MPs call for social care tax for over-40s

27 June 2018
Image

Taxpayers aged over 40 should pay a new ‘social care premium’ to fund care costs, two parliamentary committees have said.

The Housing, Communities and Local Government and Health and Social Care Committees' joint report calls for an increase in national insurance or a specific ring-fenced premium to pay for social care.

This premium would be paid for by taxpayers aged over 40s only, as well as by employers.

The committees say that the growing demand for adult social care means reform of the current system is critical. The report slams the current situation as “not fit to respond to the demographic trends of the future” and under “very great and unsustainable strain”.

The government is set to deliver a green paper on this issue in the autumn. It is estimated that in the next financial year there will be a £2.5 billion funding gap for social care.

Clive Betts MP, chair of the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee, comments: "The social care system is in a critical condition and there is an urgent need for more funding both now and in the future to ensure people are properly looked after. While we have set out steps to ease the financial pressure on local authorities delivering the service, reforms at a local level will not be enough if we are to rise to the challenge of providing high-quality care for all those that need it.

“We heard during the inquiry that people would be willing to pay more if there was an absolute guarantee that the extra money would go on social care. Given the huge funding gulf, the government should now take the opportunity to build both a political and public consensus around the need for a new social care premium to secure a fair and sustainable system in the long-term.

“The government must also consider social care in its wider context and ensure a proper joined up approach with other services such as public health and housing."

‘Doing nothing cannot be an option’

Sarah Wollaston MP, chair of the Health and Social Care Committee, adds: "We can no longer delay finding a fair and sustainable settlement for social care. Too many people are being left without the care and support they need and it is time for decisions to be made about how the costs are shared.

This report from MPs across the political spectrum also draws on the informed views of a Citizens’ Assembly in setting out our recommendations to government. Doing nothing cannot be an option." 

 

Comments

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

Everyone should pay more taxes if they want better services.Too many people want a great NHS and improved social care but want someone else to pay for it.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

I would support such an idea subject to1 a guarantee that this will not go the way of Road Fund and Social Security into the general coffers2 The sums already added to council tax will be removed3 The funds are administered by an independent bodyYou will appreciate I am cycnical. Too many stealth taxes have appeared in my lifetime and I have little trust in a broken political system.

In reply to by Stuart (not verified)

No they don’t, they want the money we pay in Taxes and National Insurance to pay for it. Unfortunately much of that money is paid out in benefits to those who don’t deserve it, in the form of foreign aid to Countries who misuse it and to pet projects and schemes thought up by MP’s and the like.

In reply to by Hesperus (not verified)

You are absolutely right except for the independent body who will want lots of money and not be accountable. Look at all our CEO’s of Hospital Trusts who get paid an enormous salary and then on top of it they get a bonus, their salary is for doing a job, why pay a bonus just for doing their job.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

Yet again those middle class who have scrimped and saved and put funds into pensions are going to be hit again. Not only having to face the possibility of paying even more tax/NI when you have retired but to fund your own health care. Again we are being asked subsidise all those who could not be bothered to save for the future and have lived off the state all their lives. The rich won't notice as they will find numerous ways of avoiding any addition taxation including the MP's that are calling for these changes.How about trying to make effective savings on NHS cost and pay 50p for a toilet roll rather than £15, this should be costed out first before giving any more money. Why do they pay over the odds for simple things. Bulk buying is meant to have savings not paying over the odds.Lets look at more age related cost, how about those under 40 subsidising child care and schools.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

So those who paid in all their working life promised care from cradle to grave don't receive it so now they want people to pay an extra tax for social care and further extra tax for the NHS funding increase as there will be nothing saved from brexit as May is promising to pay everything to the EU and also keep us in the EU. May as well go back to Labour days with Harold Wilson in 1966 when we had to pay 41.26% basic rate income tax, how would the young today like that and they say we never paid into the system.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

