Social care costs to force 10,000 Brits to sell home before National Insurance hike
Question Time: Panel discuss National Insurance funding
We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you’ve consented to and to improve our understanding of you. This may include adverts from us and 3rd parties based on our understanding. You can unsubscribe at any time. More info
According to projections based on the latest figures from the NHS, 10,450 adults in England will use up their life savings or sell their home to pay for social care costs before the tax hike is implemented nationwide. The National Insurance hike is set to come into effect next April affecting both employees and their bosses. Money raised from the tax increase will be used to pay for a cap on social care costs, which will include assistance at home or a move into a care home.
Critics from across the political spectrum have criticised Boris Johnson for hiking taxes on working people and taking longer than promised to deliver his social care plan.
When coming into office in 2019, the Prime Minister promised not to raise taxes and to have a social care plan ready from his very first day.
However due to the COVID-19 pandemic, manifesto promises have been put on hold and the Government’s attention has been drawn to the ever-changing global health crisis.
Unlike the NHS which is free to the point of use, many members of the British public need to be assessed to receive publicly funded social care.
Part of this assessment involves determining whether their assets, such as savings and property, are low enough to receive additional support.
Currently, if someone is found to need a care home, they will have to pay for it themselves if they have assets worth more than £23,250.
If they are found to need support within their own home, the £23,250 threshold remains but the value of the taxpayer’s home is no longer taken into account.
Some 400 Britons a month are surpassing this £23,250 threshold, which means the Government needs to come in to offer support.
In response to the growing social care crisis, Mr Johnson is introducing a cap on how much people are expected to pay over their lifetime in costs.
This cap will be set at £86,000. After an individual has spent this amount of money to pay for their social care, the Government will take over in paying towards their additional costs.
Despite the Prime Minister’s latest effort, his social care funding plan only covers the nursing costs that go towards someone’s care bill.
In theory, someone receiving social care could receive unlimited “hotel” costs while in a home, which include their accommodation and food.
Many critics of the Government have taken aim at their proposed tax hike on working people, as well as their perceived failure to successfully address the UK’s social care needs.
Upon the announcement of the Government’s plans, John O’Connell, the Chief Executive of the TaxPayers’ Alliance, outlined why the British public should be concerned.
“This tax hike on working people would fly in the face of all the PM’s promises,” Mr O’Connell explained.
“Suggesting this rise is the only sustainable solution for social care is smoke and mirrors.
“Receipts will end up being used for day-to-day spending, while taxpayers will be left paying the highest tax bills in a generation.
“Taxpayers will not tolerate being hoodwinked into yet more Tory tax rises.”
Jonathan Ashworth, the Shadow Health and Social Care Secretary, voiced Labour’s opposition to the Government’s social care plans.
Mr Ashworth said: “Ministers are imposing a punishing, unfair tax rise for something that won’t even fix social care.
“In fact thousands of people paying for their care face going broke before any measure is introduced to limit liabilities.
“The simple truth is working people will be paying more tax for a care cap that doesn’t prevent people losing their homes.”
Despite The Telegraph’s projections of how much households will pay, the Government’s pending National Insurance tax hike is set to be introduced next April to pay for the social care cap.
Source: Read Full Article