK workers in India .
Let's see what the limits actually are though, if it's a few hundred or a couple of thousand per year then big deal. If it's unlimited then I think there's going to be a lot of abuse.
We also need rather more detail on the other side of the equation. There do seem to be significant benefits for the UK in terms of improved trade with India.
"The UK will lower tariffs on Indian clothes, footwear and food products. Ministers said this would give consumers access to cheaper products and more choice."
Not exactly good news for British producers of clothes, footwear and food products.
I'd like to see what crossover food we import from India has with food produced here. I don't think we have a lot of production for Indian spices or exotic fruits. In terms of clothes it's actually going to be a price cut for consumers as we already import a huge amount of clothing from India, realistically it's Bangladesh and Pakistan that lose out because now Indian imports won't have tariffs so UK supply chains will move to exclude those countries rather than the very high end producers of clothes and shoes we have here that won't be competing for the same money as Indian made imports.
This is the worst part: " it was revealed British employers will not have to pay national insurance for Indian workers for three years, making it cheaper to employ Indians than anybody else." So it will be cheaper to employ Indian workers over British ones? This is a betrayal. No other government would put their own workers at a disadvantage like this.
Our government loathe us. They absolutely despise us.They learnt nothing from REFORM gains.
Are we sure it applies to Employer's NI? If it does then yes, it's actually suicidal by Labour. I can sort of see the argument for a mutual cancelling of employee contributions but this would give Indian workers a systematic advantage of domestic ones. While in practice I don't think it will amount to much because of the income thresholds, it just sends a completely terrible message and is absolutely awful optics for the government which is already struggling with immigration.
The deal is so blatantly bad for Brits, others cannot believe it. Here is a tweet from a Pakistani
"Can't Brits go to court against this obviously discriminatory rule?"
Yes, if this does include employer's NI then it's going to become a PR disaster for the government while actually meaning basically nothing for Indian workers because most of them don't meet the skill barrier for a £39k per year job plus visa costs anyway and it's highly likely Labour will be pushing that skilled worker threshold up as well to bring legal immigration down.
Massive, massive own goal IMO.
Let's presume the employer's NIC thing is true - it seems to be
If you're, say, a big British tech company, who do you hire for three years, the Brit, or the equally qualified Indian who is now 15% cheaper? The Indian, of course. So Labour have just potentially fucked over a lot of white collar Brits
Or, you’re an idiot unable to read…
The UK already has similar "double contribution convention" agreements with 17 other countries including the EU, the US and South Korea, the government said...
The wage differentials are slightly different, aren't they?
Meanwhile, imagine trying to negotiate with this arse.
Trump: "I'll set my own deals because I set the deal. They don't set the deal. I set the deal. They've been ripping us off for years. I set the deal ... we don't have to sign them. I'm going to be setting the deal.”.. https://x.com/highbrow_nobrow/status/1919585349010850190
"The UK will lower tariffs on Indian clothes, footwear and food products. Ministers said this would give consumers access to cheaper products and more choice."
Not exactly good news for British producers of clothes, footwear and food products.
I'd like to see what crossover food we import from India has with food produced here. I don't think we have a lot of production for Indian spices or exotic fruits. In terms of clothes it's actually going to be a price cut for consumers as we already import a huge amount of clothing from India, realistically it's Bangladesh and Pakistan that lose out because now Indian imports won't have tariffs so UK supply chains will move to exclude those countries rather than the very high end producers of clothes and shoes we have here that won't be competing for the same money as Indian made imports.
This is the worst part: " it was revealed British employers will not have to pay national insurance for Indian workers for three years, making it cheaper to employ Indians than anybody else." So it will be cheaper to employ Indian workers over British ones? This is a betrayal. No other government would put their own workers at a disadvantage like this.
Our government loathe us. They absolutely despise us.They learnt nothing from REFORM gains.