I think that this is an excellent idea.Obviously the government will need to identify all those over forty, and also those under forty who for reasons of health will be needing care and support earlier than normal.A new bureaucracy can be established headed by retired politicians, and include panels of doctors to check on those in ill health, and of course tribunals with many lawyers employed to address any perceived injustices.The Government admits that there are over a million illegal immigrants in UK, so another department should be established tracking down all those illegal immigrants over forty in order to tax them.After this is completed we can identify all people with teenage children because teenage yobs cause a lot of extra time, trouble and expense to the Police and the parents of teenagers should be taxed extra.Then we can set up another department to identify all those who send their children to Government schools, and charge them extra tax as a contribution towards the cost of their schooling.I must congratulate our politicians on this outstanding idea.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

pity MPs dont call for a cull in the UNELECTED house of lords that would pay for a lot of care,most of them need to be in care anyway useless bunch of nobodys.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

More taxes for those who work and already contribute It is such a shame that so much money is spent on those in prison, they are suppose to be there for punishment, but it seems more like a holiday camp at times, have heard that more is spend per head on prisoners for meals than those who are in-patient in the hospital. If we cut the huge amount being spend on prisoners, there would be a lot more money to help fund things like social care and the NHS.We also have those who have worked all their lives and have to sell their homes to look after them in their old age, then there are those who have never worked, but never seem to want for anything, where are they going to contribute to any care they receive.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

Good point Kim - even though we know that such a change will never happen. In the end, I imagine, as with NHS funding, that a slight hike in income tax rates all round will be the chosen path, or perhaps freeze personal allowances for a while instead of raising them with inflation. If the government were to go down the route of linking public financing (tax) to those who benefit most from specific types of spending, not only would all kinds of unfairness result, but we would need more bureaucracy to administer such new arrangements - and we all know how little of the extra funding would end up where needed. Not a good idea.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

Fair enough, but on condition that:1. Care homes and care are vastly improved2. We train and recruit more UK residents giving our young people jobs and vastly reduce care immigration.3. We create choices for care, not all allocated by local authorities.4. How about a few mini towns for dementia or infirm, with local shops, cinema, tea shop etc but with trained care on hand.5 As controversial as it sounds, the enhanced care would only be available to those that have contributed 30 years Nat ins. I don’t want to be taxed further to pay for punters that have dodged working life. If Yes, there are genuine cases, but tons aren’t. I’m already paying for methodone for junkies, funding prison amenities, keeping many layabouts on benefits and subsidising their rent. They should receive basic care, ,

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

So we have National Insurance, income tax, VAT, IPT, Capital Gains, Car Tax, fuel duty and they need another tax?????Sort out what you do with what you get before you ask for more

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

A National Insurance increase to fund Social Care would exclude pensioners who are receiving private pensions higher than most of the younger population can hope for today. They will be the first cohorts to benefit from social care and I believe they should be included in the costs. I am one of those lucky pensioners and would gladly make contributions to fund future improvement to social care in England and Wales.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

It would be better if the NI was raised on all from they start earning as this mean smaller weekly/monthly payments over a longer period. This extra charge to be used only for this purpose and not used to help other areas of government.It might be a good idea to restrict moneys raised from taxes to those they were supposedly for , eg road fund tax for upkeep of roads etc.They should not be able to raise money from motorists ad lib to spend on payment of MP's expenses etc

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

This idea is no less than fraud perpetrated by the government against those who have faithfully been paying income tax, national insurance etc. for many years. It is particularly wrong for pensioners who are taxed if they have a works pension (not all that big) as well as a state pension (tiny compared to German Pensions) and the total of the two takes them into the tax bracket. We were always told that our various taxes and National Insurance was to provide for cradle to grave healthcare , covering everything. If the governments over the years have not set aside this money--that is NOT THE FAULT OF THE PENSIONER. It is a ridiculous and unfair idea that must be scrapped immediately.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

I am over 60, and have paid a fortune in taxes, national insurance, VAT and many other taxes all my life. I was told at an early age, that one of the reasons for paying ALL THESE TAXES was to provide for my retirement and for all of my care costs if I ever was unlucky enough to need any of them when I goy older. Now I am being told that there is not enough money!! Why not?? Where was it spent? Have I been defrauded by the government reneging on promises made to me when I was much younger. It looks like it.The money has been massively squandered by successive governments--despite the large windfall that they received from taxes on NORTH SEA OIL..Let the young work as hard as I used to do. Let them do without all their expensive computers etc. Let them do without ANY foreign holidays as I had to do until I had saved enough to afford to go on a very cheap foreign holiday. The young want everything handed to them on a plate without doing the work necessary. I regularly worked 10 or 11 hour days, as well as on Saturdays. I do not see many people in their teen, twenties, or thirties doing that.So --I am TOTALLY OPPOSED TO ANY EXTRA TAX FOR THE OVER FORTIES. I FEEL VERY ANGRY THAT IT IS EVEN BEING SUGGESTED. It should be a non-starter.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

