Skip to main content

In an email I just received from Benefits and Work which is looking into the Government's Green Paper for proposals to changes in the disability benefit system there was this about how the Government may be planning to fund their new system.  Which seems to involve everyone being sent a Β£20,000 tax bill on their 65th birthday!

5 November 2009

The government has gone back on a pledge to reveal the true cost of its proposed National Care Service before the green paper consultation period ends on November 13th, prompting further suspicions about the honesty of the whole consultation process.

As reported by Benefits and Work, (Β£20,000 shock birthday tax for all) the green paper rules out using general taxation to pay for everyone’s care and instead offers three options for funding the service, one of which is sending everyone a tax bill for Β£20,000 on their 65th birthday.

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Reference:crossy
What are the other two options then squiggle?
I think the other 2 options involve taking away the benefits that disabled people received, mainly Attendance Allowance and Disability Living Allowance.  I got involved when there was talk about taking away DLA which my husband was receiving following a major stroke.  I don't know more than that but I think this all has to look quite sinister, they seem to be very secretive about their plans.  And yes Dan I know its a Green Paper at the moment but these things have to start somewhere, who knows a White Paper next?
squiggle
From memory, the other options involved putting a charge on your house as an asset and recouping the money when you die, or paying tax/insurance in advance, or a combination of a number of them.  The idea that a bill will arrive on everyone's 65 birthday for Β£20K is risible.  Most people clearly won't have that money available.

The basic principle, I think, is along the lines of an insurance scheme. You can prepay (say) Β£20K somehow and that buys you your care for the rest of your old age.  Some people will die without using all that money up and some will use more.  If you don't prepay and you pay as you go instead then you're liable for the actual charges like you are now, which may run into many Β£Ks more or many Β£Ks less, if you can afford to pay.  For the poor or the feckless, the state pays as usual.  The Β£20K figure is the guess at the moment of how much on average care in old age will cost individuals.  The idea, I think, is to make it fairer for people who have large assets in the form of a house from having to sell it to pay for care like they do now.
FM
Reference:
Daniel J* 4997 Forum PostsToday at 01:47 (Edited: ) Reference: Difficult isn't it? Some people will look at that amount and think, "Wow! what a bargain, that's about three cars!" Others will never have a chance of raising that sort of cash. And sadly there will be no rural post offices left to do over with a home-knitted balaclava and a sawn-off to make up the difference
 and here's me planning just that!Means I'll have to go to town to get the job done!
F
Reference:
National Care Service
Here's the green paper online if anyone wants to skim-read it.

http://careandsupport.direct.g.../greenpaper/execsum/

and the funding options:

http://careandsupport.direct.g...sum/funding-options/

Option 1 and 5 are already ruled out.

Option 2 is the state pays 1/3, 2/3, or all the basic care bills depending on your savings/assets where the average total care bill for over 65s is Β£30K they say.  So some people will end up paying about Β£20K.

Option 3 is an insurance scheme where the state pays a proportion (a third?) and the insurance picks up the rest if people buy into it.  If not then they have to pay as they go and that could be much more. They buy into it before or during retirement or after death from their estate.  Again Β£20K is the expected insurance premium.

Option 4 seems to be like option 3 but compulsory for those who can pay and you can pay a lump sum upfront (again about Β£20K) so that you don't have to worry about losing your house later to pay for costs. A topup NI contribution basically.

Well, that's my quick interpretation of it anyway.  The main points seem to be that future care costs cannot be met by the state in the future because of an aging population, most people want to remain in the homes while they're able and have care provided there, and there's currently a postcode lottery where care around the country is charged differently and they want to standardise this to make it fairer for everyone.  Care costs here, btw, don't include the accomodation costs in a residential home, just the care on top.
FM

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×