|
-
Published on: 21/11/2017 07:55 AMReported by: roving-eye
The poorest in society are being hit the hardest by changes to tax, social security and public spending reforms, and are set to lose 10% of their income, our new report has revealed.
Ahead of this week’s budget, the Commission has published its independent report on the impact that changes to all tax, social security and public spending reforms from 2010 to 2017 will have on people by 2022.
Whilst the poorest are set to lose nearly 10% of their incomes, the richest will lose barely 1%.
Undertaken as a ‘cumulative impact assessment’, the report, which looks at the impact the reforms have had on various groups across society, suggests the decisions will also affect some groups more than others:
black households will face a 5% loss of income (more than double the loss for white households)
families with a disabled adult will see a £2,500 reduction of income per year (this is £1,000 for non-disabled families
families with a disabled adult and a disabled child will face a £5,500 reduction of income per year (again, compared to £1,000 for non-disabled families)
lone parents will struggle with a 15% loss of income (the losses for all other family groups are between 0 and 8%)
and women will suffer a £940 annual loss (more than double the loss for men)
the biggest average losses by age group, across men and women, are experienced by the 65 to 74 age group (average losses of around £1,450 per year) and the 35 to 44 age group (average losses of around £1,250 per year)
David Isaac, the Chair of the Commission, which is responsible for making recommendations to government on the compatibility of policy and legislation with equality and human rights standards, warned of a 'bleak future'.
Mr Isaac said:
"The Government can’t claim to be working for everyone if its policies actually make the most disadvantaged people in society financially worse off. We have encouraged the Government to carry out this work for some time, but sadly they have refused. We have shown that it is possible to carry out cumulative impact assessments and we call on them to do this ahead of the 2018 budget.
"If we want a prosperous and, in line with the Prime Minister’s vision, a fair Britain that works for everyone, the Government must come clean and provide a full and cumulative impact analysis of all current and future tax and social security policies. It is not enough to look at the impact of individual policy changes. If this doesn’t happen those most in need will face an extremely bleak future."
The Commission is now calling on the Government to:
commit to undertaking cumulative impact assessments of all tax and social security policies ahead of the 2018 budget
reconsider existing policies that are contributing to negative financial impacts for those who are most disadvantaged
implement the socio-economic duty from the Equality Act 2010 so public authorities must consider how to reduce the impact of socio-economic disadvantage of people’s life chances
The assessment undertaken by the Commission considered changes to income tax, national insurance contributions, indirect taxes (VAT and excise duties), means-tested and non-means-tested social security benefits, tax credits, universal credit, national minimal wage and national living wage.
Useful links: Report Cyber Crime
| Stop Nuisance Calls & Mail
| Daily Covid Stats (updated 4pm)
| Covid excess deaths in your area
| Local NHS Resources
| What 3 Words
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
Check Todays Deals on Ebay.co.uk
Check Todays Deals On Amazon.co.uk
Your Comments:
-
I get all of the above, Apart from one thing. What difference does it make if your white or black? I can't think of any benefits/pension that are linked to the colour of your skin.
Being out of work, yep
single parent, yep
disabled, yep
low income, yep
pensioner, yep (I don't class that as a benefit, it's been earnt)
colour of skin, hmmmm not seen that on any paperwork.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
Originally Posted by roving-eye
The poorest in society are being hit the hardest by changes to tax, social security and public spending reforms, and are set to lose 10% of their income, our new report has revealed.
Ahead of this week’s budget, the Commission has published its independent report on the impact that changes to all tax, social security and public spending reforms from 2010 to 2017 will have on people by 2022.
Whilst the poorest are set to lose nearly 10% of their incomes, the richest will lose barely 1%.
Undertaken as a ‘cumulative impact assessment’, the report, which looks at the impact the reforms have had on various groups across society, suggests the decisions will also affect some groups more than others:
black households will face a 5% loss of income (more than double the loss for white households)
families with a disabled adult will see a £2,500 reduction of income per year (this is £1,000 for non-disabled families
families with a disabled adult and a disabled child will face a £5,500 reduction of income per year (again, compared to £1,000 for non-disabled families)
lone parents will struggle with a 15% loss of income (the losses for all other family groups are between 0 and 8%)
and women will suffer a £940 annual loss (more than double the loss for men)
the biggest average losses by age group, across men and women, are experienced by the 65 to 74 age group (average losses of around £1,450 per year) and the 35 to 44 age group (average losses of around £1,250 per year)
David Isaac, the Chair of the Commission, which is responsible for making recommendations to government on the compatibility of policy and legislation with equality and human rights standards, warned of a 'bleak future'.
