Budget 2024

[Blue Maverick]

IHT threshold is £500k on property and you can pool yours with your spouse, so effectively £1 million.

But what about pension pot’s accumulated between spouses so for example both drawing pensions, one dies the other still gets that (although reduced) and they still have their own, then that one dies are both taken into consideration fir the kids?

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

We can measure outcome on performance and productivity. Health is obvious. Length of waiting lists, A&E turn around, ambulance response times, mortality rates and so on. Education is measured in pupil performance but this can be a blunt instrument if you start excluding children simply to boost performance measures. Education should also focus on well being etc.

The primary focus of the Heath and Education sectors is not to make money but to oversee a healthy and educated population that can in turn lead productive lives, a productivity that is largely measured in monetary profit/growth.

And yes happiness is also a factor that is measured when rating countries and cities to live in. Nordic countries tend to do well. High tax rate countries historically.

So are you saying we should ignore Reeves statement that this was a budget for growth and if we don't have economic growth it doesn't matter as long as we are happy? Surely it's the economic growth that enables the spending in the areas you mention and the resultant happiness ?

 

[Roachy]

I suspect most of the people getting annoyed about it wouldn't actually be affected. They've just seen an angry article in one of the right wing publications, or they've misunderstood it.

This could well be true to a certain extent. I think a lot of people could be affected though, but want others to pay rather than themselves.

 

[roubaixtuesday]

But what about pension pot’s accumulated between spouses so for example both drawing pensions, one dies the other still gets that (although reduced) and they still have their own, then that one dies are both taken into consideration fir the kids?

I think so but not sure.

 

[flook]

Complaints about the pensions IHT aren't justified.

Pensions were originally conceived to support the people who paid in whilst working during their retirement, never as something to leave to younger generations. You used the sum to buy an annuity.

Now you're allowed to draw down the capital, they suddenly became a tax avoidance vehicle for IHT savings.

The arrangements now still allow for you to save tax efficiently for your won retirement, they just stop the pension tax relief being used to avoid IHT.

I write as someone with what to me is a considerable private pension pot.

not forgetting of course that there has already been tax relief at source for said pension pot

 

[BlueAnorak]

Anybody who doesnt work for the state who is expecting much of a pay rise over the next two years can whistle I think. Ni is a tax on employees and anyone who is a private sector employee you will suffer. At least corporation tax is based on profits not running costs.
While we're at it, any thoughts of growth above inflation can also whistle.Reeves has just put a choke hold on economic growth. Considering she wants to be judged on growth, she's going a funny way about it attacking businesses on the bottom line.

 

[BlueAnorak]

That doesn't seem to be the stance of the NFU?

Budget blow for British farming, says NFU

The Autumn Budget is a blow to British farmers and could lead to food price rises, the NFU has warned.

www.nfuonline.com

Family farms will cease to exist as a result of this budget. Probably the intention of course - a part of the electorate that doesnt really vote for Labour - Tory or Lib Dem for the most part.

 

[inbetween]

Reeves repeatedly stated that this was a budget for growth, we can all debate the ins and outs on here, but it's that growth that she will be judged on over the next few years.

As an aside, I have just come out of our monthly finance teams meeting with our group financial controller amongst others. In that meeting we raised the issue of increasing salary offers to attract the best staff as recruitment is currently difficult. He told us to hold off to see what impact the budget would have, but he was clearly concerned about the NI rises. It was agreed that we couldnt absorb these costs and they would have to be passed on. I suspect most companies are having similar conversations this morning.

It's always seem odd to me that businesses do function like this.

Can't afford to pay the NI increase so we'll make employees pay for it by reducing their pay. However, yes we expect employees to continue to work to ensure our business continues to function and makes profit.

Is the economy really this fragile? It's sad really that most medium to large companies are reduced to nothing more nowdays than an excel spreadsheet.

 

[The Future’s Blue!]

It’s the inheritance factor where people want their children to have it all. My sister in law recently said: “I’m going to spend it all. I’m not letting those layabouts have anything.

What I don’t get is why people want to save up all that money rather than gifting it to their family when they need it? It seems a perverse way to show stature.

Personally, as I’ve already got a decent pension, most of my extra money goes to the kids to give them a better life. Affording housing isn’t cheap and with grandchildren, they need help now, not when I’ve kicked the bucket.

As for my house, that’ll be sold off and we’ll downgrade. Again, any spare cash will go to support the family.

 

[bluenova]

So you don't believe the NFU? Why? is it just more right wing press in your opinion?

I think we should listen to everyone, but is it not the same around every budget? For the last week we've had all sides telling Reeves that she needs to increase taxes more than she's planned for x cause, or not increase them as it affects x cause.

Now we'll get a few weeks of people telling us it's not enough/too much.

If there are changes that add costs to employers, then any employers' union is going to be saying it's too much. If the NFU weren't complaining that would be more surprising - it's their job to advocate for their members.

As with anything, the proof of the pudding is in the eating, and I guess we'll see what happens. Employers can say they won't take people on, or won't be able to increase wages, but if they need staff, then those decisions won't be as straightforward as many are suggesting.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

What I don’t get is why people want to save up all that money rather than gifting it to their family when they need it? It seems a perverse way to show stature.

Personally, as I’ve already got a decent pension, most of my extra money goes to the kids to give them a better life. Affording housing isn’t cheap and with grandchildren, they need help now, not when I’ve kicked the bucket.

As for my house, that’ll be sold off and we’ll downgrade. Again, any spare cash will go to support the family.

