So it's National Insurance then

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY

You need to contact Age Cymru to hurry up this matter

Does your mother wish to stay at home ?

0300 303 4498

If you can get hold of Simon or guto they will help you

---

Thanks Sludge, she has been in a care home since May last year. I spoke with Age Cymru a few weeks ago, they were really helpful in helping make sense of the system after the council confused the hell out of me. We are looking at the deferred payment agreement so we don't have to sell her house. Do you think Age Cymru can kick the council up the arse then?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Re-sign Carl Dale

Assuming that this idea is a re-invented version of changes proposed in 2015 (which it seems to be), the idea that no-one will pay more than £85,000 is a myth, unfortunately - but it's a great headline!

I'm an IFA specialising in retirement / later life planning, and the proposal seems to be along the lines of ...

Let's say someone's paying £60,000pa (which is about the rate for a good quality care home).

Firstly, £12-£14,000 of this £60,000 will be treated as 'hotel costs' (food and accommodation) so immediately only around £47,000 will be counted towards the 'cap'.

Secondly, the system needs to be set up to avoid it being abused ... if it's all fully paid for when someone hits the 'cap', then we there would be a clamour to book mum and dad the flashest, nicest - and most expensive care home possible. So the amount that counts toward the 'cap' will be a 'reasonable' one. This looks like it's based on what the local authority pay for their care homes; somewhere in the region of £35,000pa.

So, forget that someone's paying £60,000 - Boris reckons £35,000 is what's 'reasonable' to pay (although I've not met any self-funder able to get a half decent care home for anywhere near this), and we need to deduct £13,000 for hotel costs. Therefore of the £60,000 paid, only around £22,000 will only count to this £85,000 'cap'.

To hit the £85,000 'cap' on care, someone paying £60,000pa would need to have actually paid around four years (longer than the average spell in a care home incidentally) - so around £240,000.

After this point, Bozza will step in and pay what they feel is a reasonable element towards the 'care' cost (ie £22,000 per year of the £60,000).

I've got too much time on my hands ... bring back the football!!!

---

And, as I understand it, there is no backdating of care costs. So, my dad already in care for 18 months, won't have the care-not-food-and-accomodation element count towards the £85,000 until 2023. In England, government will pay care costs when total asset value is less than £20k. Currently that figure is £23,250 so a hidden reduction (£50k in Wales, I think). An as yet undisclosed care subsidy will apply in England between £20,001 and £100,000 of asset value. So, government could pay just 5% of care costs. No-one knows, even though Parliament is due to vote on it today. The headline figure of £85k maximum lifetime care payment by an individual is just spin. May as well paint it as a slogan on the side of a bus.
Anyone living in UK that thinks we have a NationalHS is also being misled. We have a fragmented, confusing, inefficient and, at times, dysfunctional and expensive system.....that isn't integrated with social care. My dad's advice of "don't get old" stands true. Best pass on any assets to the offspring whilst you can. You can't take it with you as care providers will have taken it first.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bluesp

Thanks Sludge, she has been in a care home since May last year. I spoke with Age Cymru a few weeks ago, they were really helpful in helping make sense of the system after the council confused the hell out of me. We are looking at the deferred payment agreement so we don't have to sell her house. Do you think Age Cymru can kick the council up the arse then?

---

Have you got Power of Attorney set up? A shed load of paperwork but very, very useful when it comes to any financial dealings such as deferred payment. Also, depending on the value of the house, care costs can outstrip asset value in a matter of years.4 years on an average house. I looked into deffered payment for my dad. £350 in legal fees to set up. Plus an annual charge equivelant to 1.5% for ongoing fees/interest payable to the council on sale. This is in England (Dudley) last checked 18 months ago. Costs will vary across councils. Important that any siblings understand that the council will have a financial interest in the house (it is a type of equity release) and that all understand the financial arrangements your mum is setting up. I found Cardiff Council most helpful. Bad news is that you have to be on the ball to be effective in the process with understanding the system the main challenge. Age Cymru are very good at pointing in the right direction.
Good luck.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by life on mars

Unless its funded from the public purse , taxpayers or as other countries do through separate insurance , as you righty point out folk are living and working longer that pulls on the purse strings as the elderly need greater support and care , we can't have it all ways Covid health funding ,vaccines , job / business support , has tipped the world of government funding on its head , extreme measure for extreme times .

I note the triple lock is going to be suspended or scrapped , this is a big balancing act .