Are we sure it applies to Employer's NI? If it does then yes, it's actually suicidal by Labour. I can sort of see the argument for a mutual cancelling of employee contributions but this would give Indian workers a systematic advantage of domestic ones. While in practice I don't think it will amount to much because of the income thresholds, it just sends a completely terrible message and is absolutely awful optics for the government which is already struggling with immigration.
The deal is so blatantly bad for Brits, others cannot believe it. Here is a tweet from a Pakistani
"Can't Brits go to court against this obviously discriminatory rule?"
Yes, if this does include employer's NI then it's going to become a PR disaster for the government while actually meaning basically nothing for Indian workers because most of them don't meet the skill barrier for a £39k per year job plus visa costs anyway and it's highly likely Labour will be pushing that skilled worker threshold up as well to bring legal immigration down.
Massive, massive own goal IMO.
Let's presume the employer's NIC thing is true - it seems to be
If you're, say, a big British tech company, who do you hire for three years, the Brit, or the equally qualified Indian who is now 15% cheaper? The Indian, of course. So Labour have just potentially fucked over a lot of white collar Brits
Or, you’re an idiot unable to read…
The UK already has similar "double contribution convention" agreements with 17 other countries including the EU, the US and South Korea, the government said...
Just a tiny bit more incentive for an Indian to come here, from a vastly poorer country with 1.4bn people? Or maybe you hadn't noticed that
"The UK will lower tariffs on Indian clothes, footwear and food products. Ministers said this would give consumers access to cheaper products and more choice."
Not exactly good news for British producers of clothes, footwear and food products.
I'd like to see what crossover food we import from India has with food produced here. I don't think we have a lot of production for Indian spices or exotic fruits. In terms of clothes it's actually going to be a price cut for consumers as we already import a huge amount of clothing from India, realistically it's Bangladesh and Pakistan that lose out because now Indian imports won't have tariffs so UK supply chains will move to exclude those countries rather than the very high end producers of clothes and shoes we have here that won't be competing for the same money as Indian made imports.
This is the worst part: " it was revealed British employers will not have to pay national insurance for Indian workers for three years, making it cheaper to employ Indians than anybody else." So it will be cheaper to employ Indian workers over British ones? This is a betrayal. No other government would put their own workers at a disadvantage like this.
Our government loathe us. They absolutely despise us.They learnt nothing from REFORM gains.
Are we sure it applies to Employer's NI? If it does then yes, it's actually suicidal by Labour. I can sort of see the argument for a mutual cancelling of employee contributions but this would give Indian workers a systematic advantage of domestic ones. While in practice I don't think it will amount to much because of the income thresholds, it just sends a completely terrible message and is absolutely awful optics for the government which is already struggling with immigration.
The deal is so blatantly bad for Brits, others cannot believe it. Here is a tweet from a Pakistani
"Can't Brits go to court against this obviously discriminatory rule?"
..Under the terms of the deal, some Indian and British workers gain from a three year National Insurance exemption, which the Indian government called "an unprecedented achievement". The exemption applies to the staff of Indian companies temporarily transferred to the UK, and UK firms' workers transferred to India. The agreement means they will only pay social security contributions in their home country, rather than in both places. The UK already has similar "double contribution convention" agreements with 17 other countries including the EU, the US and South Korea, the government said...
I want to see more clarity on this before getting excited.
So, basically, it's nothing like some of the descriptions from the radical right trolls on social media.
well it is, because Indian pay compared to British pay is shite. and so the "reciprocal" part of it doesn't mount to a row of beans.
I thought it was a Brexit benefit to sign these kind of trade deals. I mean good grief this country is impossible to govern – people will complain about everything and anything and blame it all on other people, be it immigrants or foreigners or “woke” liberals.
It’s pathetic really.
So true . The constant whining is grating. All trade deals involve compromises.
These double contribution conventions are common for temporary workers so you don’t pay contributions in two countries .
It’s no big deal but of course Kemi useless is hacked off that Labour got the deal that her government couldn’t .
it is a fairly big deal in the way it will affect the operation of local labour markets, if it means overseas staff are 20% cheaper purely by dint of the operation of the tax system.
