Retirement

[Lord Tyrion]

Perhaps it would be fairer if the tax rate for pensioners with incomes beyond £35k are doubled .. sounds mean but most won’t have mortgages and can holiday anytime of the year so don’t have enforced costs

Why penalise those who have done exactly what you are told to do. Save, put money aside for old age, don't be a burden on the state. Do all of that and we will nail you big time. That doesn't add up. As others have said, they will already be taxed, don't hammer them more.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Housing benefit goes to the owner of the property not the poor people living in that property.
The working tax payers' money goes to support those who have multi-property ownership.

…and unlike mortgaged home-owners who have to find the extra money from their income when the rate goes up, landlords can simply hike the monthly rental. They should be like the rest of us home owners and have to find additional money from their existing income, or find additional source of income that isn’t the rental already being paid - alternatively a strict limit on what landlords can pass on tied in with tightening up of laws around ‘no fault eviction‘.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Personal income allowance for 2023/24 is £12,570.
Everyone pays tax on income above this - pensioners included.

And

The personal allowance reduces by £1 for every £2 of income above £100,000. The personal allowance is lost if taxable income exceeds £125,140 (2023/24).

I’d happily lose that £1 for every £2.

I was looking forward to an extra £203/week from end August…forgetting that it would only be about £162. Anyway…that £162 means that my Mrs can stop her P/T work…or more likely cut down to 1 day/week as she loves the job.

 

[PJ87]

@Red devil just got this from the pensions meeting

On Funding as of 30 September the funding was 86.9% on the Technical Provisions basis and
111.6% on the updated side letter basis (basically on how well the shared and Guilts are currently doing). Total assets were £13.9bn
Current expectations are that we remain over 100% funded and will have a
surplus in excess of £1bn at current date. The December quarter end funding
update is expected to be received later this month.



yet our pension was under threat of change last 2 years to "save cost"

bear in mind my pension lent my company 100 million few years back

please keep your greedy hands off our pensions!!

why can't workers have good pensions? Especially when they are proven to fund themselves

 

[harpo_72]

Why penalise those who have done exactly what you are told to do. Save, put money aside for old age, don't be a burden on the state. Do all of that and we will nail you big time. That doesn't add up. As others have said, they will already be taxed, don't hammer them more.

It’s a fair point but the counter would be did they pay enough tax and maintain the system during their lifetime.. did they keep voting for the government that advocated spending cuts and low tax?

 

[harpo_72]

Given that the older you are, the more likely you are to vote, the party who introduced something like that would be annihilated at the next election.

Ah is it not policy to get a massive majority on false promises and then do as you please ? Or have I misinterpreted the last 15 years ?

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Ah is it not policy to get a massive majority on false promises and then do as you please ? Or have I misinterpreted the last 15 years ?

…careful…

 

[harpo_72]

…and unlike mortgaged home-owners who have to find the extra money from their income when the rate goes up, landlords can simply hike the monthly rental. They should be like the rest of us home owners and have to find additional money from their existing income, or find additional source of income that isn’t the rental already being paid - alternatively a strict limit on what landlords can pass on tied in with tightening up of laws around ‘no fault eviction‘.

Landlords or second home owners with buy to let mortgages are currently stuffed. You cannot just remove a tenant who doesn’t pay .. they can sit there as long as they please at your cost.
You have to maintain a property despite them abusing or over using items such as dishwashers, fridges , etc..
You have to give them 2months notice of an increase.
The law should be all renters will have their rates increased in line with landlord’s mortgage rate …

As currently we have a bunch of people who are wholly unaware of the cost of living and are being supported by others.

 

[harpo_72]

…careful…

Yes it’s a fine line … I know

 

[Lord Tyrion]

It’s a fair point but the counter would be did they pay enough tax and maintain the system during their lifetime.. did they keep voting for the government that advocated spending cuts and low tax?

If they paid the tax rate asked of them then there is nothing more that can be done (I speak as someone who has been on PAYE all of his life so I am not an advocate of people avoiding tax.) As to the latter part, that is not how we work

 

[Lord Tyrion]

Incidentally, we are just about, probably, keeping on the right side of this. Let's keep it that way so the chat can continue without posts being removed etc.

 

[PJ87]

If they paid the tax rate asked of them then there is nothing more that can be done (I speak as someone who has been on PAYE all of his life so I am not an advocate of people avoiding tax.) As to the latter part, that is not how we work

.what I will say on PAYE taxes is get rid of the 100k limit with the losing personal allowance

Everyone should have that

Over 100k tax me at 45% off the bat, no sliding scale

It's why people pay into pensions, do other schemes to stay under the 100k because you lose so much at it

Like free childcare allowance, including 15 free hours. Which is worth 2k a year for the allowance and £7200 in free hours

That's per child

So if you have young kids why would you let your wage go above 99k when at 100k your going to be 9000 per kid worse off. Plus you need to then earn that money to cover which is then taxed higher ofc so it's basically 16k you need to find per year

 

[Lord Tyrion]

So if you have young kids why would you let your wage go above 99k when at 100k your going to be 9000 per kid worse off. Plus you need to then earn that money to cover which is then taxed higher ofc so it's basically 16k you need to find per year

Not something I have ever had to worry about . I'm also not going to worry about those who are in that predicament, if you can call it that. Not at that wage.

