The last budget

[tiggerai]

Paid maternity leave to rise to a year. That's nice. Who pays for it? As a small business I have been put off hiring because of the costs. I couldn't afford to pay someone to be at home for a year. Even at a reduced rate. Hence if I was to recognise a need to hire I would be automatically wary of hiring a woman of child bearing age. Except maybe on a rolling contract basis. This will do nothing to aid the cause of equality for women in the workplace. As for paternity leave. Pffft, bonding with the newborn? Most blokes would take the chance for an extra few rounds of Call of Duty while being paid.

1. Paid Maternity leave is only paid for 6 months.
2. You may be missing out on hiring some bloody good talent. I would be wary of working for someone who had that kind of outlook. Be aware that people can take you to industrial tribunals for that kind of comment.
3. Paternity leave is a big step forward. Means that the woman can get back to work if she wants to. (and what's stopping the woman from sitting at home playing call of duty instead?)

[nichomach]

And statutory maternity pay is reimbursed by the state anyway; small businesses get 100% back plus help with employee NI contributions over the period, and even larger organizations get 92% or more back. As far as the blokes taking the chance for a bit of extra CoD, statutory maternity (and thus paternity) pay is in the following amounts:

"If your average gross earnings are £79.00 a week or more, Statutory Maternity Pay is paid for 26 weeks:
First 6 weeks 90% of your weekly earnings with no upper limit
Remaining 20 weeks £102.80 or 90% of your average weekly earnings if this is less than £102.80"

So I don't think you're going to be upgrading to that X850XT-PE off it, RVF....

[Rave]

In brief answer to rich. I am well hammered by the inheritance tax band and I really don't consider myself in the top 4% of the country. Far from it.

The majority of estates, more than 96%, do not have to pay any inheritance tax because they are below the threshold.

So, either the Inland Revenue are lying or your estate is amongst the top 4% most valuable in the country. There's no other explanation.

Anyway, you're 'well hammered' by it are you? Let's do some back of a fag packet calculations then. I assume if you're significantly affected that makes your estate worth a lot more than £265,000, so we'll say £400,000. I'm not sure how many kids you have, three is it? So, If inheritance tax was abolished tomorrow and you died the day after, your kids would inherit about £133,000 each. Paying the 40% Inheritance Tax on the top £137,000, they get a smidge over £115,000 each. So your kids get a mere £115,000 instead of £133,000? Forgive me if I don't shed a tear for them.

My comment on the £50, I decided that it wasn't worth claiming as it wouldn't really help my situation much at all I was either going to go down or rise up on my own and did it off my own back. In fact I was so lazy and grasping I took nothing from welfare, used my own resources (every penny I had and plenty I didn't as well)

Right, well had you taken the money you would have had to borrow a bit less. I can't see your point at all; you moan about this grasping government taking from us all the time with stealth taxes etc. and yet when they actually offer to give you something back you refuse it.

The idea of peopel improving themselves because there are private houses on council estates is naive imo. We need more council housing not expensive private housing.

The whole point is that it'll be cheap private housing. I agree that councils should also be building more council houses for people who are in no position to buy whatever the cost of the house.

For my sins one of the jobs I did, albeit briiefly, was 'financial advisor' and inheritance tax planning was one of the things I got involved in. A very murky area. The things I have stated above are to the best of my recollection true. I'm not sure on the time limit that one has in which to pay the tax before the estate reverts but most resort to getting out a bank loan if they can to pay the tax before liquidating assets.

Read the links I provided earlier (I just corrected one). Interest is chargeable on any accounts not settled within six months, and penalties become payable if they're not settled withing a year, unless there are mitigating circumstances.

I could find no evidence that the estate would at any time revert to the crown.

There are plenty of poor southerners it seems my sarcasm escaped you.

I know, I'm one of them. Your sarcasm did indeed escape me.

[DavidM]

The government are shooting emselves in the foot taxing fags even more, up to nealry £5 a pack for some brands, are people gonna pay that or £25 for 200 from the shady bloke in the pub, I know which I choose.

Me too... I don't smoke

[nichomach]

I DO smoke, and buy my cigarettes legally, so it's not inevitable that people will cheat. It's a choice; buy legally and pay the tax, or be a criminal.

[Rave]

....or buy them legitimately from France or Belgium. It's swings and roundabouts for me, I live in one of the most expensive cities in the world and haven't a hope in hell of buying my own home, but at least I can get to the Channel Tunnel in a little over an hour.

[Kumagoro]

i dont really know what to think. do i think the tories would do any better, no way
they will say anything to get into power it feels.
i think the libs will get more seats than ever which is a good thing a bit more of a spread in parliment will be good.

it seems gordon must be a fan of turkey twizlers seeing as no mention of school dinners haha

[RVF500]

2. You may be missing out on hiring some bloody good talent. I would be wary of working for someone who had that kind of outlook. Be aware that people can take you to industrial tribunals for that kind of comment.

I may be missing out on good talent. On the other hand I may save myself a headache. I don't employ, much as I would like to. I also believe in paying top dollar for top people. I like the idea of contract working primarily because that's the way I work myself and I'm very comfortable with it. It allows me a degree of flexibility that I wouldn't have as a permanent employee. It is also more tax efficient. Ultimately if I do employ it will be on my terms. After all I want to run a profitable organisation not a charity. As does anyone else who runs a business. I'm simply not big enough to offer large scale benefits to employees and actually believe I could give mt best deal by paying gross and letting the employee decide how they want to spend their money. Others may disagree.

