Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Fairyland

Middle-class pensioners to lose benefits under Tory plan to fund social care

Recommended Posts

DT: Middle-class pensioners to lose benefits under Tory plan to fund social care

Quote

The Conservative manifesto will set out plans to begin means-testing winter fuel payments and to charge more people who currently receive free care in their own home. 

The money saved from means-testing the annual heating handout, worth up to £300, will be used to help close the £2.8 billion social care funding gap.

The Conservatives will also pass legislation to ensure nobody has to sell their home to pay for their care during their lifetime, and new rules will allow pensioners needing nursing home treatment to keep more of their assets.

The flagship policy marks a gamble as it risks angering core older Tory supporters. David Cameron repeatedly pledged to maintain universal pensioner benefits, but Mrs May’s team believes that pensioners can no longer be fully protected from austerity.

On Wednesday it was unclear whether the Prime Minister would also abandon the so-called triple-lock, which guarantees a rise in the state pension every year. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if the cost to pay for social care is taken from the estate before inheritance tax or whether the tax would need to be paid first and then any care fees? If the former I suppose it is a way of offsetting tax against care home fees. 

 

Edited by fru-gal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always thought it was rather strange that they made winter fuel payment a separate payment instead of just increasing the state pension by £200 for all pensioners......very odd.;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I just posted in another thread....

Or, looking at it another way, it is a sum deducted from the basic state pension that is only paid if the weather is inclement. Not that it matters much, it's only pennies, but everything that is not included in the basic state pension is open to means testing and means testing of the state pension would be theft.[/quoted]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, winkie said:

I always thought it was rather strange that they made winter fuel payment a separate payment instead of just increasing the state pension by £200 for all pensioners......very odd.;)

Not odd at all; if you consolidated the WF payment with the pension then it would be escalated with inflation, which the current payment is not, but, far more importantly, could not be withdrawn and I think this is precisely the reason that it has not been consolidated with the SP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, crouch said:

Not odd at all; if you consolidated the WF payment with the pension then it would be escalated with inflation, which the current payment is not, but, far more importantly, could not be withdrawn and I think this is precisely the reason that it has not been consolidated with the SP.

Winter fuel payment is not taxable meaning wealthy high rate tax pensioners with other income receive it tax free....if it was added to the basic state pension it would have been means tested of sorts......or was it a sales policy to make pensioners feel special or something?;)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, winkie said:

Winter fuel payment is not taxable meaning wealthy high rate tax pensioners with other income receive it tax free....if it was added to the basic state pension it would have been means tested of sorts......or was it a sales policy to make pensioners feel special or something?;)

 

It was introduced by Gordon Brown and as such is beyond comprehension.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Bruce Banner said:

It was introduced by Gordon Brown and as such is beyond comprehension.

WFP was the ultimate virtual signaling which did nothing to help pensioners (vs simple raise) other than add a layer of complication 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, PropertyMania said:

WFP was the ultimate virtual signaling which did nothing to help pensioners (vs simple raise) other than add a layer of complication 

As Bruce said, one of Browns great ideas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, winkie said:

I always thought it was rather strange that they made winter fuel payment a separate payment instead of just increasing the state pension by £200 for all pensioners......very odd.;)

Allowed a good news announcement every year as was non consolidated?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another of Browns disasters.Young lad over the road working full time on NMW job pays tax to hand to the retired policeman and his retired teacher wife next door who retired at 50 and have an income of at least 4 times his and a mortgage free house.No really,they do live over the road.

The only problem i have with this is that once again,those just over the limit who probably worked and saved a bit lose it while the person next door who never worked keeps it.

The counting your house as wealth for care in the home looks like the first part of them going after all wealth.I notice wording of "products will be available" so no doubt their mates in the city have come up with a way they can share the assets with the government.

The key problem the elite have is keeping the middle working forever to pay for the 20/30% who live on benefits.One part is getting the young in massive mortgage debt.The second is how to stop 55 year olds who have worked hard and saved retiring once they inherit their parents house.Seems this care thing is a move to start removing that from as many people as possible.

Older people who need care should band together in an area and form a co-operative.Employ 3 carers between 20 of them and pay the carers cash in hand.Girls just popping in to see them and offer christian charity.I know several people already who pay council workers cash in hand for care already.The girls simply call in on their rounds.Not high level care of course,but a good deal for the older folk and the girl,sod off state.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, durhamborn said:

Older people who need care should band together in an area and form a co-operative.Employ 3 carers between 20 of them and pay the carers cash in hand.Girls just popping in to see them and offer christian charity.I know several people already who pay council workers cash in hand for care already.The girls simply call in on their rounds.Not high level care of course,but a good deal for the older folk and the girl,sod off state.

I think this is the answer and one that will be increasingly employed; after all if the system doesn't support you you make other arrangements and this type of personal care arrangement will probably be a lot cheaper than the more regulated state care that we have now. Of course you have to find someone who is reliable and who won't rob you when your back is turned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, winkie said:

Winter fuel payment is not taxable meaning wealthy high rate tax pensioners with other income receive it tax free....if it was added to the basic state pension it would have been means tested of sorts......or was it a sales policy to make pensioners feel special or something?;)

 

If WFP had been consolidated with the SP its value would be much higher than the £200 it is now; in fact it would have to be only £330 for the post tax amount to be greater than the £200 net as it is now (£330 x 0.6) = £200.