---

And there is debate about one tax , however in 2023 the levy will appear separated on wage slips as a health levy , for me I want to see the overall of the NHS and Social Care in which is coming in a bill as you have to have a plan to spend this in the right places there is so much waste and abuse of the NHS services because the services is free in its ( entirety unlike a lot of other countries where you get basic minimum health care free and pay insurance thereafter for social care ie Italy and Germany to name two ).

The big move for me would be to drag the social care back under the NHS umbrella , get rid of private companies running social care , to ensure we get the buck we deserve not for someone to profit from , and critically pay those carers a decent wage

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IanD

Have you got Power of Attorney set up? A shed load of paperwork but very, very useful when it comes to any financial dealings such as deferred payment. Also, depending on the value of the house, care costs can outstrip asset value in a matter of years.4 years on an average house. I looked into deffered payment for my dad. £350 in legal fees to set up. Plus an annual charge equivelant to 1.5% for ongoing fees/interest payable to the council on sale. This is in England (Dudley) last checked 18 months ago. Costs will vary across councils. Important that any siblings understand that the council will have a financial interest in the house (it is a type of equity release) and that all understand the financial arrangements your mum is setting up. I found Cardiff Council most helpful. Bad news is that you have to be on the ball to be effective in the process with understanding the system the main challenge. Age Cymru are very good at pointing in the right direction.
Good luck.

---

If your mother and father are still alive but your mother is in a care home isn't the assumption made that only your mother's share of the house (50% assuming tenants in common) is taken into consideration? Furthermore would your father be required to sell the house he lives if your mother dies before him?

Sorry for the daft question but I am trying to get to grips with my understanding of the past and present situation because things must have changed since I was involved in this issue for my parents.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IanD

Have you got Power of Attorney set up? A shed load of paperwork but very, very useful when it comes to any financial dealings such as deferred payment. Also, depending on the value of the house, care costs can outstrip asset value in a matter of years.4 years on an average house. I looked into deffered payment for my dad. £350 in legal fees to set up. Plus an annual charge equivelant to 1.5% for ongoing fees/interest payable to the council on sale. This is in England (Dudley) last checked 18 months ago. Costs will vary across councils. Important that any siblings understand that the council will have a financial interest in the house (it is a type of equity release) and that all understand the financial arrangements your mum is setting up. I found Cardiff Council most helpful. Bad news is that you have to be on the ball to be effective in the process with understanding the system the main challenge. Age Cymru are very good at pointing in the right direction.
Good luck.

---

Yes fortunately we have POA in place, before my mum's dementia set in.
With Cardiff there's a £330 set up charge, then no interest providing you pay back with 56 days of the end of the contract. The house is in a holiday area so we are renting it out to help with her funding, trying hard to avoid selling it as it's an investment for myself and brothers in the long run as well as generating income now.
Thank you :thumbup:

something always doesn't seem to add up with care in this country. the costs are always eye watering. thousands per week. that can wipe through a value of a house in a couple of years.
yet at the same time there is no money to pay the carers adequately, they are hugely stressed and leaving the industry in droves.

where does it all go?

I don't know how to address it but the current system is completely broken.
someone who is really rich, can afford to pay for their care in old age from pensions and investments or rental income that they don't need to work for, so their house isn't touched.
whereas many other people will end up losing everything they e ever saved to pay for their last few years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

something always doesn't seem to add up with care in this country. the costs are always eye watering. thousands per week. that can wipe through a value of a house in a couple of years.
yet at the same time there is no money to pay the carers adequately, they are hugely stressed and leaving the industry in droves.

where does it all go?

I don't know how to address it but the current system is completely broken.
someone who is really rich, can afford to pay for their care in old age from pensions and investments or rental income that they don't need to work for, so their house isn't touched.
whereas many other people will end up losing everything they e ever saved to pay for their last few years.

---

I think there are plenty of unscrupulous business owners making a fortune out of it.
Same goes for the multi property landlords.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Grievous Angel

The spin doctors (via the media) told us that individual employeeswould pay 2% extra, so I don't see what point you're trying to make by bringing employers' NI into it.

---

Actually the increase is not 1.25% it is actually 10%


if National Insurance is rising from 12% to 13.25% it is NOT rising by 1.25%. It is rising by 1.25 percentage points. if you want to describe its rise in percentage terms, it is rising by just over 10%. It is a 10% tax hike

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY

The social care system in this country has had it

The elderly population keeps living longer

And the people who work in care are paid crap wages

It's a tsunami

---

thank feck for those immigrants that are willing to work for peanuts...oh yeah, they all got sent home :hehe:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bluesp

Thanks Sludge, she has been in a care home since May last year. I spoke with Age Cymru a few weeks ago, they were really helpful in helping make sense of the system after the council confused the hell out of me. We are looking at the deferred payment agreement so we don't have to sell her house. Do you think Age Cymru can kick the council up the arse then?

