Sunak has decided to help out certain industries - at last.

Thanks for that explanation, Dinahmo.

tens of thousands of self empoyed got no help.We are lucky we didn't need it but many who were newly self emplyed did.

No new money for the devolved nations its already factored into the Barnet formula ,so included in the budget we ae required to live within.How I wish Weatminster had to live within a budget ,then we woud't be responsible for around 10% of the debts they accrue .Why should we need to pay for London 's sewers or crossrail or HS2 or Big Ben or ANYTHING that has nothing to do with Scotland or our taxpayers? Devolution= power "given means power retained by WM . Usually for the benefit of England and the detriment of the other nations !!

It really isn't true we have all had pay outs/financial help! Lots of people carried on working and had no loss of income and didn't need any help! My husband didn't, in fact he has been busier. We don't bemoan others who needed support getting it

In answer to Maizie

Dividends are paid from a company's profits after taxation so if a company has taxable profits of £100,000 the CT on that would be (at the lower rate of 19%) £19,000 leaving a balance of £81,000 that could be distributed as dividends or retained in the company (or a bit of both).

The individual receiving the dividend has a tax free allowance, originally £5000 but currently £2000. Depending upon the indivdual's other income the tax liability is 7.5% or 32.5%. This is being increased by 1.25% from April 2022 on order to help fund the health and social care settlement as announced in September.

There has been financial help for almost everyone from the chancellor since the pandemic began. BUT no help at all for pensioners who have had to shoulder increasing costs on essentials like food and energy.

I think I paid enough tax in my life before retirement. I don't need to pay any more!

MayBeMaw

I just don’t get the “at last” part of the thread title!
It strikes me that Rishi Sunak has responded very promptly to a situation which is only just developing.

I agree with you MawBeMaw.

In any case (getting back to the OP) the amount being offered in support (£6,000 per business affected) is going to have much effect.

MaizieD

^A tax which taxes all income, including from shares and property, would have been even fairer.^

Investment income is taxed, it's just that it's taxed at a lower rate and there is a tax allowance on it, too.

I queried this once on twitter and was told, rightly or wrongly, that dividend income is paid from net profit; the rate of 7% was lower than the standard income tax rate because the company profit had already had corporation tax levied on it. I don't know if our taxation experts can confirm or refute this. But it still feels inequitable.

But there's no National Insurance, which is just another form of taxation - that's my point.

MayBeMaw

I just don’t get the “at last” part of the thread title!
It strikes me that Rishi Sunak has responded very promptly to a situation which is only just developing.

Omicron has been on the march in the UK for at least 3 weeks now, and hospitality and the entertainment industry have been hit pretty badly for at least the last two. I don't see Sunak's action as being particularly prompt...

It's like the government never plans for a worst case scenario.

MaizieD nothing wrong with being prudent/forward planning for old age, if of course your circumstances allow.

I think you are correct MaizieD we have to declare all income/interest etc it incurs tax but not NI.
Which is why an income tax rise would have been fairer.

GrannyGravy13

growstuff what about taxing ISA’s or Premium Bonds? which is where a lot of wo/men on the street invest to save themselves paying tax?

Premium bonds lose value yearly because of inflation. They also produce no income if your numbers never come up...

Tax free ISAs (and they're not all tax free, are they?) were a government wheeze to encourage people to save. Wasn't it an attempt to make us all prudent and save for our old age..

Quite what their economic function is I don't know...

A tax which taxes all income, including from shares and property, would have been even fairer.

Investment income is taxed, it's just that it's taxed at a lower rate and there is a tax allowance on it, too.

I queried this once on twitter and was told, rightly or wrongly, that dividend income is paid from net profit; the rate of 7% was lower than the standard income tax rate because the company profit had already had corporation tax levied on it. I don't know if our taxation experts can confirm or refute this. But it still feels inequitable.

A tax which taxes all income, including from shares and property, would have been even fairer.

Yes this.

growstuff what about taxing ISA’s or Premium Bonds? which is where a lot of wo/men on the street invest to save themselves paying tax?

I agree with growstuff

Btw growstuff I am not ‘smug’. What an unpleasant thing to say for no reason other than my financial position seemingly being better than yours.

Germanshepherdsmum

I don’t make the rules growstuff. I have always paid my taxes and have never indulged in tax avoidance or evasion. I worked beyond retirement age too. Don’t have a go at me if our present circumstances differ. I recall now that we had a bit of a spat about my first husband having left me with debts to pay off and my feeding my child rather than myself. You know my history. I feel no guilt about being one of the ‘unemployed wealthy’ whose taxes haven’t (yet) been raised. What I have today I’ve earned in more ways than one.

I'm not having a go at you. I just disagree with your stance on the "politics of envy" - that's all. It's a lazy put down.

GrannyGravy13

Ilovecheese

I really dislike the expression "politics of envy" I am sorry that the tax (NI) rise is being carried solely by working people. An income tax rise would have been a fairer solution, we all should chip in if we have the means.

I agree an income tax rise would have been fairer all round.

A tax which taxes all income, including from shares and property, would have been even fairer.

I don’t make the rules growstuff. I have always paid my taxes and have never indulged in tax avoidance or evasion. I worked beyond retirement age too. Don’t have a go at me if our present circumstances differ. I recall now that we had a bit of a spat about my first husband having left me with debts to pay off and my feeding my child rather than myself. You know my history. I feel no guilt about being one of the ‘unemployed wealthy’ whose taxes haven’t (yet) been raised. What I have today I’ve earned in more ways than one.

growstuff

PS Germanshepherdsmum How about actually justifying why those with assets pay less tax than those with the same income who actually work for a living?

... how about asking the government why they chose to burden working people with increased NI contributions instead of raising taxes on income - which would probably have excluded the lower-paid and included the wealthier pensioners?

... and themselves.

Ilovecheese

I really dislike the expression "politics of envy" I am sorry that the tax (NI) rise is being carried solely by working people. An income tax rise would have been a fairer solution, we all should chip in if we have the means.

I agree an income tax rise would have been fairer all round.

I really dislike the expression "politics of envy" I am sorry that the tax (NI) rise is being carried solely by working people. An income tax rise would have been a fairer solution, we all should chip in if we have the means.

People are going out less, of course they are, and they are doing the right thing.