One in three troops hit by tax rise


A third of all members of the Armed Forces have been made poorer by Gordon Brown's decision to scrap the 10p tax rate, calculations have disclosed.

The disclosure will pile further pressure on Mr Brown over the decision to scrap the lower rate.

In his last Budget as Chancellor last year, Mr Brown scrapped the 10 per cent starting rate of income tax and used the money raised to cut the basic rate from 22 per cent to 20 per cent.

The changes have left 5.3 million households worse off, among them the lowest-paid workers in Britain. Anyone earning between £5,200 and £18,500 will lose out because of the abolition of the 10p rate.

Among them are up to 66,000 Armed Forces personnel, according to calculations by Vince Cable, the Liberal Democrat Treasury spokesman.

Ministry of Defence statistics put total numbers for the Army, Royal Navy and Royal Air Force at around 196,000, meaning that more than 34 per cent of service personnel have been left worse off.

The most junior private soldiers and their equivalents in the other services have a starting annual salary of just £14,349. Abolishing the 10 per cent band will cost them £89 over the next year.

For those junior service people, this year's 2.6 per cent pay rise is worth £373.

Dr Cable said: "This is a shabby deal from ministers who appear to care little about those who put their lives on the line for Britain.

"How can we be asking our hard-pressed personnel to pay more in tax when we pay them so little in the first place?

"This is a disgraceful way to reward our armed forces for the fighting they are doing in Afghanistan and Iraq at this Government's behest."

Labour has come under heavy political fire over its treatment and funding of the Armed Forces, with several former defence chiefs accusing ministers of breaking the military covenant between the Government and the Forces.

Liam Fox, the shadow defence secretary, said the tax change was another breach of the covenant.

He said: "This news will hardly help the morale of our troops on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan or their families back home. Only a Labour government could justify such a move on our brave armed forces."

Douglas Young, of the British Armed Forces Federation, said ministers had tried to keep the impact of the changes quiet, meaning many military personnel were only just starting to realise they are worse off.

He said: "It is outrageous that our junior service personnel are going to be made worse off.

"When things are being increased, the bands are playing and the Government makes a lot of noise about it, but the Government has not owned up to this change."
Hit the low paid Gord, why dontcha!
with he sounds like a tory what next reduced school funding


Stop moaning, they are uping the tax credits for single mums, what more do you want.
I wonder how many Service and Service widow pensioners are similarly affected? A significant number must lie within the income bracket quoted (£5,200 to £18,500).


Dunservin said:
I wonder how many Service and Service widow pensioners are similarly affected? A significant number must lie within the income bracket quoted (£5,200 to £18,500).
This is where it get a little more complicated.
War Pensions are tax free. OAP is not but the tax allowance for someone aged 65 and over jumps from £5435 to £9030.
Those aged under 65 with taxable income of under £18.5K are the ones being hit.
A younger war widow may have a job as well as her war pension & only that part will be hit, so she may or may not be better off.


Governments own figures suggest that over 5 million people will be involved, so I think some of us will fall into that category.

However a leading TORY suggested that this is a good move and would simplify the tax system. As is normal, some of us are crapped on.

Nobody seemed to want to complain when the original statement was made over 1 year ago. Cheap point scoring by other parties with nobody saying what they would do instead. The conservative party have already said they would not be able change any think covered in the last two budgets and now toy boy Cameron is saying that he would reintroduce the 10p tax threshold.

Once again our great politicians use double speak.


Liarbor MPs voted for it in the 2007 Finance Bill & being generous perhaps thought that the new chancellor would use an above inflation uplift in tax allownces to offset the problem for the low paid.
There again maybe they are just thick sheep & have only just cottoned on.
At the time there was plenty about it in the national press.
This is flippin' outrageous! The rich get richer and the poor poorer. It does my head in! especially as they have released what all the MP's are spending! No wonder there isn't much left in the kitty!

I mean just look at this 'Shahid Malik, the Junior International Minister and MP for Dewsbury spent £26,069 on on stationery!'.

They wonder why less and less people are voting and trusting in politics and government. Money taking idiots!

I have just found this; 'Siobhain McDonagh, the Labour MP for Mitcham & Morden spent £49,107 on stationery!'. It's just wrong!

In Total for the government spent £87.6 million on expenses...nuts!
I watched Brown's budget speech live when he introduced this (yep sad I know). The measure to cut 22% band to 20% and make 20% the starting band was greeted by whoops and yells by the Liarbour MPs. It was then I realised that the MPs had no idea that the minimum tax band was 10% and that the lowest paid members of the public would have to pay more in income tax. Of course MPs were too busy at the troughs to notice this.

Last Saturday a female Liarbour minister said on Radio 4 that over the last few years the people at the bottom of the earnings table had proportionally done better than those at the top. What twisted world do these people live in?

New Posts