Temporary workers from abroad are a tiny proportion of the workforce . I really don’t get the controversy .
So Accenture India hires 10k developers there and seconds them to the UK temporarily for three years and rinses and repeats that cycle indefinitely which means for 10k workers the government is losing £90m per year in tax vs if those workers were hired locally.
We need to see the detail and limitations on this policy but on the face of it, I think it's a poor idea and no trade deal at all would be preferable.
If it’s the same as the other similar double contribution convention deals, then the “exchange” is that the Indian employees don’t accrue pension rights, nor qualify for any other benefits that are notionally funded from NI (unemployment benefit for instance). Not sure about access to the NHS - They might still be subject to the NHS surcharge?
How big a deal this is really depends on how much NI they are not paying - if it’s just the social security part then there’s at least an element of fairness. If it’s the entirety of both employee & employer NI then it’s a huge incentive for employers to import Indians for ordinary jobs in the UK - that’s something like 20-25% of income.
They are - it's been explicitly stated.
How big of a deal this is really relates to how many workers it's likely to benefit, and how much relative advantage that gives them in local labour markets. That's really not clear at all.
If we merged income tax and NI, it wouldn't matter at all...
It seems to me to be a reasonably conventional potential arrangement, unfortunately on here we have Leon's dog whistling bullshite and back on terra firms we have Farage picking and choosing his narrative and the media fawning over his every last word.
Fortunately Leon is so fixated with the racial angle it can't be long before he earns his next ban.
People are aware that this exact same arrangement already applies to temporary workers from a host of overseas countries , including the EU and countries in the EEA .
Kemi needs to STFU and stop embarrassing herself . Does she realize that her own government signed upto exactly the same thing in the Brexit agreement.
People are aware that this exact same arrangement already applies to temporary workers from a host of overseas countries , including the EU and countries in the EEA .
Kemi needs to STFU and stop embarrassing herself . Does she realize that her own government signed upto exactly the same thing in the Brexit agreement.
People are aware that this exact same arrangement already applies to temporary workers from a host of overseas countries , including the EU and countries in the EEA .
Kemi needs to STFU and stop embarrassing herself . Does she realize that her own government signed upto exactly the same thing in the Brexit agreement.
If you’re a temporary worker you don’t pay NI.
It's probable a negligible cost to the exchequer. The problem is the optics of simultaneously raising employer's NI on those permanently residing in the UK vs cutting for those who aren't.
People are aware that this exact same arrangement already applies to temporary workers from a host of overseas countries , including the EU and countries in the EEA .
Kemi needs to STFU and stop embarrassing herself . Does she realize that her own government signed upto exactly the same thing in the Brexit agreement.
If you’re a temporary worker you don’t pay NI.
It's probable a negligible cost to the exchequer. The problem is the optics of simultaneously raising employer's NI on those permanently residing in the UK vs cutting for those who aren't.
As I said before the optics are terrible because there are Indian firms who already play fast and loose with the rules and this will simply encourage them...
People are aware that this exact same arrangement already applies to temporary workers from a host of overseas countries , including the EU and countries in the EEA .
Kemi needs to STFU and stop embarrassing herself . Does she realize that her own government signed upto exactly the same thing in the Brexit agreement.
The Indian deal appeared on the horizon at such a pace which raised the question as to why. India were supposed to be a difficult lot to deal with so what's changed or what's on the horizon? You could argue all the standard stuff here and how the sky is going to fall in, but what appears odd to me is that the Indian deal was done before the EU one.
Is the UK the vehicle to allow Asian nations to access the EU through the UK? We were considered a gateway for US companies when we were in the EU. Now we've left the EU (editor: Have we?), and Trump has uniquely applied his own take to world trade, we can no longer look across the water. We have to find our deals elsewhere.
Reckon there is more to this than will/can be announced so wait and see.
People are aware that this exact same arrangement already applies to temporary workers from a host of overseas countries , including the EU and countries in the EEA .