---

If anyone can do it they can

Is anyone living in the house at the moment as their only residence ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bluesp

Do pensioners pay NI still?

---

To clarify working pensioners will pay the new tax.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vindec

If your mother and father are still alive but your mother is in a care home isn't the assumption made that only your mother's share of the house (50% assuming tenants in common) is taken into consideration? Furthermore would your father be required to sell the house he lives if your mother dies before him?

Sorry for the daft question but I am trying to get to grips with my understanding of the past and present situation because things must have changed since I was involved in this issue for my parents.

---

If both parents are alive, the value of the home is completely ignored providing that one owner (or anyone relative over the age of 60 is living there as their main home) - it doesn't matter if t's owned as tenants in common or jointly tenancy.

Top advice from Ian about Lasting Power of Attorney - absolutely essential for everyone of any age. The example I give clients is Kate Garraway who had to rely on financial support from friends and family when her husband was suffering from Covid and everything was frozen as he hadn't set up Power of Attorney.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bluesp

Yes fortunately we have POA in place, before my mum's dementia set in.
With Cardiff there's a £330 set up charge, then no interest providing you pay back with 56 days of the end of the contract. The house is in a holiday area so we are renting it out to help with her funding, trying hard to avoid selling it as it's an investment for myself and brothers in the long run as well as generating income now.
Thank you :thumbup:

---

I think the deferred payment scheme will mean a charge is made on the house and in order to avoid selling mum's house you have to between you pay that charge or the council will force a sale

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY

If anyone can do it they can

Is anyone living in the house at the moment as their only residence ?

---

Nice one, I'll go back to them.
No, it's rented out for the summer/ autumn at the moment

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by life on mars

And there is debate about one tax , however in 2023 the levy will appear separated on wage slips as a health levy , for me I want to see the overall of the NHS and Social Care in which is coming in a bill as you have to have a plan to spend this in the right places there is so much waste and abuse of the NHS services because the services is free in its ( entirety unlike a lot of other countries where you get basic minimum health care free and pay insurance thereafter for social care ie Italy and Germany to name two ).

The big move for me would be to drag the social care back under the NHS umbrella , get rid of private companies running social care , to ensure we get the buck we deserve not for someone to profit from , and critically pay those carers a decent wage

---

I totally agree

Private companies raking in the money and paying crap wages to the carers

Many on under 9 quid an hour

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bluesp

Nice one, I'll go back to them.
No, it's rented out for the summer/ autumn at the moment

---

Get some advice on your concerns too , you are helping mum but it's understandable you have a future life too

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

something always doesn't seem to add up with care in this country. the costs are always eye watering. thousands per week. that can wipe through a value of a house in a couple of years.
yet at the same time there is no money to pay the carers adequately, they are hugely stressed and leaving the industry in droves.

where does it all go?

I don't know how to address it but the current system is completely broken.
someone who is really rich, can afford to pay for their care in old age from pensions and investments or rental income that they don't need to work for, so their house isn't touched.
whereas many other people will end up losing everything they e ever saved to pay for their last few years.

---

If social care was brought under direct control of NHS and local authorities then that would be a start .....better wages , secure employment , workers rights .......but for many years thanks to thatcher private companies bid for care packages from local councils

They treat the staff like shit and pay them shit ........and therfore the standard of care is shit

Yet the private companies roll more and more money in , year in year out

And anyone who thinks the care staff looking after their loved ones in a nice home are on good wages ........don't be mistaken

The owners of these care homes ?

Minted

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ToTaL ITK

thank feck for those immigrants that are willing to work for peanuts...oh yeah, they all got sent home :hehe:

---

Well I wasn't going to say it but ....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Re-sign Carl Dale

If both parents are alive, the value of the home is completely ignored providing that one owner (or anyone relative over the age of 60 is living there as their main home) - it doesn't matter if t's owned as tenants in common or jointly tenancy.

Top advice from Ian about Lasting Power of Attorney - absolutely essential for everyone of any age. The example I give clients is Kate Garraway who had to rely on financial support from friends and family when her husband was suffering from Covid and everything was frozen as he hadn't set up Power of Attorney.