i disagree with the Government, yet another TAX on the already poor people to pay via national insurance, to which we have been paying in to since starting work, not to mention local authorities charging more in local charges by residents to pay for care, so in the end we will be charged twice (Stealth Taxes again). we might a well just pay for private medical and elderly care and forget the NHS National insurance all together.surley they can find another way to raise revenue, i dont agree with the recommendations people has paid into the health care for years to pay for their social care services, if money is not available then they need to check on how the management of the funds are used, so why not have a TAX on over wweight people, or a tax on people with disabilities who use services more frequent, or even a tax based on people with social deceases, when will it stop. i agree with BBungy it is everyones responsibility to pay not just between age groups.Goverment need to get a grip on the situation and stop trying to rip off the public again, stop public spending or eve stop the allowances MP's get that everyone elase has to pay for out of their earnings, how much can be saved here

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

I am fed up with MPs, who generally have no idea about commerce or finance, coming up with new taxes to finance their "solutions" to problems. I run a small business, as well as working full time, and I am giving it up because I can't afford to employ people because of all the extra premiums attached to employment of individuals. The reason that there is such a shortfall is because a lot of people make no attempt to put a little away for the future, consequently those who do have their houses taken from them to pay for those who don't. Our MPs then want to tax those same contributors even more. If the MPs looked into how the government departments systematically waste our taxes, they would find that there is no shortfall and that there is enough money in the system to fund most of our needs. The NHS is a great institution, which is poorly managed by overpaid executives - that is why it constantly cries out for more funds, other government agencies would not survive in any business situations.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

We should all be included not just over 40s......I’ve already paid into the kitty since 18...now 77...why single me out now?

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

People forget that this 'social care' problem is still due to the effects of the banks financial crash in 2008 for which we are all still paying the price whilst banks are 'business as usual' making huge profits and paying large bonuses for failure. Council budgets were cut year on year and still are being cut effecting all areas of social care as well as many other services such as education, NHS., and housing. Not to mention the wrong done to the women's pension age moving from 60 to 62 to 65 plus years when some of these women started work at 14 & 15 years old in lower paid jobs than men. This plus the numbers of immigrants accessing these services has placed enormous pressure on our fragile services. The elderly have paid in ALL THEIR LIVES and ENTITLED to this care.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

As with Pensions this needs to be started when a young person starts work, if I had had the sense to listen when I was starting work (16) to start a pension, I wouldn't be worried now about retiring, the earlier this is implemented the better.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

Social care is everyone's responsibility and should be funded by general tax increases irrespective of age. Many people below the age of 40 need social care so the logic doesn't hold, other than to maintain the political correctness drive to blame the older generation for the country's medical, housing and financial woes.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

Well in that case the under 40s can pay a premium tax for putting their children through school and I am sure I can come up with lots of other age related premiums too if you give me a minute or two

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

I see problems with this idea. The money taken from 40+ taxpayers will be used to pay for social care NOW. There is no guarantee that there will be enough money when it comes to looking after the people paying the tax. It's a bit like a smaller version of the current pension thinking which has obviously failed!There is also no guarantee that the money will ONLY be spent on social care.How much of Vehicle Excise Duty is spent on roads??

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

I started working age 15 and have paid taxes ever since - retiring age 62 when my NHS pension kicked in. I also pay taxes on everything else. No I don't think they should apply yet another stealth tax

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

A decision to introduce a tax based purely on age is an abomination and is discrimination in its purest form. It is this government's latest effort to squeeze tax out of the younger generation, to pay for the debt of their predecessors. While the tax may not start until you are 40, a huge number of today's young people are entering a tax burden through student loans, which they face well into their 40s. Now they face this tax to replace it, either when it's paid off or written off.I've spent the last three years almost living at work, channelling all my salary into clearing student loans and debts, so I could then start saving for my future. I'm almost 40 and, having caused none of the nation's debt, I'm stuck right in the middle of clearing it.Tax burden must be means tested. Saying only the old should pay for social care is as bad as saying only women should be taxed to pay for female health screening. It's total nonsense.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

This idea doesn't make sense to me!Aren't we already one of the most taxed nations in the world? Are we not already an overpopulated small island?If we spent more on things in this country as oppose to aid for others I do not believe we would be in this situation.England, if not all of the UK has not yet recovered from recession - we can see this in shop closures, the rise of foodbank usage for working families, closures of libraries, cuts in council services etc. Taxing us more is not the answer!

