Share this content
26

Budget predictions?

Budget predictions?

Didn't find your answer?

The chancellor is expected to announce today that his annual Budget will be delivered on 24 March. What are members expecting from this Budget and what do you hope to see?

Replies (26)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

avatar
By Anonymous
10th Mar 2010 10:16

Very little

I would like to see them do absolutely nothing other than cut out pointless bits of legislation that create work for little revenue.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Anonymous
10th Mar 2010 10:38

Dear Country

The Government quits.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Anonymous
10th Mar 2010 10:54

agreed

Thanks (0)
avatar
By cymraeg_draig
10th Mar 2010 11:36

How appropriate....

...it's as near as possible to April 1st - very appropriate for fools.

 

Sorry, but this budget will be a pathetic attempt to buy votes by covering up, (or plain lying), about the state of the economy, and trying to make it look as if Labour's 13 years of mismanagement have nothing to do with the appalling state of the economy.

 

They really do think that the electorate is stupid.

 

 

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Anonymous
10th Mar 2010 12:35

No difference

I think the majority of politicians are tarred with the same brush. Politics no longer seems to be 'what can we do for the country', but 'what can the country, ie. taxpayers, do for us'. I no longer trust any politician, be it at local, or government, level.

This selfish 'look after no.1' attititude that permeates Britain today commenced with Maggie Thatchers reign.

And yes, I know there are exceptions. They are the ones who give me hope.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Anonymous
10th Mar 2010 13:32

in one word SIMPLIFICATION

1 - abolish NIC - put it onto income tax and introduce sliding scale to deal with the inequities.
 

2 - abolish VAT - and impose a sales tax on end users - or at least cut out the merry-go-round of paper that adds no value (or tax take) whatsoever, and in particular all of those forms that are "needed" for inter EU transactions.

3 - tax all UK citizens (sorry, subjects) and all UK residents on their worldwide income. If everywhere did this they wouldn't leave the UK.
 

4 - introduce a sliding scale up to 75% on incomes over say, £10m
 

but as I say SIMPLIFICATION of the whole system

and......but I must do wome work!

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Anonymous
10th Mar 2010 14:13

usual disingenuous smoke and mirrors

trouble with these guys ...and this is difficult for us mere mortals to understand ...is that they really do genuinely believe the rubbish they come out with....took me a long time to realise that....everyone knows they've got no option but to hike taxes hugely in an attempt to get us out of the mire they put us in but it'll be the usual "we're so flippin wonderful" rubbish as usual..this lot couldn't run the proverbial...

VAT is easy and will go to 20%.Huge raft of anti avoidance for the new 50% rate inlcuding income shifting and creating capital from income.

In fact they're so out of touch wouldn't be surprised to see a £100 dog license coming in after the nonsense yesterday...that would pay off about 0.00001% of the deficit.

pembo

Thanks (0)
avatar
By cymraeg_draig
10th Mar 2010 14:48

Guard Cat ?

 

 

In fact they're so out of touch wouldn't be surprised to see a £100 dog license coming in after the nonsense yesterday...that would pay off about 0.00001% of the deficit.

pembo

 

Posted by Anonymous on Wed, 10/03/2010 - 14:13

 

No problem - mine will become "guard dogs" to keep client's records safe and their licence, food, vets bills will be claimed as a business expense.  Wonder if I could claim for a "guard cat" too - he does have a vicious hiss.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Anonymous
10th Mar 2010 15:45

but ....

...... you don't know whether the licence would apply to all dogs, or just pet dogs! 'Working dogs may be exempted, but may not!

