Steep Rise in Class 4 NIC Upper limit

Steep Rise in Class 4 NIC Upper limit

Didn't find your answer?

Just received (opened) my Payroll World complimentary Tax Facts 2008/09 leaflet and notice that the Self-employed Class 4 Upper Earnings threshold has been increased by a whopping 14.925% from £34840 to £40040 or £100/week., resulting in the Govt getting 8% of that lot - for what? And they have the gall to say that NI is not a tax - Class 4 certainly is.
The Lower limit has gone up by 4.01% from £5225 to £5435 as it follows the Personal allowance base.

This government is getting to be as bad as the Performing Rights Society who would almost charge you for having a Jimmy Riddle - because it makes a noise!

Except of course the present Government is now the Non-Performing Left Society!
John Mackay

Replies (8)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

avatar
By AnonymousUser
01st May 2008 07:29

What exactly do you mean, Peter?
There are two definitions of "trillion", and they are so vastly different that it behoves us not to use the term:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/trillion
I suspect that you are referring to the US definition, which is to say 10 to the power 12 (a UK billion).

Perhaps we should refer to it as 6500 Domes, where a Dome = £1,000,000,000 of wasted public money

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
30th Apr 2008 20:40

All about labour squandering
Try reading the book entitled "Squandered" by David Craig available from book stores. It will tell you how GB squandered our dosh and counting. David Craig is being kind but by my reckoning GB and the Labour party squandered in excess of £6.5 trillion pounds!

Thanks (0)
David Ross
By davidross
28th Apr 2008 11:01

Sorry for my 'obvious political bias'
I will certainly plead guilty to "Anti Gordon Brown" bias and fear that the Useless Tories will do little to reverse his damage

Clearly I am guilty of not having heard his speech correctly, too - thanks for the correction.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By AnonymousUser
28th Apr 2008 08:28

Contrary...
...to what the previous respondent claims, there is actually a great deal wrong with “good old-fashioned redistribution of wealth”.

In the first place, it does not really benefit those it is intended to benefit – ie the poor. What it actually does is make their impoverished lives marginally more tolerable thus discouraging them from working their way out of poverty. At the same time, it reduces pressure on their employers to increase working wages, thus again victimizing them.

Secondly, old-fashioned redistribution actually transfers wealth not to the poor but to those who are already wealthy because the poor, who are the initial recipients of the redistribution, do not, because they cannot, retain what they have received for more than a millisecond. They immediately spend what they receive on such essentials (for them) as junk fast food (MacDonalds, KFC et)c, low-cost supermarkets (Costco , Netto, Tesco), all forms of electronic gadgetry and mobile phones (Vodaphone etc) and cheap clothes (Primark, BHS etc). So the real beneficiaries, as far as old-fashioned redistribution of wealth is concerned, are the already wealthy shareholders in those businesses and not the poor, who remain as poor after they have spent the redistribution as they were before they received it, whereas the fortunate shareholders are that much richer.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By IanRiley
26th Apr 2008 11:55

David..
Your obvious political predjudices may be getting in the way of reason (and your hearing).
The abolition of the 10% band WAS in the budget speech in this passage:

'So having put in place more focused ways of incentivising work and directly supporting children and pensioners at a cost of £3 billion a year, I can now return income tax to just two rates by removing the 10p band on non savings income.'

The full text of the speech can be found here
http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/budget/budget_07/bud_bud07_speech.cfm

PS Nothing wrong with a bit of good old fashioned 'redistribution of wealth'.

Thanks (0)
David Ross
By davidross
25th Apr 2008 22:43

I remember this in the 2007 Budget speech
Gordon called it 'harmonisation' between tax and NI Rates and got some applause for that.

Of course it was really another stealth tax.

I also distinctly remember him announcing the reduction in the Basic Rate at the end of the speech but that he DID NOT mention the abolition of the 10% Band - that was in the notes sneaked out by HM Treasury in typical New Labour style.

I have been telling my clients for years that GB was just Tax and Spend Old Labour in sheep's clothing and am gratified that everyone now sees this

Thanks (0)
avatar
By IanRiley
25th Apr 2008 21:21

Employed too
Not sure why your'e portraying just the self employed to be the victims.
Class 1 upper rearnings limit also went up 14.9% from £670 pw to
£770 pw.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Paul Soper
25th Apr 2008 19:04

Gordon's disappearing coin trick
You didn't think you were going to keep the reduction in the basic rate from 22 to 20% did you? Overall effect for a higher rate taxpayer will leave you better off by about £35 or so taking into account the 10% rate band dodge. Next year they'll do it again to equalise the point at which NIC falls to 1% and IT rises to 40% - then you'll save a bit more as income chargeable at 8% instead of 1% will offset income being charged at 20% instead of 40% - a whole £200 or so! Don't spend it all at once.

Thanks (0)