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

So I worked from 16 and was promised a pension at 60, I am now 63 and still no pension, so do they really think people will be happy to contribute to a pot for so called social care, when god only knows what they will spend the money on, or even if it will be spent in this country. I’m sure allthe politicians will benefit though..

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

We first need to know why so many are 'being left without the care they need', before imposing a discriminatory tax on people. Otherwise, we are throwing good money after bad. We need to tackle the problem not the sympton.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

Once again the poor taxpayer is going to be lumbered with more increases. We’ve only just been told that we can expect a tax increase to fund the NHS and on top of this we won’t have any money left to live on. We continue to pay foreign aid to countries who don’t use it to improve their poor, we continue to fund projects that are of no use to the taxpayer, we continue to pay Members of the Lords just to turn up, not to do anything and the rich are getting richer, both companies and individuals, by using Tax Avoidance schemes. When will this, and any government recognise there are people in this country, some of them sports people, who take home in a week more than the average worker earns in 25years!

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

Once again the poor taxpayer is going to be lumbered with more increases. We’ve only just been told that we can expect a tax increase to fund the NHS and on top of this we won’t have any money left to live on. We continue to pay foreign aid to countries who don’t use it to improve their poor, we continue to fund projects that are of no use to the taxpayer, we continue to pay Members of the Lords just to turn up, not to do anything and the rich are getting richer, both companies and individuals, by using Tax Avoidance schemes. When will this, and any government recognise there are people in this country, some of them sports people, who take home in a week more than the average worker earns in 25years!

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

I support the idea of a social care tax being paid by the over 40s.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

I'm 59. Worked and paid tax since I was 16, never claimed any benefits, have private health care and paid into a pension plan since 17, now it's suggested I pay more tax just because I'm getting old, how unfair.The country has enough money to pay billions into Europe and the rest of the world but not for its own people.Something is clearly wrong with Britain.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

I don't see any reason why retirees should not still pay national insurance contributions. As a sweetener to those who say they have contributed and paid for their OAP the perhaps the government should consider a new reduced rate NI contribution for people still employed over pension age.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

And what about those on benefits? Will I be paying their share too through my tax?

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

whilst I agree that something needs to be done, it is wrong for the government to think that they can penalise the over 40s only. In my opinion, a tax like this should apply to everyone who is working including the under 40's.Social care should form part of the NHS in a format more suited to the modern world. There needs to be a radical audit and overhaul so that we have a fair system in place for everyone. That means everyone should be paying for it,

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

Here we go again the rich MP'S ripping the less we'll off again, they will claim theirs back through tax, but we can't,We have been paying high taxes for years to pay for this sort of thing .start charging all those who use it but paid nothing into the system. Oh sorry the do gooders won't let us.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

I'm mid sixties and worried already about the prospect of social care as my husband and I age: however taxing us more would be pretty punitive as we often struggle to get by now anyway.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

While the thought of an increase in tax freaks me out, the reality is that I have absolutely no idea what will happen to me in my old age, except to say that I am hoping they introduce euthanasia so I can get out of here before it is too late and I am stuck in some horrid old people's home, not being cared for by underpaid and overworked care assistants. However, as I would like to live a quality life till it is my turn to go, then the reality is that we do need to do something, and paying a bit more tax seems like a small price to pay for the certainty that if and when I need care, I will get quality care and will end my days living a decent small life. So yes, to a bit more tax. However, why only the over 40s? We are all going to get old, and we will all need something in later life. They are guaranteeing us longer lives, but not that we won't end up disabled and decrepit. So why not also introduce a small but effective tax on all working-age people? Just a little bit at a time but it will add up so that by the time someone just starting a job now is in need of care, the money will be there to ensure they get the quality of care and the sufficiency of care that they need.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

Born in 1955 I have Already been robbed of six years of my pension! I absolutely disagree that I should pay any more towards social care !