Not quite sure how I would be dragged in front of a tribunal for saying that legislation makes me wary and may well make others wary of employing a certain person. Though Nicho has pointed out something that I didn't know which basically says that small businesses are protected. So I stand corrected.

Rave, the figures are such that I don't really want to go into but the amount that I would have got from the welfare would ultimately have made little or no difference to me so I decided not to take it. Left it in the pot for someone who needed it more than me. I gambled and won. If I'd lost then I would have sold the house, paid the debts and started again. Doesn't stop me from thinking that the govt is grasping.

[schmunk]

Well, the increase in the Stamp Duty Land Tax threshold means that I have saved my client some money on his £65,000/year rental agreement!! and

[Swafe]

I DO smoke, and buy my cigarettes legally, so it's not inevitable that people will cheat. It's a choice; buy legally and pay the tax, or be a criminal.

I was never sure of this, does it make you a criminal for buying dodgy ciggies ? I mean, if they come in from say France, and the tax has been paid to the french government, is there anything wrong with buying them ? Your not dodging taxes, your just paying a lower rate to a different government.

[nichomach]

There's nothing wrong with buying cigs in the EU for personal use, but buying them there and reselling them here is basically illegal (evasion of duty etc).

[Rave]

It's completely illegal in fact; technically even buying stuff for your friends and passing it on at cost price is illegal. In practical terms that sort of thing is very hard to police though obviously.

[RVF500]

Inheritance tax....tell me why my kids should pay tax on goods and property that I have paid tax on all my life? 94% escaping inheritance tax? Not sure how they came by their figures but I wouldn't mind betting they are represented in a manner best designed to promote the policy. They could of course simply be wrong. Wouldn't be the first time.

I wouldn't want you to shed a tear for them anyway rave. They know how to make the best of a situation, they've been poor too (the 2 oldest have). So have I. I grew up in a council flat in a 1 parent family. I was also homeless for a while so being poor is nothing new to me. In fact we stood and watched single parent families being housed while we waited. Though the lib dem housing officer did say to my wife that if she left me then they would house her and the kids. Forgive me if I don't vote lib dem. I value my family too much.

I've been fairly wealthy too. I know which I prefer. I work hard to provide the best grounding for my growing family and to keep them in the best manner that I can whilst preparing for as comfortable retirement for myself and my wife as possible. I don't want to be a burden to my kids or the state. Why should I, or anyone like me, be penalised for working hard? Why, because I work hard and improve my standards, should I be penalised more for buying a nicer property? After all it vacates a property further down the ladder for someone else. If you saved hard to buy a nicer car how would you feel if the govt slapped an additional tax on that? Ok, you're a lib dem, you might go for that but I hope you see my point. Stamp duty should be flat, actually I think it should be abolished along with inheritance tax.

Interestingly most people who yell loudest about those with more should pay more are not going to be affected by such payment increases. Tell me, does a higher rate tax payer who loses their job get benefits in line with the greater contribution they have made while working or do they just get the same as someone who may never have contributed? By which I do not mean someone who has not been capable of contribution. If income tax was flat people who get more pay more anyway. however, my big beef is with stealth and class taxes as opposed to income tax.

Now, my stance on the private housing on council estates comes from personal experience. I moved out of council/housing association into a private house. This house happened to be in the very next street and was a new developement. My erstwhile neighbours for some reason decided that I now thought I was too good for them. This was transmitted to their kids 3 of whom decided to set upon my son when he went round to play with his 'friends'. They actually came off worse in this exchange I'm happy to say. I hadn't changed towards them, they had towards me. It was an us and them situation the same type of situation that I believe would arise if private housing was built on council estates. Strangely this kind of thing doesn't seem to arise when tenants buy their council homes. Maybe because outwardly nothing changes. I dunno. Inexpensive, affordable housing needs to be built. I gree wholeheartedly. But should be built on private estates.

[RVF500]

Ah well, I can no longer moan about tax as I'm off to Malaysia to work and after a year will be free of UK income tax (providing the project goes that long) which is retrospective.

Before you all cheer, I'll be logging on to tweak rave's nose, argue with nicho and annoy dabeenster et al with my mere presence .

[Kumagoro]

you have to be out a full tax year you know. so if you go after april you will have to stay effectively two years.

[schmunk]

Ah well, I can no longer moan about tax as I'm off to Malaysia to work and after a year will be free of UK income tax (providing the project goes that long) which is retrospective.

Before you all cheer, I'll be logging on to tweak rave's nose, argue with nicho and annoy dabeenster et al with my mere presence .

You will need to be out of the UK for a complete tax year i.e. Leave BEFORE 6 April 2005 and return AFTER 5 April 2006 to be non-resident. However, if you leave part way through a year but expect to be non-resident for the entirety of the next year, you can claim a split year and be non-resident for the part of the first year you are out, i.e.:

Leave July 2005 and return May 2006 - You will be resident for the full period

Leave July 2005 and return May 2007 - You will be non-resident for 06/07 AND can claim split-year non-residency for July 2005 to April 2006 for 05/06

I'll PM you my bill...