Monday, 22 July 2013

Time for a real benefits cap

Here's an idea - why doesn't the Government limit the amount of tax relief available to anyone individual to £26000 a year. There seems to be a dreadful 'entitlement culture' amongst some better off people who seem to think the taxpayers should fund their lifestyle choices - so for example an wealthy individual can claim tax relief on pension contributions of up to £40,000 a year.

Clearly the ordinary family  we hear so much about these days can't possibly be in a position to put aside £40,000 a year towards a pension, let alone claim tax back.

Incredibly the individual lifetime allowance is £1.25 million.  An individual putting aside every penny of their £26,000 a year income for 45 years would still have plenty of their lifetime allowance left.   Someone on minimum wage would have to put in every penny for 114 years to reach the cap.

So people on minimum wage and on average incomes don't benefit from these tax breaks, but the very richest, those who need it least get the most help.
There seems to be a "dependency culture" amongst the wealthy.

Oddly you never seem to read about it in the Daily Mail.  You never get articles pointing out the landlords charging excessive rents with 40 properties all being funded by housing benefit - ie the taxpayer. 

You never hear of the Tesco subsidy - where the tax payers fork out billions in tax credits so people who work for Tescos can afford to eat and rent somewhere while Tesco avoids tax by pretending it's CD's are sold from the channel islands.

Tose of us who know about these things realsie that Housing Benefit goes to the Landlord - not the tennant - so if the Government wants to reduce costs rather than saying tennants can claim only £26,000 a year - lets make the rule the same for landlords.  If they find that they can't afford their buy-to-let properties without the huge state funded subsidy they get, then they can sell them off.  We can't expect the taxpayer to fund them. If this was British Leyland, the Conseravtives would be going up the wall. Yet here we are with private sector landlords provding a shoddy, expensive service and being funded by the taxpayer to do so.

If the benefits cap is good enough for the poor- it's sure as hell good enough for the rich.

No comments: