Winter Fuel Payment what would be fair

dayvidg

Why not just make it taxable? That way the reduction would be graduated with no 'cliff edge'.

That's the most sensible way to do it.

Mamie

Boz

I was surprised to read that WFA was being paid to pensioners living abroad. Do ex-pats in Spain really need it?
Pensioners are seen as Tory and their vote not very important to Labour.

The WFA is not paid to pensioners in Spain, France, Gibralter, Malta, Cyprus or Greece. It is paid in Scandinavian countries, Latvia, Lithuania and other countries known for their multitudes of migrant UK pensioners (not).

And, Boz, you’ll doubtless be even more surprised to learn that WFAs were stopped for British people living in Spain 9 years ago !
And maybe get your facts right before trying to blame anyone other than the government for this latest completely irresponsible idea! Older people everywhere do get cold - not everyone lives on the beach!

The majoirty of well off pensioners are not in the higher tax bands, so looking to them to cover the withdrawal of WFA wont even touch the cost of it.

The median pensioner household income (meaning 50% of pensioners get more, and 50% get less) was just under £28,000 lst year. The vast majority of the upper income half of pension households will have an income between £28,000 and £50,000 approx. and will be on the basic tax rate.

Elusivebutterfly

I think the same household income level as Child Benefit would be fair. A lot of younger people were complaining about rich pensioners getting an unnecessary benefit so this would make it equal.
Being household based, rather than individual, is fair. Very few single female pensioners have a high pension. Mine is above Pension Credit but below minimum wage, which I think would be the same for most women.

Do you know how high the child benefit cap is?

growstuff

How about increasing the state pension by a similar amount and taxing it?

How about just paying a decent state pension, then only those on pensions credit getting it?

When the WFA was first introduced people like Anne Widdecombe were saying that they didn't need it. The argument then was that it would cost more to sort out those who didn't need it than it would save in the payments to them.

M0nica

The majoirty of well off pensioners are not in the higher tax bands, so looking to them to cover the withdrawal of WFA wont even touch the cost of it.

The median pensioner household income (meaning 50% of pensioners get more, and 50% get less) was just under £28,000 lst year. The vast majority of the upper income half of pension households will have an income between £28,000 and £50,000 approx. and will be on the basic tax rate.

More than you might think are in the higher tax band though.

‘HMRC figures for 2022/23 revealed there were 7.7 million taxpayers aged 65+, with one in 10 of all taxpaying pensioners paying a rate of 40% or more.

This is up from the 5.38 million recorded in 2012/13 where around one in 12 was paying the top rates of tax.’

From Your Money.com

Visgir1

Why not give to people who's Community charge is Band E and under?

I know a few people who live in their old family homes having looked after their parents in retirement.

They are asset rich but cash poor - they couldn't afford that.

I just missed out on pension credit due to receiving a final salary pension however I believe those on the lower income bracket should receive the heating allowance , every little helps I can’t imaging people having to sit in the day with blankets on them to keep warm, that’s a blooming disgrace

and I don’t mind not receiving the heating allowance

I've been looking at the projection for my bills over the next six months. Even with the increase in fuel bills and not receiving WFA, I'll still be paying less for fuel this winter than I did last winter. How did people manage last winter? The WFA was due to be less than last year anyway.

As I keep saying. Get rid of all the seperate little extras pensioners get, whether, WFA, subsidised bus travel or prescriptions. Increase the Pension Credit level by £30-40 then situations like this would never arise.

I would also add that many pensioner households with high incomes consist of 2 pensioners with good, but not higher tax rate level pensions. They could have household incomes of £60-70,000 , and more.- and neither would be paying higher rate tax.

M0nica

As I keep saying. Get rid of all the seperate little extras pensioners get, whether, WFA, subsidised bus travel or prescriptions. Increase the Pension Credit level by £30-40 then situations like this would never arise.

I would also add that many pensioner households with high incomes consist of 2 pensioners with good, but not higher tax rate level pensions. They could have household incomes of £60-70,000 , and more.- and neither would be paying higher rate tax.

I think that's quite simplistic though. People with small occupational pensions (which weren't free) can easily find that paying into them has disqualified them from PC, so increases are irrelevant and losing the 'little extras' makes a huge difference. That's exactly the situation for many people when it comes to the WFP.

Doodledog You are not correct. You are not exclude from PC because you have a private or occupational pension. Currently PC is granted to anyone with an income from all sources that is under just over £215 a week(for a single person).

If PC went up to £275, anyone who currently has an income from all sources of more that £215 but less than £275 would qualify for PC. That means any single person who currently has an income up to £60 a week more than the current rate would now qualify for help. That would include an awful lot of people who are currently on the margin. There are always gping to be people on the margin, whatever rate you set PC at.

Everyone on here making suggestions, but why? It’s not going to change because it has been decided. There is no longer anything anyone can do about it, because that point has passed.
To be honest I didn’t have any problem about it being paid to everyone. People pay their taxes all their lives and receive a miserable state pension in this country, so if they got a couple of hundred pounds in WFA, I had no problem with that. The amount saved is only about one point four billion. Peanuts in government expenditure. There are far more worthy targets, but they were excused.
Anyway, it doesn’t matter whatever suggestions we put forward, it ain’t gonna happen folks.

Anyway, it doesn’t matter whatever suggestions we put forward, it ain’t gonna happen folks

Judging by how Rachel Reeves was received at the Labour Party Conference and how very pleased she looked with herself then that is absolutely correct!

My thought was that she wouldn't worry too much if Sir Keir did step down because she's just waiting for the top job.

M0nica

Doodledog You are not correct. You are not exclude from PC because you have a private or occupational pension. Currently PC is granted to anyone with an income from all sources that is under just over £215 a week(for a single person).

If PC went up to £275, anyone who currently has an income from all sources of more that £215 but less than £275 would qualify for PC. That means any single person who currently has an income up to £60 a week more than the current rate would now qualify for help. That would include an awful lot of people who are currently on the margin. There are always gping to be people on the margin, whatever rate you set PC at.

I didn't say that though. I said that an OP may bring people over the PC level (as, of course, may other sources of income - it doesn't matter - the point is that other income can bring you over PC level). If someone is above PC level an increase in it is irrelevant, and yes - there will always be those on the margins.

I can see sense in removing allowances and adding them to the pension, but I don't think that in the case of the WFP it will help. Apart from anything else, they were paid in addition to PC, and weren't taxed - adding the to the pension would mean that those on £12500 (or whatever it is) would lose 20% of it, which can't be what was intended.

Well - it's not "peanuts", and I think it worth still having a go. Not to give up.

The key problem for alternatives all along has been admin costs of more complex means testing. My best option has been discussed above, that is raising the level where PC can be claimed.

"There are far more worthy targets, but they were excused" I'm not clear to what you were referring?

(replying to maddyfour)

M0nica

The majoirty of well off pensioners are not in the higher tax bands, so looking to them to cover the withdrawal of WFA wont even touch the cost of it.

The median pensioner household income (meaning 50% of pensioners get more, and 50% get less) was just under £28,000 lst year. The vast majority of the upper income half of pension households will have an income between £28,000 and £50,000 approx. and will be on the basic tax rate.

This is interesting M0nica. If this is household income, it will include 1 and 2 person households (not sure of the split). Even where households are at the upper end of that range, may be 2 pensioners and 2 x tax allowance. So no of pensioner higher rate tax payers will be even fewer.

I think the threshold should be higher £300 is a great help to people on basic pension but over for PC

Make it taxable… simple way forward!

Other European countries have a social tariff for energy - so that everyone on low income gets cheaper energy. Many younger people, including people with disabilities, have the same problems with energy costs as pensioners. Social energy tariffs would improve access to fuel for hot water, heating and cooking for everyone.

On the radio this morning, I was in my car, a presenter said that Labour had announced that anyone not claiming but entitled to Pension Credit would receive the WFA. I don't know if this is true or not. I think it should include people who are on housing benefit should receive it. Surely if they can't afford to pay their rent then they wouldn't be able to afford heating!

Keep it universal but tax it