Over-50s could be EXEMPT from income tax in a bid to tempt them back into work

I am 69 and still working 18 hours part-time in a care home doubt I will see anything…(yes worked all through Covid and we were the recipient of people with Covid coming back from hospital,consequently lost quite a few residents) 🤦‍♀️😓

The DM says the idea of over 50s returning to work being exempted from income tax for up to a year is being discussed, along with people not losing benefits - if you believe anything the DM says. Anyone of that age who is able to, but can afford not to, work is fortunate. I can beat your working record by some consider margin btw - and all of it full time. So I understand your feelings.

Considerable, not consider.

I am probably going to be unpopular however, I am not a fan of this alleged proposal

Nor me.

Call me a cynic. This is what the Mail article also says:

‘Last week the PM admitted 'we need to look at how our welfare system is operating', to ensure it is 'incentivising people who can be to be in work'.

Work and Pensions Secretary Mel Stride has been assembling plans to 'rewrite' the benefits system.

He wants to remove 'perverse' incentives for claimants to prove they are too sick to work - instead focusing on what people are able to do.

Disability claims are up 70 per cent since the pandemic, with estimates that the annual cost will rise to £8.2billion by 2027.

A white paper due in the coming months will include reforms to the 'work capability assessment'.’

I read this as saying that the disability claim threshold will be rising. It’s all smoke and mirrors though, because it’s those who can afford to retire early but don’t claim any benefits at all who would benefit the workforce more than the disabled and mentally unwell.

GSM - how lovely to see you back!

Oh, thanks so much!

Casdon

Call me a cynic. This is what the Mail article also says:

‘Last week the PM admitted 'we need to look at how our welfare system is operating', to ensure it is 'incentivising people who can be to be in work'.

Work and Pensions Secretary Mel Stride has been assembling plans to 'rewrite' the benefits system.

He wants to remove 'perverse' incentives for claimants to prove they are too sick to work - instead focusing on what people are able to do.

Disability claims are up 70 per cent since the pandemic, with estimates that the annual cost will rise to £8.2billion by 2027.

A white paper due in the coming months will include reforms to the 'work capability assessment'.’

I read this as saying that the disability claim threshold will be rising. It’s all smoke and mirrors though, because it’s those who can afford to retire early but don’t claim any benefits at all who would benefit the workforce more than the disabled and mentally unwell.

He wants to remove 'perverse' incentives for claimants to prove they are too sick to work - instead focusing on what people are able to do.

That's more or less what Ian Duncan-Smith said.

The problem with such thinking is that whilst it seems a most sensible and logical attitude to take towards disabled and ill people is that what a person "can do" might not be sustainable. While I was undergoing chemotherapy I was able to achieve quite a lot - for about an hour. And then crushing fatigue and nausea took over and I had to lie down. If someone who is disabled is easily able to walk a few metres, it doesn't mean they can do it for hours on end

Then, there is the question of the willingness of employers to cater for the needs of those who are sick or disabled. Friend of mine - willing to work through chemotherapy - ended up shunned by her workmates because they had to carry her load on the days she was off having her infusion. They ultimately complained to their manager who then insisted that these 'chemo-days' were taken from her holiday entitlement. So no holiday breaks for her. I told her that it was probably illegal for the company to do this - but she was too physically and emotionally exhausted to deal with it. So she left the company.

Fine words from the Pensions Secretary. But the reality will be somewhat different.

I do realise that being affected by illness and disability in the workplace is a difficult issue. Particularly where employers are unwilling to ensure fair treatment. I also have sympathy for those that have been forced out of meaningful work and onto benefits. We live in a so-called equal society but reality is very far from that ideal.
Yes, we should focus on what any one can do, but theoretically, someone could return to a job alongside any of us working but have far more fiscal reward. There’s something very wrong there.
(It’d be my luck I’d have to train them in too!).

ExperiencedNotOld

I do realise that being affected by illness and disability in the workplace is a difficult issue. Particularly where employers are unwilling to ensure fair treatment. I also have sympathy for those that have been forced out of meaningful work and onto benefits. We live in a so-called equal society but reality is very far from that ideal.
Yes, we should focus on what any one can do, but theoretically, someone could return to a job alongside any of us working but have far more fiscal reward. There’s something very wrong there.
(It’d be my luck I’d have to train them in too!).

Yes, we should focus on what any one can do, but theoretically, someone could return to a job alongside any of us working but have far more fiscal reward. There’s something very wrong there.

I think it's being looked at through the lens of what will benefit the employer - in terms of helping businesses that are plagued by the lack of staff. I don't even understand TBH why there are so many unfilled vacancies. Is it because of sickness - are there that many people who are ill? Or, possibly, it's because of low-pay?