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

Before a wealthy Doctor and MP start saying over 40 year olds should pay towards Social Care,I should like to point out I along with all residents who pay Council tax already pay towards Social Care. My County of Shropshire allocate are shown to allocate £113,000,000 towards Social Care Operations.There are 48 English counties all who I assume have a Social Care budget.If for an example all these Counties allocate the same as Shropshire that would amount to a staggering sum of £5,424,000,000 allocated to Social Care.Is this money ring fenced? Who knows! What is it spent on? Salaries ?How much more money does Social Care need?Social Care along with NHS should get NO more money until they cut out in house waste.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

National insurance was supposed to be for or pensions, but the government have used the money for other things, the road fund licence was supposed to be for road, where did that money go, so I don't hold out any hope for a further tax which will never be used for the purpose the government are suggesting. I think that we are taxed to the hilt and the government should be more honest as to where our money is being spent, I was a trustee of a charity and every payment was scrutinised before spending. MP numbers should be cut , and they should attend parliament on each and every day and consider it a job, cut their pensions - wish I as a pensioner got the same type of pensioner as them!!

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

The over 40s will soon be the generation who have only just been able to get on the housing ladder and have large mortgages, many of them will also have young families and still be paying off student loans. How can targeting this group be fair? This group have already been disadvantaged by having to work far longer before receiving their state pension compared to the retired population many of whom accessed their pensions and remained in work either part time or full time.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

notice how the people that make these sort of rulings/suggestions are the people that can EASILY afford it.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

Absolutely vital that the whole structure of care for the elderly is overhauled. If middle aged people stop to think of the future that is waiting for them as things are at present, with the lack of care for most people in their latter years, they should have no hesitation in signing up for a scheme which will guarantee a fair standard of living for them in their final years. The sooner such a scheme is put in place the better and this government should make it plain to the population that the money cannot just come from thin air, they must play their part and they will get the benefit

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

why should tax payers be hit for everything. Care homes are expensive yes, but people who have never worked and not p;aid any taxes are looked after for free all their lives.Get benefits sorted out then ask the workers to pay more tax but why should we work all our lives and still have to pay over the top in carehomes. Get to the root of the problem before you put taxes up.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

Tax the over 40's because they can afford it, is simplistic and superficial at best and down right undemocratic, unfair and rather rich coming from the likes of Clive Betts MP. The Labour party spent all our money and lots more beside on it's pet projects whilst leaving social care out of the lavish spending seen elsewhere by Labour under his watch. He now calls for extra taxes to solve the problem he helped to create, shame on him and others thinking in this socialistically undemocratic way. Sarah Wollaston MP as a conservative should be asking the question of why we can commit to spending money on getting involved in conflicts like Syria instead of looking after our own people and their social care needs.

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

A sound idea, but ONLY if EVERYONE actually contributes....the scroungers, free loaders and 'cash in hand' merchants will as ever be at the front of the queue with both hands outstretched for whatever they can lay their hands on in the form of handouts, without actualy having paid a penny to be 'in the club' and, no doubt as ever when the silent majority try to make a stand against them 'collecting' the bottomless pit of 'do gooders' will see to it they get an unjustified look in !

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

WHAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I have worked full time since I was 17, AND PAID FULL STAMP AND TAXES, on the understanding I would retire at 60 and that the funds I paid in had contributed towards my pension. THEN THE FLAMING GOVERNMENT MOVED THE GOALPOSTS AND FORCED ME TO WORK AN EXTRA 6 YEARS - STILL PAYING FULL STAMP AND TAXES, despite the fact that I have more than paid my contributions for my Pension. NOW YOU WANT MORE MONEY OFF ME - YOU FAT SLOBS SITTING ON YOUR BACKSIDE GET WAY TOO MUCH TAX PAYERS MONEY - TAKE A PAY CUT, TAKE AN EXPENSES CUT AND LET THAT FUND THE NECESSARY DEFICIT - YOU CAN AFFORD IT - I CANNOT! Get rid of your second homes, your second cars, your big cars, all the flaming assistants, start doing a 40 hour a week, 48 week year AND GET A GRASP ON THE REALITY OF TODAY

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

I do think most people would be willing to pay a bit more if it definitely went to where it is supposed to go, not like Road Tax, who knows where that goes.I'm sure it would be auditable to show people where it was going although all figures can be manipulated

Add new comment