The Budget..

[Mick Mac]

It's a winner... ?

Reducing the 50% tax rate to 45%

Stamp Duty increased to 7% for houses > ?2m

No mansion tax.

Gets the balance right I feel.

[Brendan]

Yeah it?s great. From what I can make out I?ll be paying more tax and have an extra chunk to pay if I ever can afford the luxury of giving my family a home to live in whereas people earning 3 time more than me have to contribute less.

Fucking winner.

[Chippy Minton]

No mansion tax yet but they're introducing a 15% stamp duty on homes over ?2m purchased by "non-natural persons." I assume this is to try and stop people avoiding stamp duty altogther by buying something in a company name.

Once this is implemented, they're going to "consult" on introducing the mansion tax on properties valued at over ?2m owned by these people, with the intention of legislating in Finance Bill 2013 for commencement in April 2013.

Sounds like they are laying the groundwork for a mansion tax "proper."

[Loz]

How the hell do you work that out Brendan? Unless you have a 200 a day smoking habit.

Lots in the budget I like. The continued move towards a ?10K person limit is very good. The remove of stamp duty breaks for companies is very good as well. Change in corporate tax is a positive move too. The child benefit changes to remove the cliff edge was needed.

Whilst the move from 50% to 45% is, on paper, financially valid, it was a bit politically naive. It was noticeable that it was the only part of the budget that Miliband picked up on and will probably be in most headlines. I'd have left it for next year as it's taken the shine away from the lower end changes.

[Loz]

Chippy Minton Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Once this is implemented, they're going to "consult" on introducing the mansion tax on

> properties valued at over ?2m owned by these people, with the intention of legislating in

> Finance Bill 2013 for commencement in April 2013.

>

> Sounds like they are laying the groundwork for a mansion tax "proper."

Sounds like they are pushing it to the back burner, probably permanently. Did you never watch Yes Minister?

[Chippy Minton]

:))

Perhaps you're right. I can't see a Tory-Lib Dem coalition at the next Parliament and it's a Lib Dem policy so may be it will wither.

[El Pibe]

Next Parliament wil probably be a lib-lab coalition if both main parties continue do to nothing to sway the electorate in either direction.

[dulwichgirl2]

THat all depends on boundary changes and the proposed reductions of c. 60 to the nos of sitting MPs.

If it all goes through, there will be a sort of musical MPs game going on while they all run around to be reselected by their various new constituencies.

[Jeremy]

Brendan, you planning on buying a ?2m house then? Flash git!

[Marmora Man]

Whilst the move from 50% to 45% is, on paper, financially valid, it was a bit politically naive. It was noticeable that it was the only part of the budget that Miliband picked up on and will probably be in most headlines. I'd have left it for next year as it's taken the shine away from the lower end changes.

I agree the need for the reduction (and no, I am not in that tax bracket). However, I'm not sure it is politically naive - yes lots of, predictable, noise and bluster from Labour on the move but by next year's Budget it'll be history and by the time of the next Election will be long done history. Had he delayed the reduction to next year it could have still been used by Labour as a stick to beat the Coalition with come the election.

[Loz]

I laughed when Milliband was doing his "Just nod if you're going to benefit from [the 45% tax change], or shake your head if you're not. Come on, we've got plenty of time." bit. Mad Hattie was sitting behind him nodding her head furiously. I don't think anyone briefed her on the joke.

[Mick Mac]

I'm not sure how well that came across for Milliband, I'm not sure if it is the right etiquette to refer to other MP's personal financial position. Anyway he just kept repeating it, as if they were really going to respond.

[Jenifire]

.

[Senor Chevalier]

Seemed to make a reasonable fist of balancing priorities to me. Haven't seen the detail. Hopefully they'll have taken the opportunity to clean up the stupid cock up in the transitional arrangements where the personal allowance is phased out so that those with income in the threshold area pay a marginal rate of income tax that is higher than those earning far more.

[Bellenden Belle]

So, if I were a rich person who until now has been paying my taxes properly and has no plans to move house.....

#winning

[????]

The tax was initially boiught in as a temporary measure to raise an extra ?3bn according to the government it has failed to do this.

The government claims it isn't raising any significant revenue and has driven some very high earners away or to evasion, these are significant tax generators (45% tax on annual earnings of ?1million + adds up to an awful lot more than 50% on someone earning say ?200,000)

The 50% rate is the highest in the top 20 economies - it says in an internationally competitive market AND MORE CRUCIALLY to business looking to invest in the UK (whose execs maake the decisions and will fall intoi the hiigher tax bracket). It says, the UK is a high tax environment. Nice message when we need as much foreighn investment as possible.

It needs to go, unfortunately in small picture terms that means that the highest earners in the UK do get a significant tax cut which in current circumstances looks grossly unfair, and of course the left will go on and on about this but it was an ill thought out, politically motivated, impractical and long term damaging tax in the first place. The rise in tax on high value properties and 'company' sales of domestic properties makes much more sense and will bring in more revenue.

[Otta]

Obviously seeing the very rich get a tax cut is q bitter pill to swallow, but in the long run, it seems the way to go.

The pensioner's personal allowance is the thing that I think is bad, as it's making those who worked and saved for years, pay back the debts that younger people have run up.

Other than that, it all seems okay to my (admittedly not very economics based mind).

[*Bob*]

Many people would rather see someone else's nose cut off, even if it spites their own face in the long run.

It's a British tradition.

[Chippy Minton]

Otta - it looks like the papers agree with you about the pensioners

[????]

Papers largely read by older peple sticking up for a significant section of the readership shocker.

If you are on a minimum state pension solely you won't be affected, it's just freezing tax allowance from earnings above ?10k back down so it's nearer to everyone's personal allowance - given that pensioners get winter fuel allowance and free travel then this is hardly mugging old grannies relying on the state pension it's just freezing personal allowance for those pensioners who earn above it. Predictable haedlines though - another emotive load of cack given that increasingly people retiring at the moment and over recent years (from both Private and Public sector jobs) have very generous final salary, index linked pensions, something future generations will only be able to dream of

The other moan to expect in the longer term is the fact that this budget will make the bottom 10% poorer (in relative terms) as the raise in personal allowances will incraese the earnings of anyone in work. If you are going to reward work for the poorest workers, you're going to create a gap between them and those on benefits. That'll be hitting the Guardian front page when the lefty think tanks start doing their sums.

[Brendan]

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Brendan, you planning on buying a ?2m house then?

> Flash git!

This was an initial misunderstanding of the figures on my part.

I blame Nick Robinson.

Either that or I?m a multimillionaire chain smoker.

[Chippy Minton]

According to the Newspaper Marketing Agency 35 million people read a national newspaper every week.

The demographics of The Sun, Guardian and Independent show over half of their readership are below the age of 45. The Mirror and the Times show that over 40% of their readership are below 45. This doesn't even include online readership figures which I would suspect have a younger readership.

All the papers focus on the pensioners tax allowance, representing both sides of the political arguments.

[????]

Express, Telegraph and Mail Chippy? Not quoting their readership age profile for any reason?

[Chippy Minton]

Yeah, you're right their demographics are higher, but the Sun/Mirror Guardian/Times represent pretty opposing editorial bias all of which criticise the pensioners tax allowance.

[Brendan]

As with all political shit there are a number of ?truths? being spouted by that we are supposed to just swallow without any independent supporting information.

The one that seems most prevalent here is, ?The 50p tax rate hasn?t/doesn?t raise any significant income.?

What are the figures on this and what amount of the shortfall (if any) from scrapping this tax is going to be paid by other people?

Anyway people in the city are celebrating I'm sure. That must be nice for them.