Mr Isaac said:
"The Government can’t claim to be working for everyone if its policies actually make the most disadvantaged people in society financially worse off. We have encouraged the Government to carry out this work for some time, but sadly they have refused. We have shown that it is possible to carry out cumulative impact assessments and we call on them to do this ahead of the 2018 budget.
"If we want a prosperous and, in line with the Prime Minister’s vision, a fair Britain that works for everyone, the Government must come clean and provide a full and cumulative impact analysis of all current and future tax and social security policies. It is not enough to look at the impact of individual policy changes. If this doesn’t happen those most in need will face an extremely bleak future."
The Commission is now calling on the Government to:
commit to undertaking cumulative impact assessments of all tax and social security policies ahead of the 2018 budget
reconsider existing policies that are contributing to negative financial impacts for those who are most disadvantaged
implement the socio-economic duty from the Equality Act 2010 so public authorities must consider how to reduce the impact of socio-economic disadvantage of people’s life chances
The assessment undertaken by the Commission considered changes to income tax, national insurance contributions, indirect taxes (VAT and excise duties), means-tested and non-means-tested social security benefits, tax credits, universal credit, national minimal wage and national living wage.
Since we have technically left the EU - surely the UK does not have to provide welfare for immigrants? It was claimed that any immigrants to the UK should support themselves, they should not be entitled to any benefits unless they have been paying into the system for at least ten years.
Are the cuts to fund the Public service workers pay rises? That would be a stab in the back for the poorer people of society as they too, have to pay for the same cost of living as the public service workers do?
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
Originally Posted by said
Since we have technically left the EU - surely the UK does not have to provide welfare for immigrants? It was claimed that any immigrants to the UK should support themselves, they should not be entitled to any benefits unless they have been paying into the system for at least ten years.
Are the cuts to fund the Public service workers pay rises? That would be a stab in the back for the poorer people of society as they too, have to pay for the same cost of living as the public service workers do?
We have done nothing of the sort....yet.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
Originally Posted by Ceam
pensioner, yep (I don't class that as a benefit, it's been earnt)
.
No it hasn’t. The state pension has never worked like that. Those working pay for those who are retired and it has always been like that. Therefore it is a benefit.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
Originally Posted by Tinkerbell1
No it hasn’t. The state pension has never worked like that. Those working pay for those who are retired and it has always been like that. Therefore it is a benefit.
I paid in for 46 years to provide my State pension.
Definitely not a benefit.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
Originally Posted by said
Since we have technically left the EU - surely the UK does not have to provide welfare for immigrants? It was claimed that any immigrants to the UK should support themselves, they should not be entitled to any benefits unless they have been paying into the system for at least ten years.
Are the cuts to fund the Public service workers pay rises? That would be a stab in the back for the poorer people of society as they too, have to pay for the same cost of living as the public service workers do?
We have not left the EU as yet, you know very well the cuts are all part of the ideological austerity programme, which while hitting many people very hard, is actually costing considerably more in far too many cases.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
Originally Posted by Tinkerbell1
No it hasn’t. The state pension has never worked like that. Those working pay for those who are retired and it has always been like that. Therefore it is a benefit.
I disagree - it may fit the narrow criteria of a 'benefit' but, more accurately, it can be likened to an long term investment which yields a small dividend on money tied up over a long period of time and, is subject to certain qualifying conditions - not least of which is living long enough to derive any meaningful financial value.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
This posting is very poor in the sense it does not say who " the Commision" actually are. You would only know if you realised that David Issacs Is the head of the EHRC - Equality and Human Rights Commision. I just looked it up. Inevitably they have to cast a gloomy eye and potentially pick statistics to justify their existance.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
|
Search Qlocal (powered by google)
Privacy & Cookie Policy
Check Todays Deals On Amazon.co.uk
Check Todays Deals on Ebay.co.uk
Booking.com
Supporting Local Business
Be Seen - Advertise on Qlocal
UK, Local Online News Community, Forums, Chats, For Sale, Classified, Offers, Vouchers, Events, Motors Sale, Property For Sale Rent, Jobs, Hotels, Taxi, Restaurants, Pubs, Clubs, Pictures, Sports, Charities, Lost Found
wolverhampton,
wolverhampton News,
|