---

Does the other half , as it were or any relative living there as their main home whilst wife or husband is in care home eventually have to pay care home fees for loved one as you say the house is ignored ?

I assume savings are then looked at ?

But once they run out what happens regarding care fees , if the house isn't counted and there is no savings or investments left .....who pays ?

This is a brave political move by Johnson it will be interesting to see how this plays out .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY

If social care was brought under direct control of NHS and local authorities then that would be a start .....better wages , secure employment , workers rights .......but for many years thanks to thatcher private companies bid for care packages from local councils

They treat the staff like shit and pay them shit ........and therfore the standard of care is shit

Yet the private companies roll more and more money in , year in year out

And anyone who thinks the care staff looking after their loved ones in a nice home are on good wages ........don't be mistaken

The owners of these care homes ?

Minted

---

I think it needs to be all under the NHS, local authorities should not be involved.
if the budgets are controlled by the same group then there aren't conflicts of interest and they can focus on better outcomes for patients.
they might be able to redirect some NHS money into care to ensure better availability, meaning less beds are blocked and less hospital acquired infections etc

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by life on mars

This is a brave political move by Johnson it will be interesting to see how this plays out .

---

There's an argument about whether it should NI, income tax or some other form of tax, but I don't see he had much choice - don't forget he was telling us he had a plan for social care before the pandemic was heard about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dml1954

Sounds like the politics of envy there to me. Plus, just because you are living in a house worth over £500000 doesn’t mean you are rich. There are two or three bed semis in Cardiff worth that. Plus again that most pensioners have worked hard all their life, paid their taxes and National Insurance, and spent/saved their money prudently, so why should they have their property snatched off them later in life.

---

the point here is that the NICs paid by today's pensioners were based on life expectancy after retirement of 5 may be 10 years. We are now seeing pensioners live well into their 90s, meaning the cost of their pension is 3x what it was originally thought to be. You factor in social care and health care costs too and suddenly you appreciate today's pensioners have paid in nowhere near enough.

the issue is that pensioners forma huge voting block, and governments are scared of upsetting the block for fear of losing large swathes of votes.

something had to be done, although whether the way to finance it was the way chosen by this government is debatable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dandywarhol

From today yes,

---

only if they work, which is fair enough

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY

If all this money is going into social care do you think the poorly paid ......many on 9 quid an hour .....health care staff that work for these money making private companies will benefit ?

Better pay

Better work conditions


No chance

Social care should be brought back under local authority complete control

At present social services send out a job for these private care companies to bid for ....lowest bidder ......paying crap wages ....gets the work

The directors rake in the cash , the staff are treated like dirt

And if you think your loved ones are treated and cared for by well paid , motivated staff when in care homes .......think again

---

LAs can stipulate that those tendering must meet certain obligations, such as a minimum level of pay. There is no reason why the LAs can't dictate the terms.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

There's an argument about whether it should NI, income tax or some other form of tax, but I don't see he had much choice - don't forget he was telling us he had a plan for social care before the pandemic was heard about.

---

As I see it not much has changed and the new arrangements are far from being a solution to the problem of long term care. The government's statement is all smoke and mirrors. Originally I thought the government had at least made a decision about future care but the bottom line is that even under the new arrangements, once savings are exhausted, houses will have to be sold to pay for the housing element of care for a single individual as well as for care itself. This of course pre-supposes that the house is not required to house a partner/spouse who is able to remain as that component is not included.

Many thanks to Carl Dale who has advanced my understanding of the situation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Bloop

Read earlier that someone was complaining that theyd be paying an extra £1300 a year.
Must be tough for them living off a salary of £100k

---

I'll be worse off by several thousand a year. I won't even notice it and neither will someone losing £1300 a year on a £100k salary. I'd pay more if it meant those earning less paid less.

If we have champagne tastes we can't expect to use beer money.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Feedback

the point here is that the NICs paid by today's pensioners were based on life expectancy after retirement of 5 may be 10 years. We are now seeing pensioners live well into their 90s, meaning the cost of their pension is 3x what it was originally thought to be. You factor in social care and health care costs too and suddenly you appreciate today's pensioners have paid in nowhere near enough.

the issue is that pensioners forma huge voting block, and governments are scared of upsetting the block for fear of losing large swathes of votes.

something had to be done, although whether the way to finance it was the way chosen by this government is debatable.