I wonder if a Chihuahua will need the same licence as a Pit Bull, or a Tosa? After all, this licence is being suggested because the Dangerous Dogs Act didn't work, isn't it?

ps. I know a very good 'guard' cat. It lives next door.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Anonymous
10th Mar 2010 16:04

never heard of a tosa

must check it out.

my cat comes off best every time with my collie who always looks really upset about it all...so makes sense really to widen the legislation and rename it the "may be dangerous under certain extreme but unlikely circumstances animals" Act and start charging for cats,rabbits, hamsters etc etc ...think of the revenue..

and yes the dog/cat then do become "company dog/cat" hence deductible.....only problem is there may be P11d implications..??

pembo

 

Thanks (0)
avatar
By cymraeg_draig
10th Mar 2010 18:11

OK - well off topic - but who can really take Alister Darling se

The cat is a stray that wandered in one day and decided to stay. He's deaf, has only got one tooth, has bronchitus, and the vet reckons he's about 15 - should I start a pension scheme for him and claim tax relief ?  Is there a statutory retirement age for guard cats ?

He also types a bit (well, walks over my keyboard anyway).

 

Pembo - I know a good canine counsellor if your collie gets too stressed about it.   

 

One other point - How the hell do you microchip a hampster, and will they need a road fund licence for their little wheels?

 

 

 

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Anonymous
10th Mar 2010 21:54

Astonishing

It's astonishing that a group of professionals can only muster 1 substantive post in 11 about issues that are fundamental to their profession. Instead of pointless moaning like a group of teenagers how about we actually think what the issues are and how we would solve them? I'll start.

Issues as I see them are this:

Massive deficit that needs to be reducedNeed to stimulate growth in the economy to help reduce the deficit and encourage business investment

So as I see it that means there needs to be some fancy footwork that encourages investment but can't be as broad or untargeted as a big headline tax cut (and maybe alongside tax rises) because it would be too expensive. So does that point to some sort of increase in the Annual Investment Allowance or capital allowances to stimulate capital investment? Or some sort of decrease in NICs for new employees to stimulate labour investment? Or maybe something specific aimed at new businesses and entrepreneurs?

So what do the professionals think? What changes would you make?

Thanks (0)
avatar
By cymraeg_draig
10th Mar 2010 23:02

The patient is bleeding to death and sticking on a couple of ban

So what do the professionals think? What changes would you make?

 

Posted by Anonymous on Wed, 10/03/2010 - 21:54

 

Since you chose to commence your post in quite an offensive way, and end it with a deliberately patronising comment, I will tell you what a professional of 40 years standing thinks. 

Those of us with experience and knowledge know that this budget is a total  and utter waste of everyones time. If Labour by some miracle form the next government they will introduce a further budget to make the changes they dare not make now for fear of losing votes. If the Tories form the next government they will introduce a budget within 100 days as stated and take apart Labours budget.

As for sorting out the disaster area that is currently not-so-great Britain.  Fiscal policies will do nothing to cure the causes of the recession. A total fundemental shift in policy is needed in many areas.  Public services such as health, education & social services are being used by too many but paid for by too few.  Law & order is a distant memory. Politically correct clap-trap has replaced common sense. The entire nation is demoralized and our culture and our character is in melt-down.  Until these issues are addressed no amount of juggling with tax levels etcetera will make the slightest difference.

 

Thanks (0)
avatar
By cymraeg_draig
10th Mar 2010 23:28

IS THIS LABOURS IDEA OF GETTING US OUT OF RECESSION ?

Millions of middle income families are facing a 10 per cent 'death tax' levy to pay for social care of the elderly.

Health Secretary Andy Burnham yesterday said he wanted to see those with bigger houses pay more to provide for the old.

Up to 17million families would be forced to pay the tax - whether or not their loved one had required any care.

A 10 per cent tax raid would leave the relatives of middle income earners with estates worth £500,000 with a £50,000 bill when their relatives die.
 

This would be on top of an inheritance tax bill of £70,000.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1257066/Millions-face-10-death-tax-Middle-class-hit-hardest-Labour-plan-fund-elderly-care.html#ixzz0hoqsMpMt
 

 

If this is what we can expect from a budget then Britain really is finished.