Because it's not really about helping family out it's a virtuous excuse for being tight fisted or an ego trip for people who see themselves as building "generational wealth".

People that come from generational wealth in the main tend to be boring, superficial arseholes. Why would you want to plant the seeds of such a creation?

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

It's always seem odd to me that businesses do function like this.

Can't afford to pay the NI increase so we'll make employees pay for it by reducing their pay. However, yes we expect employees to continue to work to ensure our business continues to function and makes profit.

Is the economy really this fragile? It's sad really that most medium to large companies are reduced to nothing more nowdays than an excel spreadsheet.

Sorry, I didn't mean pass on to our employees, I meant pass on the costs to our customers. We are actually hoping to increase our employees terms and wages to attract the best candidates. But our Finance team have said hold off for the time being until they can assess the impact of the budget.

 

[BobKowalski]

So you don't believe the NFU? Why? is it just more right wing press in your opinion?

I think the NFU are looking after the interests of their members. If they want to present an argument about ‘food security’ and make it stick then fine, but there is a lot of doomsday hyperbole over the changes in the budget which will not come to pass - see arguments over minimum wage as an example.

Pensions are to provide for yourself in your latter years. Treating them as a tax dodge at a time when public finances are in a black hole is not finding much sympathy with me.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

I think we should listen to everyone, but is it not the same around every budget? For the last week we've had all sides telling Reeves that she needs to increase taxes more than she's planned for x cause, or not increase them as it affects x cause.

Now we'll get a few weeks of people telling us it's not enough/too much.

If there are changes that add costs to employers, then any employers' union is going to be saying it's too much. If the NFU weren't complaining that would be more surprising - it's their job to advocate for their members.

As with anything, the proof of the pudding is in the eating, and I guess we'll see what happens. Employers can say they won't take people on, or won't be able to increase wages, but if they need staff, then those decisions won't be as straightforward as many are suggesting.

Of course, I agree entirely. I just raised it as some clearly think it's all positive regardless simply because its a Labour budget. In fact, they can even see no wrong even when an MP attacks a member of public as long as he's a Labour MP ;-)

 

[bluenova]

But what about pension pot’s accumulated between spouses so for example both drawing pensions, one dies the other still gets that (although reduced) and they still have their own, then that one dies are both taken into consideration fir the kids?

Much of the debate around IHT seems to create a narrative, that as soon as a penny of an inheritance is taxed, all the money is gone.

Your post is arguing that more inheritances will be pushed over £1 million.

Let's just step back, and consider that this is already up to £1m tax free.

If (for the couple passing on a house to kids), it's only above the million that tax starts being paid, then an inheritance of £1.1 million is potentially being taxed at 3.6%. Obviously that percentage goes up as the inheritance goes up, but then we're getting away from any argument that it's any kind of "normal" wealth.

When you consider that most people who are likely to leave those kind of sums, are also likely disposing of assets well before they die, then it's less than 4% of what they couldn't avoid.

I don't think anyone can argue that's punitive.

 

[SWP's back]

IHT threshold is £500k on property and you can pool yours with your spouse, so effectively £1 million.

IHT is £325,000 which can rise to £500k with property (ie the Residents Nil Rate Band is £175k) and then double as you say to £1m (but only if leaving estate to immediate family - children/step/foster/adopted children or grand children)

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

I think the NFU are looking after the interests of their members. If they want to present an argument about ‘food security’ and make it stick then fine, but there is a lot of doomsday hyperbole over the changes in the budget which will not come to pass - see arguments over minimum wage as an example.

Pensions are to provide for yourself in your latter years. Treating them as a tax dodge at a time when public finances are in a black hole is not finding much sympathy with me.

It wasn't a tax dodge, it was encouraged to enable you to save for your future and your families. What's so wrong in that? These rules don't just affect the super rich or rich whatever definition is. The IHT thresholds are now relatively low compared to how property prices have risen. It will affect many middle income earners more than the rich or super rich who will just avoid iHT altogether via other means.

Regardless this isnt about not providing for public services correctly, if you have read my posts you will undertand that It's about the fair distribution of that tax take and how that may affect or not the UKs future growth.

I notice that you and others have not commented on my issues with big business not paying their fair share and the missed opportunity that Reeves had to correct this? Can I ask why that is. Are you I'm favour of big business avoiding tax? Or is it that you just can't bring yourself to question anything a Labour government does.

 

[BobKowalski]

So are you saying we should ignore Reeves statement that this was a budget for growth and if we don't have economic growth it doesn't matter as long as we are happy? Surely it's the economic growth that enables the spending in the areas you mention and the resultant happiness ?

A well educated and healthy population/labour pool is an economic benefit. A happier person is more productive. My point is that there are intangibles that do not show on the balance sheet but are necessary for a modern economy to function and grow.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

A well educated and healthy population/labour pool is an economic benefit. A happier person is more productive. My point is that there are intangibles that do not show on the balance sheet but are necessary for a modern economy to function and grow.

No argument from me on that front, but it goes hand in hand with economic growth. You certainly can't have the first without the second.

 

[SWP's back]

No. The proportion of people paying IHT is very small.

I'm not sure why there's so much fuss about it, personally I'd much rather be taxed after my death than while I'm alive!

But you ARE taxed whilst alive as well.

There’s income tax, national insurance, Value added tax, capital gains tax, stamp duty, council tax, dividend tax, savings interest tax and whatever you’ve managed to save after that gets taxed again and the cunts are now taxing your personal pension whereas it was IHT free previously.