Sunak U-turn?

The recently announced mini budget might be, as one minister quipped, a windfall tax "that dare not speak it's name" but will be welcomed by many. The £400 for all towards energy bills may-like his furlough scheme-be criticised for not being targeted enough but additional one off payments have been announced to help the more vulnerable.

The packages will not, of course, come anywhere close to completely covering the hikes of the current cost of living crisis ( most people face an increase of far more than £400 on their energy bills alone for example) but at long last this government has perhaps realised that it's tin ear responses thus far have not gone down well. Doubtless many Tories will not be happy with the rumoured £1.5 billion package and feel they have had their hand forced by public opinion but it is, at long last, something. If only I believed they genuinely cared

£1.5 billion? Sorry, that should be £15 billion! This is on top of what Sunak claims is £22 billion already spent on measures announced in the Spring. All this obviously comes at a cost though so anything outside of any monies garnered from windfall taxes on energy companies will have to be borrowed and added to the national debt which then feeds back into inflation costs. Not ideal but guess he didn't have many other options and he was never likely to increase taxes on the super rich was he.

As anyone who has studied Economics will know the split of income tax generated within the UK is already biased in favour of the lowest income earners as it should be.

Undoubtedly the top earners pay disproportionately more tax but the question always is, is it enough.

The latest stats show (from UK Gov.co)

Top 1% by income, earn 12.5% of all income in the UK but pay 29.1% of all income tax
People between 90-99% top earners get 21.4% of all income but pay 31.4% of all income tax
People in 50-90 percentile earn 40.6% of all income and pay 30.1% of all income tax
People in the below 50% by income, earn 25.5% of all income but pay 9.4% of all income tax.

Taxing the top 1% wouldn’t make much of a difference at all.

I am less concerned bout the income tax but more bothered about how the ‘benefits’ side is applied and trying to see the difference between the top earners and lowest paid closing. The latter is the most difficult, always been there, always will but we need to at least try to do something more about it.

For me there needs to be a cut off point at which the state doesn’t give out payments such as winter fuel, and even these new payments. Why burden the country with extra debt to give people earning say over £150k (pick a figure) any benefits. Surely this is not what the state support systems were designed for.

I raise this with my MP who said it is too costly to do such a system. I don’t buy that. Yes it would cost but surely not as much as the present system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yarmbaggie

As anyone who has studied Economics will know the split of income tax generated within the UK is already biased in favour of the lowest income earners as it should be.

Undoubtedly the top earners pay disproportionately more tax but the question always is, is it enough.

The latest stats show (from UK Gov.co)

Top 1% by income, earn 12.5% of all income in the UK but pay 29.1% of all income tax
People between 90-99% top earners get 21.4% of all income but pay 31.4% of all income tax
People in 50-90 percentile earn 40.6% of all income and pay 30.1% of all income tax
People in the below 50% by income, earn 25.5% of all income but pay 9.4% of all income tax.

Taxing the top 1% wouldn’t make much of a difference at all.

I am less concerned bout the income tax but more bothered about how the ‘benefits’ side is applied and trying to see the difference between the top earners and lowest paid closing. The latter is the most difficult, always been there, always will but we need to at least try to do something more about it.

For me there needs to be a cut off point at which the state doesn’t give out payments such as winter fuel, and even these new payments. Why burden the country with extra debt to give people earning say over £150k (pick a figure) any benefits. Surely this is not what the state support systems were designed for.

I raise this with my MP who said it is too costly to do such a system. I don’t buy that. Yes it would cost but surely not as much as the present system.

---

Agree with a lot of that! The £400 payment to all is a blunt instrument at best and my understanding is that those wealthy enough to have multiple homes get it for each so they may get it even for holiday homes that stand empty for most of the year. The furlough scheme was similarly taken advantage of by richer business owners when it was primarily aimed at helping those businesses that would struggle to weather the covid storm and protect employees. The Tory way I suppose as they may want to help support the poorer sections of society but will always want to protect the richer. Like yourself, I cannot see how implementing a fairer, means tested, system for benefits is beyond any government as surely the savings would cover the costs of implementation.

What sticks in my craw is watching that slimy little runt deliver the news like it was a fantastic idea he’d thought up himself.

Weeks on inaction and fighting against giving any help and the acting like that is unbelievably false.

If I’d been in his position I would’ve been seeping with humility at not having done it sooner and would’ve admitted I’d got it wrong and that Labour et al were ahead of me on this.

I’d then have said that I’d taken on board what opposition parties had said but had decided to build on the idea and put more help in place.

The arrogance and lack of humility is a real weakness in politicians.

Generally in life, people respect or there who f u c k up and then hold their hands up to it or to those who admit they’re using someone else’s great ideas.

I’m too honest to become a politician, I just couldn’t act like Sunak has.

This slimer Sunak visited my work site last year, the Legal & General modular housing site at Sherburn, and he was classed as a 'top priority VIP guest'.
Our lot just smarmed around him and there was some first rate top quality brown nosery going on lol, and it was a case of yes sir no sir and can I pull the chain for you sir, etc.
Makes you sick dunnit!. :mad:

"Too costly to administer" means tested benefits - my ar$e, could easily be done using tax codes for PAYE.

Sunak along with Johnson are why the Tories will lose the next election, Labour are taking a leaf out of the "Get Brexit Done" mantra by focusing on their cost of living plan and sticking to the message.