 

 

 

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Anonymous
11th Mar 2010 09:23

astonished not

without at all wishing to reciprocate your rather patronising comment anon if you looked in the middle of my first post you'd note that I indicated 2 likely targets rather than adopting a stating the obvious "what is wrong with things" approach.We all know what is wrong (or should do) and the rather light hearted exchanges of some of us indicates both a weary cynicism of it all coupled with a realisation that from prior experience nothing is beyond the thought processes of the current incompetant incumbants.

Do you seriously believe that tax incentives are showing on the radar? We have a massive problem in this country that needs to be addressed quickly and to think that this can be corrected by incentivising economic growth is optimistic to say the least.Taxes need to go up hugely and fast and the only question is how they can dress it up to make it look as if they're not.They've already started with the NIC  and 50% hikes but there's far more to come.

pembo

Thanks (0)
avatar
By cymraeg_draig
11th Mar 2010 12:05

Sorry to disagree with you Pembo - but.......................

 

.......increasing taxes is the worst thing any government can do. It simply kills enterprise and destroys business.

The answer is not to collect more tax, but to spend less of it.  At the risk of someone calling me a "racist" we MUST reduce the number of people in this country and reduce the load on our benefits system, health service, education system etc.  And yes that does mean immigration being controlled, and if possible reversed.  It does mean an end to paying people to breed which is what family income suppliment etcetera has become. It does mean targetting benefits and the sick and the elderly and weeding out the scroungers.

People simply cannot pay any more tax.  Every penny the government takes in tax is a penny taken out of the economy and a reduction in peoples purchasing power which, in turn, reduces demand and increases unemployment.

Simple economics - which is the problem, governments dont understand common sense.

 

And yes, I'd sooner talk about my cat than about Gordon Brown.  My cat looks better, has better morals, and is certainly more intelligent than any of the bunch currently in power.  I think my cat is a political pundit - every time Brown is on TV the cat turns his back and walks away from the TV with his tail in the air :) 

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Anonymous
11th Mar 2010 12:46

Same as the PBR

i.e. nothing of any substance, and certainly nothing that will come into force before the election.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Anonymous
11th Mar 2010 13:42

I partly agree

I agree there is a lot of waste of tax payers money. I agree that many people (especially the unemployed who are on benefits) are being financially encouraged to have numerous children.

I don't agree it is Gordon Brown that caused the poor state of this nation, but he did allow it to happen. I think it is 'greed' that caused this problem, and the greed will continue, no matter who governs.

Things will get worse for the small business, and the average working man, if David Cameron gets into power. The greed, which started under the Conservatives many years ago, will get even worse.

I am afraid I don't have a simple answer to the problem.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Anonymous
11th Mar 2010 14:14

unusual times

agree totally about the effect of direct tax hikes under normal circumstances however problem is that these are not such times.In an ideal world not run by imbeciles prudent fiscal/tax policy would ensure a sensible balance that is exactly what Gordon "Mr Youtube" lied about for so many years.Given the monolithic structures and bureaucracy this lot have created over the last 13 years it would takes years to redress the underlying problems assuming there was the will to do so to in the first place.Hence don't really see what other option there is.As someone said Ireland is only a letter away from being Iceland and we're a doner kebab away from being Greece.

Your cat sounds like a remarkable creature with such intuitive insight CD...my dog was sick yesterday but think that was because she ate a birdy fatball my wife left lying around rather than was watching "Youtube"on the telly...

pembo

Thanks (0)
avatar
By cymraeg_draig
11th Mar 2010 15:49

Discerning cat

 

Of course he's remarkable.  He read the post entitled "astonished" and stalked away from the computer screen with his tail up over his back too.  A very discerning cat indeed.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By WhichTyler
11th Mar 2010 18:41

How to fund it then?

From the Mail article

"But yesterday he unveiled the three main options for raising money:

a 10 per cent levy to be paid from an estate on death; means-tested amounts to be paid across the whole of retirement; or, the option of deferring pensions for three years to pay into a new National Care Service.

In return, every person over 65 would be guaranteed a free residential care home place if  they needed it and any home help before that is necessary. 