Kemi needs to STFU and stop embarrassing herself . Does she realize that her own government signed upto exactly the same thing in the Brexit agreement.
People are aware that this exact same arrangement already applies to temporary workers from a host of overseas countries , including the EU and countries in the EEA .
Kemi needs to STFU and stop embarrassing herself . Does she realize that her own government signed upto exactly the same thing in the Brexit agreement.
People are aware that this exact same arrangement already applies to temporary workers from a host of overseas countries , including the EU and countries in the EEA .
Kemi needs to STFU and stop embarrassing herself . Does she realize that her own government signed upto exactly the same thing in the Brexit agreement.
If you’re a temporary worker you don’t pay NI.
The EU has comparable wage levels. India doesn't.
"The agreement will only cover a very specific and limited group of Indian business people."
People are aware that this exact same arrangement already applies to temporary workers from a host of overseas countries , including the EU and countries in the EEA .
Kemi needs to STFU and stop embarrassing herself . Does she realize that her own government signed upto exactly the same thing in the Brexit agreement.
If you’re a temporary worker you don’t pay NI.
The EU has comparable wage levels. India doesn't.
"The agreement will only cover a very specific and limited group of Indian business people."
Maybe we need to wait and see the details?
Ah, so it's only the rich who will avoid paying extra tax. Excellent!
People are aware that this exact same arrangement already applies to temporary workers from a host of overseas countries , including the EU and countries in the EEA .
Kemi needs to STFU and stop embarrassing herself . Does she realize that her own government signed upto exactly the same thing in the Brexit agreement.
People are aware that this exact same arrangement already applies to temporary workers from a host of overseas countries , including the EU and countries in the EEA .
Kemi needs to STFU and stop embarrassing herself . Does she realize that her own government signed upto exactly the same thing in the Brexit agreement.
If you’re a temporary worker you don’t pay NI.
Problem is, those voting Reform don't have any confidence these people are "temporary" do they? Should they?
People are aware that this exact same arrangement already applies to temporary workers from a host of overseas countries , including the EU and countries in the EEA .
Kemi needs to STFU and stop embarrassing herself . Does she realize that her own government signed upto exactly the same thing in the Brexit agreement.
If you’re a temporary worker you don’t pay NI.
More precisely, you don’t pay it twice on the same earnings in 2 countries.
These double contribution conventions are common for temporary workers so you don’t pay contributions in two countries .
It’s no big deal but of course Kemi useless is hacked off that Labour got the deal that her government couldn’t .
it is a fairly big deal in the way it will affect the operation of local labour markets, if it means overseas staff are 20% cheaper purely by dint of the operation of the tax system.
Temporary workers from abroad are a tiny proportion of the workforce . I really don’t get the controversy .
So Accenture India hires 10k developers there and seconds them to the UK temporarily for three years and rinses and repeats that cycle indefinitely which means for 10k workers the government is losing £90m per year in tax vs if those workers were hired locally.
We need to see the detail and limitations on this policy but on the face of it, I think it's a poor idea and no trade deal at all would be preferable.
Aren’t there still limits on the amount of temporary workers . It’s reciprocal though and this applies to UK workers in India .
Let's see what the limits actually are though, if it's a few hundred or a couple of thousand per year then big deal. If it's unlimited then I think there's going to be a lot of abuse.
We also need rather more detail on the other side of the equation. There do seem to be significant benefits for the UK in terms of improved trade with India.
I think Sainsbury's and Tesco must be licking their lips at having a go at grabbing the Indian middle classes for British style supermarkets. There's a huge untapped market for them in India.
The Lib Dems are attacking the deal from another angle
Today, I asked the Government whether British steelworkers have once again been sold down the river to secure a deal with India
Unfortunately, the Minister didn't answer, instead choosing to remind us that Labour acted to save British Steel but failed to do so for Port Talbot.⬇️
People are aware that this exact same arrangement already applies to temporary workers from a host of overseas countries , including the EU and countries in the EEA .
