IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Economics, Business and Finance
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags budget , pensions , tax-relief

Reply
Old 15th October 2018, 04:40 PM   #1
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 34,989
Pensions Tax-Relief Thresholds

There is an Autumn budget due end of October 2018. Chancellor, Philip Hammond is strongly expected to decrease the tax-relief threshold from £40K per tax year, to just £30K.

This will affect self-employed people, for example, who've ploughed their profits back into their business, and then plough them into a pension fund in the years leading up to their retirement.

Is it fair to target people maximising their savings?

Quote:
Pension tax relief is a bonus paid by the government when you save into a pension to incentivise saving for your future. Pension savers get paid a top-up from the government, which is set according to their highest rate of income tax. For most of the UK this means: Basic-rate taxpayers get a 20% top-up on what they save Higher-rate taxpayers can claim 40% pension tax relief Additional-rate taxpayers can claim 45% pension tax relief.

Read more: https://www.which.co.uk/news/2018/10...eing-scrapped/ - Which?
__________________
who claims the soulless
Who speaks for the forgotten dead

~ Danzig

Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 04:49 AM   #2
Francesca R
Girl
 
Francesca R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London EC1
Posts: 19,046
(I know this is a really old thread, and that Hammond in the UK stepped back from reducing pension tax relief)

Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
There is an Autumn budget due end of October 2018. Chancellor, Philip Hammond is strongly expected to decrease the tax-relief threshold from £40K per tax year, to just £30K. [ . . . ] Is it fair to target people maximising their savings?
It is "fair" (not everyone agrees but this is the metric) to target people with a lot of savings, because they have greater ability to fund the government. But someone who maximises their savings usually suffers less tax than someone who doesn't before and after any such change as this. Tax relief on pension saving has been coming down persistently for years, but it is still net tax relief. There's almost no tax relief on spending money instead (there is for making charitable donations)

Most people would think there is a point beyond which it is unfair to remove the tax relief on retirement saving, but then again many people who see that someone else is affected by any particular tinkering with the system will think it's OK, particularly if they actually benefit. Objective (impartial) fairness requires a level of indifference that all those affected do not have, and even then fairness is about ideas not facts.
Francesca R is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 06:42 AM   #3
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 20,952
I don't understand why the government is putting any money at all into pension funds. If savers are making "after tax" contributions then that sounds like churn to me.

Surely the fairest system would be to just make contributions into a pension fund fully tax deductible (and any income earned by the fund tax free) while any withdrawals would be fully taxable income.
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 07:06 AM   #4
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 69,914
Originally Posted by Francesca R View Post
(I know this is a really old thread, and that Hammond in the UK stepped back from reducing pension tax relief)



It is "fair" (not everyone agrees but this is the metric) to target people with a lot of savings, because they have greater ability to fund the government. But someone who maximises their savings usually suffers less tax than someone who doesn't before and after any such change as this. Tax relief on pension saving has been coming down persistently for years, but it is still net tax relief. There's almost no tax relief on spending money instead (there is for making charitable donations)



Most people would think there is a point beyond which it is unfair to remove the tax relief on retirement saving, but then again many people who see that someone else is affected by any particular tinkering with the system will think it's OK, particularly if they actually benefit. Objective (impartial) fairness requires a level of indifference that all those affected do not have, and even then fairness is about ideas not facts.
Fairness is always about ideas, not facts.

Otherwise you end up saying things like it was fair for Germany to carve out lebensraum in Poland, because that's where the land was. Fact!
__________________
There is no Antimemetics Division.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 07:15 AM   #5
Francesca R
Girl
 
Francesca R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London EC1
Posts: 19,046
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Fairness is always about ideas, not facts.
Yes.
Francesca R is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 07:20 AM   #6
Francesca R
Girl
 
Francesca R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London EC1
Posts: 19,046
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
I don't understand why the government is putting any money at all into pension funds. If savers are making "after tax" contributions then that sounds like churn to me.
It isn't putting money in to (occupational) pensions it is relieving the tax it would otherwise have levied on the money folks put into them. But generally reducing the amount of this relief.
Francesca R is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 07:36 AM   #7
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 20,952
Originally Posted by Francesca R View Post
It isn't putting money in to (occupational) pensions it is relieving the tax it would otherwise have levied on the money folks put into them. But generally reducing the amount of this relief.
That makes a little more sense.