 

The average 65-year-old today can expect to need care costing £30,000 - with the burden on women averaging £40,400 and men £22,300."

If the average costs are £30k, it is hard to see how the Conservative's alternative of an optional £8k will be sufficient. This leaves digging into savings (whether these savings are in cash or property) to fund the care that is increasingly needed. Now this may be acceptable (as it is broadly what happens now), but has led to equally dramatic headlines of 'elderly forced to sell homes by evil local authorities'.

So which option do you prefer? Or has anyone got a better idea?

 

 

 

Thanks (0)
avatar
By cymraeg_draig
11th Mar 2010 18:45

Yes there is an alternative .....

Encourage insurance policies which cover care costs when/if required.  Maybe tax relief on the premiums? 

If you dont insure, then you sell your home, the choice is yours.

 

As for this governments figures?  I wouldnt believe this lot if they told me today was Thursday.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By WhichTyler
12th Mar 2010 06:09

Damned if they do, damned if they don't

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1236798/3-000-victims-home-snatc...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1152423/60-000-elderly-year-forc...

 

As Counsel and Care http://www.counselandcare.org.uk/ (the charity who wrote the report that the second article is based on) say

“There are no easy choices - we will all have to pay more for care in the future.
“Any future funding solution must pass at least three tests: it must be fair, simple and sustainable. Fair so it relates to people's ability to pay and wealth. Simple so that it is clear what you pay and what you get. And sustainable so it will continue to pay for better care as our population ages.

Their own solution is not dissimilar to the proposed scheme:

“But there are a number of other ways in which payment for the comprehensive option could be made. One alternative would be a care duty on estates - a small percentage, say 2.5% on all estates above £25,000.
“A care duty would be fairer because payment would be related to people’s wealth; we already have a collection mechanism in place; it would keep pace with our ageing population and increase as wealth increases; and there is logic in linking a payment at the end of life with what is mainly end of life care. Simplifying payment and making care free at the point of delivery would help make better use of existing resources by reducing transaction costs and by making it easier to join up social care with health care."

As we have seem with the low take up of stakeholder pensions, tax relief is not enough to encourage (enough) people to save now for their future. And given the aging population, and longer lifespans, those of us with older parents will have to get used to the idea that we are not going to inherit as much as we thought (one way or another) and we had better plan for our own needs in order to save our children the problem. Personally I think hoarding wealth in bricks & mortar is pretty inefficient from an economic point of view, and insuring a near certainty is likely to be so costly that it won't be attractive to the market. People who 'self-insure' through savings are exactly the ones who find the present 'voluntary' approach unacceptable. I don't, but that's just my view.

 

 

 

Thanks (0)
avatar
By cymraeg_draig
12th Mar 2010 09:41

Am I just a cynic ?

Isn't it funny how care of the elderly, fast railway links, etc. etc. are all being announced now - just before an election.

 

Makes me wonder what Labour have been doing for the last 13 years if they have only just realised these issues need addressing.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Anonymous
12th Mar 2010 10:47

cynic not

no think we're in an opposite period to "burying bad news day" whereby anything and everything that sounds as if they really do care after all will be front page..from dangerous dogs and hamsters to care for the elderly and high speed trains (why??...lifes too frantic as it is)

This care for the elderly issue is only scratching the surface at the moment compared to what it'll be like in 20 years heaven forbid 50 years.The timebomb has been ticking ever louder for a long time and it really is the economic equivalent to the higgs boson for Physicists and one that should have exercised the greatest minds in this country for many years (and no I don't mean GB or AD).

pembo

Thanks (0)
avatar
By cymraeg_draig
12th Mar 2010 11:10

Great Minds

.............. and one that should have exercised the greatest minds in this country for many years (and no I don't mean GB or AD).

pembo

 

Posted by Anonymous on Fri, 12/03/2010 - 10:47

 

Great minds ?  Well I guess we had better sort it out on AWeb then because politicians are certainly not equiped to tackle it.  

Thanks (0)
Share this content

Related posts