Kemi needs to STFU and stop embarrassing herself . Does she realize that her own government signed upto exactly the same thing in the Brexit agreement.
If you’re a temporary worker you don’t pay NI.
Seems Kemi and Farage are saying the same on this, and seems the Lib Dems are not happy, so if labour supporters cannot see the optics then they are falling into the same trap as WFA
And saying Kemi should STFU indicates she has touched a raw nerve
People are aware that this exact same arrangement already applies to temporary workers from a host of overseas countries , including the EU and countries in the EEA .
Kemi needs to STFU and stop embarrassing herself . Does she realize that her own government signed upto exactly the same thing in the Brexit agreement.
If you’re a temporary worker you don’t pay NI.
More precisely, you don’t pay it twice on the same earnings in 2 countries.
Is it right that the employer won't pay the NI on Indian workers that it would if it employed someone from the UK?
"The UK will lower tariffs on Indian clothes, footwear and food products. Ministers said this would give consumers access to cheaper products and more choice."
Not exactly good news for British producers of clothes, footwear and food products.
I'd like to see what crossover food we import from India has with food produced here. I don't think we have a lot of production for Indian spices or exotic fruits. In terms of clothes it's actually going to be a price cut for consumers as we already import a huge amount of clothing from India, realistically it's Bangladesh and Pakistan that lose out because now Indian imports won't have tariffs so UK supply chains will move to exclude those countries rather than the very high end producers of clothes and shoes we have here that won't be competing for the same money as Indian made imports.
This is the worst part: " it was revealed British employers will not have to pay national insurance for Indian workers for three years, making it cheaper to employ Indians than anybody else." So it will be cheaper to employ Indian workers over British ones? This is a betrayal. No other government would put their own workers at a disadvantage like this.
Our government loathe us. They absolutely despise us.They learnt nothing from REFORM gains.
Are we sure it applies to Employer's NI? If it does then yes, it's actually suicidal by Labour. I can sort of see the argument for a mutual cancelling of employee contributions but this would give Indian workers a systematic advantage of domestic ones. While in practice I don't think it will amount to much because of the income thresholds, it just sends a completely terrible message and is absolutely awful optics for the government which is already struggling with immigration.
The deal is so blatantly bad for Brits, others cannot believe it. Here is a tweet from a Pakistani
"Can't Brits go to court against this obviously discriminatory rule?"
Yes, if this does include employer's NI then it's going to become a PR disaster for the government while actually meaning basically nothing for Indian workers because most of them don't meet the skill barrier for a £39k per year job plus visa costs anyway and it's highly likely Labour will be pushing that skilled worker threshold up as well to bring legal immigration down.
Massive, massive own goal IMO.
Let's presume the employer's NIC thing is true - it seems to be
If you're, say, a big British tech company, who do you hire for three years, the Brit, or the equally qualified Indian who is now 15% cheaper? The Indian, of course. So Labour have just potentially fucked over a lot of white collar Brits
Or, you’re an idiot unable to read…
The UK already has similar "double contribution convention" agreements with 17 other countries including the EU, the US and South Korea, the government said...
but you are an idiot. As those are all rich countries/regions without masses and masses of poor people able to undercut British workers
People are aware that this exact same arrangement already applies to temporary workers from a host of overseas countries , including the EU and countries in the EEA .
Kemi needs to STFU and stop embarrassing herself . Does she realize that her own government signed upto exactly the same thing in the Brexit agreement.
If you’re a temporary worker you don’t pay NI.
Seems Kemi and Farage are saying the same on this, and seems the Lib Dems are not happy, so if labour supporters cannot see the optics then they are falling into the same trap as WFA
And saying Kemi should STFU indicates she has touched a raw nerve
No she should just STFU because she has nothing important to say on anything . The Tories need to get rid of her and put someone in charge who isn’t clueless .
Wow, Farage is claiming there are no legal numerical limits to the number of workers that can be hired from India, under this scheme. Can that possibly be true?