I was mislead by the article which said, "Pension tax relief is a bonus paid by the government when you save into a pension to incentivise saving for your future".
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 07:39 AM   #8
Francesca R
Girl
 
Francesca R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London EC1
Posts: 19,046
That's the same doublespeak that would say that tax cuts are a gift/subsidy. It's used all the time all over the place.
Francesca R is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 07:53 AM   #9
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 20,952
Originally Posted by Francesca R View Post
That's the same doublespeak that would say that tax cuts are a gift/subsidy. It's used all the time all over the place.
It's not exactly the same. A discount on the tax that somebody would otherwise be required to pay for whatever reason is a gift/subsidy - unless it is an unconditional discount that applies to everybody. "Pay" implies actually handing money over.

I get your point about doublespeak however. Politicians are apt to describe a discount as a "payment " to make it sound more generous.
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 07:58 AM   #10
Francesca R
Girl
 
Francesca R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London EC1
Posts: 19,046
I'm rather absolutist on this and disagree--a refund of tax isn't a gift unless paying the tax in the first place was a gift, which it wasn't.
Francesca R is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 01:28 PM   #11
Aber
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,097
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
Surely the fairest system would be to just make contributions into a pension fund fully tax deductible (and any income earned by the fund tax free) while any withdrawals would be fully taxable income.
For clarity: Yes that is the general rule in the UK.

The wrinkle is how it works in practice under the PAYE system.

To simplify things payments into pension funds are assumed to be net of basic rate tax (20%) ie pay in £80, and it is assumed that the payment is really a pension contribution of £100 and the pension provider recovers £20 from the government. No other adjustment is needed for basic rate taxpayers.

If you are a higher rate (40%) taxpayer, you pay in £80, and the pension provider recovers £20 from the government. On your tax return you state that you made a pension contribution of £100. You should have paid net £60, but actually paid net £80, so the government pays the difference back to you as a tax refund.

Tax relief for higher rate taxpayers is expensive for the government, both in timing (tax relief now, recovery 30 years in the future) and because relief on contributions is at 40% while it is likely that the tax on pensions in payment will be only 20%. Therefore all the attempts on limitations on tax reliefs on contributions.
Aber is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 06:46 PM   #12
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 20,952
Originally Posted by Aber View Post
To simplify things payments into pension funds are assumed to be net of basic rate tax (20%) ie pay in £80, and it is assumed that the payment is really a pension contribution of £100 and the pension provider recovers £20 from the government.
That is what I mean by "churn".

The simpler way would be that the payer puts in £100 and gets £20 knocked off their tax bill. The PAYE scales can easily be adjusted to cover this and the pension fund doesn't have to hit the government for anything.
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 06:49 PM   #13
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 20,952
Originally Posted by Francesca R View Post
I'm rather absolutist on this and disagree--a refund of tax isn't a gift unless paying the tax in the first place was a gift, which it wasn't.
It sounds like you believe that "taxation is theft" (which it probably is).

Regardless, there is no difference in the bottom line if you get a discount on your taxes or you pay the normal rate of tax and get a handout from the government. in practice, the latter involves churn and probably time delays as well.
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2019, 04:24 AM   #14
Francesca R
Girl
 
Francesca R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London EC1
Posts: 19,046
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
It sounds like you believe that "taxation is theft" (which it probably is).
No, just compulsory (unlike gifts)
Francesca R is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th May 2019, 08:37 AM   #15
Aber
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,097
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
The simpler way would be that the payer puts in £100 and gets £20 knocked off their tax bill. The PAYE scales can easily be adjusted to cover this and the pension fund doesn't have to hit the government for anything.
In practice that is not simpler.

Under PAYE, basic rate taxpayers don't have to submit tax returns at all as it is assumed that everything goes through the employers payroll, and any pension contributions (outside employer's schemes) are done net of basic rate tax.
Aber is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Economics, Business and Finance

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:03 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.