Starmer braces country for tax hikes in Budget

IFA Magazine ^ | 29 Oct | Meg Bratley

[RandFan]

Laura Suter, director of personal finance at AJ Bell, comments:

“Keir Starmer’s pre-Budget speech made it pretty clear that significant tax hikes are on the horizon – no surprises there. Labour have consistently trailed that tax hikes are needed to plug the now-infamous £22 billion black hole and to boost public spending. But what is still as clear as mud is exactly how Starmer defines ‘working people’, after backing himself into a corner to protect this group of people.

“Having set out to protect the working man, he still refused to clarify whether that includes people who earn money from investing, being landlords, own their own companies and are paid through dividends, or myriad other workers who aren’t on conventional PAYE. What’s more, while so-called ‘working people’ might be protected from tax rises in their pay packet, what about tax hits on the petrol they use in their car to get to work, the services they rely on, or the post-work drink they have down the pub?

“It’s a bit of a mixed message; he promises to protect average earners while also hinting that more tax increases might be necessary down the line, beyond this Budget. This approach could end up hitting middle-income earners if they’re swept up in the push for revenue.

“The employer National Insurance hike seems like it will be the headline change, but let’s be honest it’s unlikely to be the only one. With rising costs already challenging many businesses, a National Insurance increase could strain employers further – and there’s a good chance some of that burden will filter down to employees, which further complicates the promise to shield ‘working people’. So, while Starmer talks about stability and long-term growth, the lack of clarity leaves businesses and families bracing for potentially prolonged and widespread hikes...

[italianquaker]

Good give it to them hard, pain is the best lesson

[cuban leaf]

Kentucky.

I see the US like the EU. That is, 50 separate “mostly sovereign” countries that are members of a single federation who’s constitution overrides theirs when there is a difference.

I see Kentucky as completely different from New Jersey, though we both speak the same language. I can carry a concealed gun almost anywhere in my country. In New Jersey it would land me in prison.

[your other brother]

Socialists will never stop boosting public spending until they have drained evert dime out of the economy. they believe the government is or at least ought to be the economy and when they get there everything will be distributed equitably except of course their own portion which will be a little more equitable than the others. In the UK the Conservatives are hopeless and Labour is willfully incompetent. And Scotland? Don’t let them leave, throw them out.

[Moltke]

The thing is, though, they did not really vote for this. Labour managed to get roughly 60% of the seats with 30% of the vote.

They suffer for their election system (which also has its upsides in ensuring majorities instead of many parties getting some seats and not being able to form a stable government).