It feels.... insane
This is from a government that promises to go "further and faster" in bringing down immigration; yet they've just - allegedly - conjured up a mammoth incentive for eligible companies to hire from a foreign country with 1.4bn people
HOWEVER we really do need the deets. Farage says it is potentially unlimited, the Times says it is 100 people a year? That is quite the difference
Comments
Expect Reform posters to feature pictures of laughing happy asylum seekers - with a perfect smile.
Claims £500 / annum. Which is much less than “all of the NI”. If it’s just the social security element which is being forgiven then it’s less obnoxious.
Are the years under such schemes going to qualify for the number of years you need for ILR would be my other question.
Currently if you want to pay someone minimum wage to act as a carer you can sponsor a visa for that, but you can't get hire a young, skilled graduate on £35k.
Just eliminate all the exemptions to the threshold, and say anyone working on a visa needs to be on that salary or above. Any employer who complains they can't fill their vacancies can still sponsor someone, they just need to do so at threshold or above - or raise what they're willing to pay people locally, if the market rate is then less than that.
Case as stated so far makes it highly unlikely I’d vote Labour again. And I’ve often done so, as in 2024.
Farage must be in dreamland
Today was bad enough for the Left with them being reduced to arguing "we're only housing illegal migrants on your money in four star hotels without a sauna, so it's fine", now this as well?
lol.
OK off to the shops, nursing my cold
As I said yesterday, the centrists anti-Faragists at some point were behind the deportation of illegal immigrants and would have scoffed at migration figures north of 300,000... yet now they argue against thos who want something done. What changed and when?
See @Nigelb at 5.48
I just think in reality the result of it will be severely limited, if it makes a difference to more than 1,000 job decisions I'd be shocked.
You have just provided far more perspective than has the minister responsible, trying to explain it in the Commons.
How many workers is this like to apply to, for example ?
I still have absolutely no idea.
"The project grew to provide oral healthcare for refugees and asylum seekers being accommodated at hotels across the UK. We regularly run clinics at hotels near Gatwick Airport and at accommodation centres in the South West and Essex. Some of our patients have been children.
"Every month our volunteer dentists provide dental services for families experiencing poverty on the South Coast. This includes several Ukrainian refugee families. We are also planning new clinics for asylum seekers in the north of England, working with local councils, charities and healthcare providers to identify and reach those in greatest need."
https://www.dentaid.org/refugees-and-asylum-seekers/
Nice for them. A really good dentist and full clinic comes to your four star hotel and sorts you out, and why not, given that you've made all that effort to get here illegally from - checks notes - France, which is known for its intolerable horrors
Meanwhile I've got British friends who literally can't find an NHS dentist and can't afford to go private
Would have taken a picture, but afraid I may have ended up with my head nailed to the carriage.
Some asylum seekers have been quite put out to discover that on being granted asylum they are suddenly no longer eligible for the care of the GP in their asylum centre & are forced to deal with the same system as the rest of us, long waits for GP appointments & all.
I didn’t realise that all the times I have chosen a 5* hotel on, say business, when I wasn’t going to be using much more than the room, I should have just stayed in a 1* and saved a fortune and got the same bed, linen, bathroom, entertainment system.
That time I stayed at the Oberoi Agra I may as well have just booked into the local 2* because apart from the facilities, again which I didn’t have time to use, the rooms and experience would be exactly the same.
Bless .
We need to see the detail and limitations on this policy but on the face of it, I think it's a poor idea and no trade deal at all would be preferable.
My theory: the defining feature of a Liberal is their education, and their greatest fear is to be seen as unsophisticated or narrow-minded by their peers. And, if they're unsure they've done enough to demonstrate that then they will triangulate and create a straw-man to underline it instead.
This drives all this behaviour, even though it is having catastrophic political consequences.
It’s pathetic really.
How big a deal this is really depends on how much NI they are not paying - if it’s just the social security part then there’s at least an element of fairness. If it’s the entirety of both employee & employer NI then it’s a huge incentive for employers to import Indians for ordinary jobs in the UK - that’s something like 20-25% of income.
