I’ve seen little as stupid as Tory minister Philip Hammond claiming on Channel 4 last evening that child benefit was still universal — it would just be recovered from some recipients.
And I’ve never heard a comment as crass as Osborne saying he knows most higher rate tax payers aren’t well off — and then proceeds to hit the poorest of them hardest.
If we wanted a universal benefit and we wanted to hit the richest most why not start by restricting allowances for the very richest? Or cutting pension tax relief more at higher rates? Or pushing the 50% band down a bit? All viable. All easy. All hitting those on well over £100,000 a year.
No, George wanted to hit those in the £40,000s because they’re not like them — they’re just ordinary people. he doesn’t know them. he doesn’t mix with them. he owes them nothing, he thinks.
And he’s wrong: they will have their revenge. He’s even delaying introducing this change to be effective not long before the next general election. And this is a man supposed to have considerable political instinct. Pull the other one is all I can say.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
“If we wanted a universal benefit and we wanted to hit the richest most why not start by restricting allowances for the very richest? Or cutting pension tax relief more at higher rates? Or pushing the 50% band down a bit? All viable. All easy. All hitting those on well over £100,000 a year.”
Wake up – all of these have been done. And how much have they raised? I think about £1bn or £2 bn max? I notice the old Labour politics of envy language is back – “hitting” the rich etc. As for the people on £44k getting their revenge, they are most unlikely to vote Labour, and they are not poor, either. They do not need child benefit.
@Harry Lyons
I’m suggesting more….you might have noticed the word
And they’ve already raised as much as the child benefit cut….which makes my case
On every count you show your inability to appraise the evidence an formulate a response
Lets hope that Osborne has the decency to raise the level at which the higher rate of tax is applied – since Labour came into power many more people have been sucked into this bracket.
@Justin
Cut benefits and reduce taxes on he well off?
That’s your plan for equality is it?
And for reducing stress in society?
There is absolutely no justification for raising the threshold for the 40% income tax rate until those not receiving a living wage are removed from income tax altogether.
Yes the child benefit plan is full of holes and anomalies. But we must not lose sight of the real issue here. It is economic madness to give benefits to people who don’t need them. I don’t believe anyone capable of paying the 40% rate of tax should be entitled to claim ANY benefit at all. Remember, that’s a takehome pay of £3,000 a month or not far off. Why on earth should a basic rate taxpayer on £20,000 a year contribute to benefits for someone earning more than £40,000? Indeed, why should a Mum earning £12,000 a year on a supermarket checkout contribute to it, either?
@Carol Wilcox
I would support both. Good to see you would too!
@Andrew Symonds
You ignore the fact that this universal benefit is a recognition of the status of the child and its rights.
But yes, it is true that the payment may appear unnecessary for some – but a universal benefit is vital for a number of reasons.
First it ties everyone to the welfare state – of which we are all a part and from which we all benefit enormously. The breaking of the link is a deliberate ideological move to make the welfare state a second rate service from which most are forced to opt out – and which will have massive cost in terms of reduced opportunity and well being for the so called ‘middle classes’ who will like their counterparts in the US find themselves living in fear of medical and other insurance.
Second, it is costly to break universality.
Third it says some children are different from others – and they are not.
Fourth, if recovery is desired we have a tax system – and this benefit could be taxed on those in the higher rate band alone, for example. But even then I have a problem: why should parents be taxed more?
You utterly miss the point with your simplistic world view.
@ Andrew Symonds
The extension of your logic is a Mum earning £12,000 a year on a supermarket checkout should not contribute to the roads, police, fire service, hospital beds, doctors, rail networks or any of the myriad other publicly funded (fully, partially or otherwise) services and facilities that a £40k earner enjoys the use of.
The “economic madness” argument falls flat – the chancellor is effectively withdrawing a billion pounds of spending from the UK economy – money that would otherwise be paid to shops, babysitters, nurseries and the like, not to mention the tax the exchequer would receive back. Surely in a time of recession it’s economic madness to pull money out of the economy, but we know the Tories think it’s a grand idea.
Someone earning £40k takes home about £2,500 a month (that’s quite “far off”) and pays about £558 a month in income tax alone. Contrast that to someone on £12k paying £92 a month tax. If anyone is contributing, it’s the higher earner.
I come back to Richard’s point – it’s fair because it’s universal, ties us to the welfare state and recognises the right of the child.
@Richard Murphy
Richard
When last was the higher rate threshold raised? .
If you honestly believe those just caught in the higher rate bracket are well off I suggest you go and have a chat to them and ask just how they are doing.
@SFL
You are surely not suggesting that “a mum earning £12,000 a year on a supermarket checkout” pays no other taxes?
@Justin
They’re not stunningly well off
But they are the top 10% of income earners
And that makes them pretty well off
Lets not forget that the 10% statistic was achieved through a sample of 1% of those who pay PAYE – thus excluding those who are not on PAYE ie. the the self employed, who tend to make up the ranks of the very wealthy
@JayPee
Nonsense
Just look at HMRC’s stats
Don’t make everything up!
@Carol Wilcox
Definitely not! I’m well aware of the other taxes we all pay. Rather I’m trying to make a point about the fallibility of the argument against universal child benefit.
Really!
My evidence is the Office for National Statistics’ Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings
@JayPee
Well stop wasting time and look at the HMRC stats instead