 

[harpo_72]

If they paid the tax rate asked of them then there is nothing more that can be done (I speak as someone who has been on PAYE all of his life so I am not an advocate of people avoiding tax.) As to the latter part, that is not how we work

The tax rate would have been set by the political party of the time, their method of generating revenue would have set tax levels and also their cost cutting that avoided paying for maintenance of services.
In the end we all have a choice, and yes you could say voting for taxation is like turkey’s voting for Christmas.. in the end it boils down to the choices that were made and one can only strip it back to the basic truth … not enough was paid in and we are a selfish society.. we have takers at several different levels and we don’t address them harshly enough from those who commit benefit fraud or those that use evasion techniques (closing loopholes)

 

[Deleted member 29109]

Landlords or second home owners with buy to let mortgages are currently stuffed. You cannot just remove a tenant who doesn’t pay .. they can sit there as long as they please at your cost.
You have to maintain a property despite them abusing or over using items such as dishwashers, fridges , etc..
You have to give them 2months notice of an increase.
The law should be all renters will have their rates increased in line with landlord’s mortgage rate …

As currently we have a bunch of people who are wholly unaware of the cost of living and are being supported by others.

We sold our BTLs as it was becoming a nightmare to manage and the hassle wasn’t worth the return.

We rented to mostly younger people and people with lower incomes. We very rarely put rent up during tenancy and always fixed anything that broke immediately. We mostly had good tenants, but a couple were an absolute nightmare and the damage they caused cost a fortune.

We always wanted the tenants to feel the house was their home, and if they looked after it, we left them alone. We had no communication with one tenant for nearly 5 years, and the house was decorated better when they moved out than when they moved in. We gave them double their deposit back as they were moving out to buy their first house.
On the flip side we had to replace a kitchen, bathroom, all carpets and redecorate when one moved out. They left a not saying keep the deposit to pay for cleaning. Thanks

 

[PJ87]

We sold our BTLs as it was becoming a nightmare to manage and the hassle wasn’t worth the return.

We rented to mostly younger people and people with lower incomes. We very rarely put rent up during tenancy and always fixed anything that broke immediately. We mostly had good tenants, but a couple were an absolute nightmare and the damage they caused cost a fortune.

We always wanted the tenants to feel the house was their home, and if they looked after it, we left them alone. We had no communication with one tenant for nearly 5 years, and the house was decorated better when they moved out than when they moved in. We gave them double their deposit back as they were moving out to buy their first house.
On the flip side we had to replace a kitchen, bathroom, all carpets and redecorate when one moved out. They left a not saying keep the deposit to pay for cleaning. Thanks

That is AMAZING I really wish more landlords were like you

My friends just had to move her landlord selling up

The house was a death trap he did nothing to fix it. Wouldn't let them fix it either

He now is trying to charge them damages when they left the house in a nicer state than when they moved in

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Landlords or second home owners with buy to let mortgages are currently stuffed. You cannot just remove a tenant who doesn’t pay .. they can sit there as long as they please at your cost.
You have to maintain a property despite them abusing or over using items such as dishwashers, fridges , etc..
You have to give them 2months notice of an increase.
The law should be all renters will have their rates increased in line with landlord’s mortgage rate …

As currently we have a bunch of people who are wholly unaware of the cost of living and are being supported by others.

All accepted…but homeowners have (should have) their ability to pay monthly mortgage payments stress-tested against increases in rate, and so when the rate goes up they have to pay it out of existing income or pull their belts in, they have nobody to pass the rate increase on to. Why should that not apply for buy to let owners. If they can’t afford an increase in rate then should they be in that business. It’s not the renters fault that the landlord may have over-stretched himself.

Just asking. I get the issues the landlords have to put up with.

Of course this all goes back to government and council affordable housing building policy and funding. And as already pointed out, landlords ever increasing their rents to the point of unaffordability will result in serious housing issues when the huge swathe of current renters about to reach retirement age find they have no way of paying the rent, or find it a massive struggle. What’s going to happen? Landlords giving 2months notice to vacate to 66-70 yr old couples who can’t pay their rent?

 

[pendodave]

As currently we have a bunch of people who are wholly unaware of the cost of living and are being supported by otothers.

I mean, yes, but we probably have a completely different group of people in mind...

 

[harpo_72]

Or we have a bunch of people buying houses for other people…?

Quite possibly or they have a retirement strategy which has a better return than current fiscal assets … but that’s now becoming debatable.

 

[IanM]

Housing benefit goes to the owner of the property not the poor people living in that property.

Guess why? I remember dealing with all sorts of issues relating to folk not using their housing benefit for housing! (Of course that's not EVERY case, but it was significant)