Ultimately it isn’t for me, or anyone else, to care about “political consequences”. All I can do is support and advocate for the causes I believe in and try to make a life and a living for me and my family as best I can without bothering other people.
This is a uniquely bad deal for British workers. But hey it might add another 0.1% to gdp
Asylum is a distraction because even without charitable, effectively private dentists in 4-star hotels, the underlying problem is many Britons can't find an NHS dentist and can't afford a private one. And that is why they vote Reform.
https://www.politico.eu/article/india-visa-new-rules-pave-way-uk-trade-deal/
Spoiler: those vested interests are not woke millennials who wave pride flags.
It is both abject and hilarious, which neatly summarises @bondegezou
On the other hand - we have similar agreements with a swathe of countries including places like Mauritius already without those being the end of the world & if it’s limited to the social security element, which is taxed at much the same rate in India as it is here I believe, then fair enough I guess.
The optics are still ... bad right now. Labour have really failed to consider how this would look to ordinary people who are just going to see “Indians get taxed less than I do” & be very unhappy about it.
(NB, many years ago someone I knew was employed by a gov.uk employer who abused a similar tax equivalence scheme to pay no income taxes whatsoever in either the EU country in question or the UK. Distinctly dodgy, but apparently legal at the time! One of my concerns about this would be large employers working out a way to squeeze through the rules & pay 0 NI in either the UK or India.)
India are very hard to get a trade deal with, so it's something - the economic boost seems rather low for the effort though.
How big of a deal this is really relates to how many workers it's likely to benefit, and how much relative advantage that gives them in local labour markets.
That's really not clear at all.
If we merged income tax and NI, it wouldn't matter at all...
It’s such a gift for the right. All neatly wrapped, and sweetly fits the Two Tier narrative, and the stories write themselves
https://x.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1919794386117763316
The trade deal with India will raise living standards, put more money in the pockets of British working people, and deepen the unique ties between our two nations.
https://scotchwhisky.com/magazine/opinion-debate/the-debate/9558/would-leaving-the-eu-boost-scotch-whisky/
An amusing historical vignette.
The UK already has similar "double contribution convention" agreements with 17 other countries including the EU, the US and South Korea, the government said...
There do seem to be significant benefits for the UK in terms of improved trade with India.
Trump: "I'll set my own deals because I set the deal. They don't set the deal. I set the deal. They've been ripping us off for years. I set the deal ... we don't have to sign them. I'm going to be setting the deal.”..
https://x.com/highbrow_nobrow/status/1919585349010850190
is there any point ?
Two-tier Keir betrays British workers.
https://x.com/nigel_farage/status/1919789025646235671?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
Fortunately Leon is so fixated with the racial angle it can't be long before he earns his next ban.
Kemi needs to STFU and stop embarrassing herself . Does she realize that her own government signed upto exactly the same thing in the Brexit agreement.
If you’re a temporary worker you don’t pay NI.
Is the UK the vehicle to allow Asian nations to access the EU through the UK? We were considered a gateway for US companies when we were in the EU. Now we've left the EU (editor: Have we?), and Trump has uniquely applied his own take to world trade, we can no longer look across the water. We have to find our deals elsewhere.
Reckon there is more to this than will/can be announced so wait and see.
Maybe we need to wait and see the details?
Today, I asked the Government whether British steelworkers have once again been sold down the river to secure a deal with India
Unfortunately, the Minister didn't answer, instead choosing to remind us that Labour acted to save British Steel but failed to do so for Port Talbot.⬇️
https://x.com/libdemdavid/status/1919800546937934254?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
And saying Kemi should STFU indicates she has touched a raw nerve
Reform NEV 30%
Labour NEV 20%
It feels.... insane
This is from a government that promises to go "further and faster" in bringing down immigration; yet they've just - allegedly - conjured up a mammoth incentive for eligible companies to hire from a foreign country with 1.4bn people
HOWEVER we really do need the deets. Farage says it is potentially unlimited, the Times says it is 100 people a year? That is quite the difference