---

I think this is sticking plaster

Pensioners tend to vote tory and read the daily mail

If there were tax rises across the board , which is needed to claw things back , then half the country would be up in arms

The tories have been in charge for 11 years now , they have to break out of this no tax increases nonsense

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Undercoverinwurzelland

Social care definitely needs sorting as it's been underfunded for ages, but NI in it's current form is the wrong way to fund it.
Someone earning £20k a year will now pay 6.9% of their salary on NI, going up to 10.7% at £50k - fair enough, but then it starts to go down, with £100k earners paying 7% and £130k earners 6.1%.
Income from share dividends, investments and property are exempt from NI too.
Should be income tax, not NI.

---

Dividend tax is also going up by 1.5% - so if like me you are a director of your own company I'll pay 1.5% extra NI as an employee, 1.5% extra as an employer and 1.5% extra for dividends.

My wife and I are both employees and directors fo in total thats 9%....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wash DC Blue

Because they have paid into the system for their WORKING lives.
It’ should be owed to them.
Their frugality or smart investments should go to what the **** they want.

---

say that with a straight face

they should raise inheritance tax. make it massive. close the loopholes that people avoid paying it.

many older people are sitting on huge property values that by mostly luck have increased incredibly while they've lived there. they've done nothing to create that increase it has just happened.
people inheriting that wealth have done nothing to earn it either other than be born to the right people

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Feedback

LAs can stipulate that those tendering must meet certain obligations, such as a minimum level of pay. There is no reason why the LAs can't dictate the terms.

---

Well somethings not right because the carers in South Wales are all on 9 pound an hour

The private companies are making a killing on the backs of the vulnerable and the carers they employ

The council put the contracts out for care to care companies and those that get the work are the cheapest

That's the free market for you 😉

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Toadstool

Dividend tax is also going up by 1.5% - so if like me you are a director of your own company I'll pay 1.5% extra NI as an employee, 1.5% extra as an employer and 1.5% extra for dividends.

My wife and I are both employees and directors fo in total thats 9%....

---

Kin hell

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY

I think this is sticking plaster

Pensioners tend to vote tory and read the daily mail

If there were tax rises across the board , which is needed to claw things back , then half the country would be up in arms

The tories have been in charge for 11 years now , they have to break out of this no tax increases nonsense

---

Sludge

this government is collecting more in tax than any government before it. We currently pay around 35% of GDP in taxation. The Tories are not a party of low taxes, a complete myth peddled by the party and its supporters.

People seem to be ignoring that employers will also pay an extra 1.25% NIER and shareholders will also pay an extra 1.25% on dividends.

The devil is in the detail, and if this was Labour announcing these tax rises and spend decisions, those on the left would be hailing it as revolutionary and much needed. which it is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Toadstool

Dividend tax is also going up by 1.5% - so if like me you are a director of your own company I'll pay 1.5% extra NI as an employee, 1.5% extra as an employer and 1.5% extra for dividends.

My wife and I are both employees and directors fo in total thats 9%....

---

if you're a director of your own company neither you or the company will pay NICS, if you are you need a better accountant. you'll pay the extra 1.25% on divs though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

they should raise inheritance tax. make it massive. close the loopholes that people avoid paying it.

many older people are sitting on huge property values that by mostly luck have increased incredibly while they've lived there. they've done nothing to create that increase it has just happened.
people inheriting that wealth have done nothing to earn it either other than be born to the right people

---

inheritance tax is 40%, the second highest rate of tax after surtax on employment income.

why should the state take someone's house after they die?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vindec

As I see it not much has changed and the new arrangements are far from being a solution to the problem of long term care. The government's statement is all smoke and mirrors. Originally I thought the government had at least made a decision about future care but the bottom line is that even under the new arrangements, once savings are exhausted, houses will have to be sold to pay for the housing element of care for a single individual as well as for care itself. This of course pre-supposes that the house is not required to house a partner/spouse who is able to remain as that component is not included.

Many thanks to Carl Dale who has advanced my understanding of the situation.

---

It's fair to say I wouldn't vote conservative if it were my last act on earth

However what have Labour and the liberals , together stronger .......suggested ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY

Well somethings not right because the carers in South Wales are all on 9 pound an hour

The private companies are making a killing on the backs of the vulnerable and the carers they employ

The council put the contracts out for care to care companies and those that get the work are the cheapest

That's the free market for you ��

---

surely the council can state in the tender what the terms of engagement must be...the council hold all the aces, but they put out to tender for the lowest cost bidder.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY

Kin hell

---

its not 9% sludge, that's a little wide of the mark