It was meant to address winter fuel poverty and, as I said, I think it has been kept at £200 precisely because it can be withdrawn at any time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, durhamborn said:

Another of Browns disasters.Young lad over the road working full time on NMW job pays tax to hand to the retired policeman and his retired teacher wife next door who retired at 50 and have an income of at least 4 times his and a mortgage free house.No really,they do live over the road.

The only problem i have with this is that once again,those just over the limit who probably worked and saved a bit lose it while the person next door who never worked keeps it.

The counting your house as wealth for care in the home looks like the first part of them going after all wealth.I notice wording of "products will be available" so no doubt their mates in the city have come up with a way they can share the assets with the government.

The key problem the elite have is keeping the middle working forever to pay for the 20/30% who live on benefits.One part is getting the young in massive mortgage debt.The second is how to stop 55 year olds who have worked hard and saved retiring once they inherit their parents house.Seems this care thing is a move to start removing that from as many people as possible.

Older people who need care should band together in an area and form a co-operative.Employ 3 carers between 20 of them and pay the carers cash in hand.Girls just popping in to see them and offer christian charity.I know several people already who pay council workers cash in hand for care already.The girls simply call in on their rounds.Not high level care of course,but a good deal for the older folk and the girl,sod off state.

Or hire a Filipino nurse. See loads of old people being looked after in this way. Apparently they are reasonably priced and have a very high standard of care.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, crouch said:

I think this is the answer and one that will be increasingly employed; after all if the system doesn't support you you make other arrangements and this type of personal care arrangement will probably be a lot cheaper than the more regulated state care that we have now. Of course you have to find someone who is reliable and who won't rob you when your back is turned.

Very true crouch.Its a pretty simple answer for people.Most of the ones i know doing it give the girls £50 a week cash.They tend to call twice a day,some to get up and put to bed,others lunch and tea to make them a quick meal etc.Most of the cost of care in the community goes on the council managers so its far better to go the route of just the girl/guy and cash in hand.The best way is to pay for a 15 minute call from the council  twice a week, just put on to check and say hello/check pills taken etc.Youl get that for about £20,then do a deal with the girl.Most of the girls do it and the beauty of that way is if the girl moves etc you are on the system so could boost the council care if needed until you got a deal with a new girl.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, fru-gal said:

Or hire a Filipino nurse. See loads of old people being looked after in this way. Apparently they are reasonably priced and have a very high standard of care.

Exactly fru-gal,thats an other very good option if someone needs high care.The girls live in then so its a good deal for them as they are able to save most of their wages or send home to their family.Another win win with the state out of the way.They tend to know a lot of other girls doing the same thing so often cover each other as well.I would be quite happy to pass some of my wealth on to someone like that looking after me if i needed care and seeing zero go to the state machine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless I'm not understanding it correctly, they are suggesting that there will be an allowance of £100K that they will not take, for care costs, that you can leave to the kids.

I'm not sure how this works for a married couple with joint assets?

Hopefully, voluntary euthanasia will be introduced for those of us who have no desire to live as a vegetable whilst our assets are being eroded to keep us that way!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, durhamborn said:

Exactly fru-gal,thats an other very good option if someone needs high care.The girls live in then so its a good deal for them as they are able to save most of their wages or send home to their family.Another win win with the state out of the way.They tend to know a lot of other girls doing the same thing so often cover each other as well.I would be quite happy to pass some of my wealth on to someone like that looking after me if i needed care and seeing zero go to the state machine.

I bet the Government will stop allowing Filipino nurses in though as they will need to ensure that care is extremely costly, of poor quality and that it benefits the banks in terms of ££££. Anything that reduces the cost will not be allowed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't the new Tory plan to make people pay nearly all their assets for care, just an invitation for everyone to live for today, and spend their money well before old age?

After all, who wants to spend their entire life saving up to pay for care when they are old and decrepit? What's the point? Effectively you are just working to build up resources to pay for the small time before you die.

Why not just live well between 30-60 (or whatever) and then just rely on whatever is available at that time?

They are literally removing all incentive to save, and making it more likely that people will withdraw all equity from a house a long time before old age to spend or give away. That's before I mention people selling houses, storing wealth in gold or offshore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Errol said:

Isn't the new Tory plan to make people pay nearly all their assets for care, just an invitation for everyone to live for today, and spend their money well before old age?

After all, who wants to spend their entire life saving up to pay for care when they are old and decrepit? What's the point? Effectively you are just working to build up resources to pay for the small time before you die.

Why not just live well between 30-60 (or whatever) and then just rely on whatever is available at that time?

They are literally removing all incentive to save, and making it more likely that people will withdraw all equity from a house a long time before old age to spend or give away. That's before I mention people selling houses, storing wealth in gold or offshore.

Beware of "Deprivation of assets" rules!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What will this do to house prices? Presumably the Tories expect house prices to remain high in order to pay for this but they don't factor in how peoples behaviour will respond to these kind of things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Orsino said:

Every year my parents use their WFP to buy plane tickets out to their yacht in Greece. 

They can't afford to fly out to their yacht until they get their WFP? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Orsino said:

Every year my parents use their WFP to buy plane tickets out to their yacht in Greece. 

Very nice!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anything to stop savvy over 55s putting their house into a trust fund, thus removing it from the clutches of the State ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   57 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.