Maybe what's happened is that the government, in its endeavour to establish a flexible labour market, where workers can be hired and fired at will, has shot itself in the foot. Full-time jobs working for a single employer are now at a premium I think because it's cheaper for employers to employ more people part time rather than one person full time - but that has created its own problems

For millions of people, working nine-to-five for a single employer or being on the payroll is no longer a reality. Instead, they balance various income streams and work independently, job-by-job. (quote: WEF).

Which, naturally, is going to create problems with worker 'availability'. Apart from any other reasons. So now they need to lure people back into work, and they've got to offer an incentive - if you are retired, your wages will be added to your pension income and you will be taxed on the whole amount... some don't think it's worth it.

It's about turning the screw on benefits (subtext: they're all scroungers!) and not legislating to shut down tax avoidance schemes for the wealthy.

I think that there needs to be discrimination (not in a negative sense) about the needs and capacities of individual disabled people.

People with progressing illnesses: cancer is an obvious example, should not be expected to return to work until they have fully recovered, likewise someone who needs a long period of convalesence, after an accident, for example, but people with stable disabilities like amputations probably could go back to work full time, but those with illnesses like MS or RA, where their condition fluctuates and those with mental health problems pose a far greater challenge and, of course, there will always be those for whom working is out of the question.

The problemis that governments, of all hues and sizes like 'one solution fits all' answers to every problem.

COVID has shown the ingenuity of so many companies in their ability to adjust and change their methods of working to keep in business that there really ought to be some practical solutions to this problem

ExperiencedNotOld I’m going to confess my selfish reaction to this. I’ve worked full time for 23 years, part time for 7 whilst my kids were small, am still working at nearly 65, worked without respite during covid, albeit from home and have paid my taxes all my life.

When do I see any benefit from doing everything required?

You won't see any benefit with a daft plan "tempting" you back to work - imo, people should retire when they can afford and wish to retire.

Over-50s could be EXEMPT from income tax ……….

Oh right. Similar to Tory MPs then!!!!

How long after over 50s coming back to work getting a years tax holiday, will some chairty be up and running to say that when the year ends, having to pay tax means that their tax rate leaps from 0% to 22p in one go, and that the government should phase the introduction to tax in over several years so that they can adjust their outgoings to this change?

He wants to remove 'perverse' incentives for claimants to prove they are too sick to work - instead focusing on what people are able to do.

I've always thought that the problem with many of "the unemployed" has more to do with the nature of work than the ability of the individual.

Most people can do something and many of them want to. More flexibility in the workplace might just reduce our unemployment figures and the benefits bill.

Get rid of tax for young people on low wages, they need they help.

I recently had a coversation about retirement with three friends - one in his nineties, one in his eighties and one about the same age as me -late seventies.

The other three all retired in their early fifties. I retired in my seventies. I was quite surprised that I was the only one to have worked beyond the official retirement age.

I was talking to my father in law about this. He has been retired as many years as he was working, this year. On a company final salary pension plus lump sum which he's invested. I will have worked from 17 to 67, with 6 years in HE in between,to retire, so to get to the stage where I can say the same,even discounting the HE years, I would have to be 111 years of age.He doesnt have HE qualifications.I also brought up 2 children whilst working. It is interesting, isn't it? I think it's only becoming harder for the next generation, as well.

Varian I am much the same age and I too was, essentially, forced in to reitrement, in my 50s.

The reason was that in the 1980s and 1990s companies were downsizing massively. Every day companies were announcing restructuring and thousands and thousands of redundancies. I worked for British Gas and it reduced its staff from 150,000 to 75,000. This was for structural and regulatory reasons.

Many companies for financial as well as other reasons, decided the easiest way to do this was by offering older workers incentives to retire early.

I was in my early 50s then and doing very well in my career and initially had no intention of going, but when I looked at the fiancial package available to me, and saw how the opportunities for me were disappearing, and even my current job was under threat. I decided that, even I did not want to go, it was in my best interests to take the money, and the immediate pension and run. So I did.

I had hoped to get another job, possibly less senior, possibly follow up other interests, but in the mid-1990s, 50 year old job hunters, especially women in their 50s were a drug on the market, so after a year job hunting I settled on voluntary work using the skill set that had propelled my career.

Anyway, that is why so many of your friends of the same age retired in their 50s.

I would add that my daughter will be 50 this year and her story could not be more different. Over the past 5 years her career has shot up like a rocket and she has changed her career completely, from working in the media, to working in science and business research.

She nearly doubled her salary when she moved from the media to science research (via an OU degree, obtained while working in the media) and then doubled it again when she moved on at 48. Her age was no problem at all and when she started job hunting, she was inundated with interviews and offers. Coming up to 50, she is on a clearly laid out career progression path and she is seen as someone with a future with her firm. Her experience is the exact opposite of mine.