| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Remaining Private Members Bills
MEDICAL TREATMENT (PREVENTION OF EUTHANASIA) BILL
Order read for resuming adjourned debate on Question [14 April] on consideration of Bill, as amended in the Standing Committee.
A new clause--Consent of the Director of Public Prosecutions--
- ".--No prosecution under this Act shall be brought without the prior consent of the Director of Public Prosecutions."--[Mr. Dismore.]
Debate to be resumed on Friday 21 July.
HEALTH AND SAFETY AT WORK (OFFENCES) BILL
Order for Second Reading read.
To be read a Second time on Friday 21 July.
FOOD LABELLING BILL
Order read for resuming adjourned debate on Question [3 March], That the Bill be now read a Second time.
To be read a Second time on Friday 21 July.
MISUSE OF DRUGS (AMENDMENT) BILL
Order for Second Reading read.
To be read a Second time on Friday 21 July.
RESIDENTIAL CARE HOMES AND NURSING HOMES (MEDICAL RECORDS) BILL
Order for Second Reading read.
To be read a Second time on Friday 21 July.
LICENSING (CANNABIS) BILL
Order for Second Reading read.
To be read a Second time on Friday 21 July.
MARINE WILDLIFE PROTECTION BILL
Order for Second Reading read.
To be read a Second time on Friday 21 July.
CHILDREN'S RIGHTS COMMISSIONER BILL
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Sir Alan Haselhurst): Not moved.
PROPERTY TRANSACTIONS BILL
Order for Second Reading read.
Hon. Members: Object. [Interruption.]
Mr. Deputy Speaker: May I say to the hon. Member for Cheadle (Mr. Day) that he is trying to do two things in one? He must first move the motion. If an objection is taken, he then offers a date.
To be read a Second time on Friday 21 July.
PUBLIC HOUSE NAMES BILL
POLICE BILL
PARDON FOR SOLDIERS OF THE GREAT WAR BILL
URBAN REGENERATION AND COUNTRYSIDE PROTECTION BILL
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Not moved.
CENSUS (AMENDMENT) BILL [LORDS]
Order for Second Reading read.
To be read a Second time on Monday next.
CORPORATE HOMICIDE BILL
Order for Second Reading read.
To be read a Second time on Friday 21 July.
ZOO LICENSING (AMENDMENT) BILL
Order for Second Reading read.
To be read a Second time on Friday 21 July.
ROAD TRAFFIC BILL
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Not moved.
HUMAN FERTILISATION AND EMBRYOLOGY (AMENDMENT) BILL
Order for Second Reading read.
To be read a Second time on Friday 21 July.
Low-income Pensioners (Tax)
Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.--[Mr. Pope.]
2.33 pm
Mr. Edward Davey (Kingston and Surbiton): I am grateful to the Chair for granting me this important debate. I am also grateful to those of my constituents who provided me with a great deal of information from their experiences with the Inland Revenue to assist me in preparing for the debate. Finally, I am grateful to the low income tax reform group of the Chartered Institute of Taxation, which has done much work on the subject, in particular the study published in December 1998 and entitled "Older people on low incomes: the case for a friendlier tax system." That study represents a manifesto for change which I hope the Government will make their own.
Why should we debate the issue today? I am sure that, in the constituencies of all right hon. and hon. Members, even the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth), pensioners on low incomes will be concerned about their state. There are 1.8 million pensioners on net incomes of below 50 per cent. of average household income. In other words, they are very poor. Fifty-seven per cent. of pensioners have incomes in the lowest four deciles. A significantly high percentage of people on low incomes are retired. When we consider the problems of those on low incomes, we must bear in mind that pensioners are greatly affected by them.
Should we worry about pensioners in the tax system? Ministers may say that more than two thirds of those aged 65 or more are not liable for income tax. However, a third of pensioners are liable for income tax. That amounts to nearly 3 million people. Even those pensioners who are not liable for income tax may have many dealings with the tax authorities under the current system. One reason why the debate is important, therefore, is that many pensioners are affected by the income tax system.
Why should tax administration issues that affect pensioners be a priority for the Inland Revenue? When one considers the system's impact, it becomes apparent that many pensioners experience practical difficulties in dealing with their tax affairs. That is not surprising. Pensioners are no longer in the workplace, so there is no administration department to help them through the pay-as-you-earn system. Many cannot afford professional advice, and many cannot access the free advice that the Inland Revenue provides. Disabled pensioners may not be able to get to a tax office; if they are deaf, they may not be able to use the telephone service. Many do not know about the free services that are available, as they may not have seen the existing literature.
The practical difficulties that pensioners face are compounded by the fact that they may deal with multiple agencies, including the Department of Social Security and local authorities. Pensioners may be hit especially hard by life events. Let us imagine the plight of a widow whose husband had looked after their tax affairs in the past. Suddenly, at a late stage in her life, she is expected to fill in tax forms of which she has no previous experience. One can think of many examples of life events that make pensioners vulnerable.
Pensioners face extra complexities in the tax regime. Many arise from facets of the regime that have been introduced to help pensioners and give them better
incomes. For example, the age-related allowances and higher personal allowances that pensioners receive are tapered and clawed back on higher incomes. That causes significant complexities. The way in which the married couples allowance works is more complicated for pensioners.Post-retirement income sources are also more complicated. Many are outside the PAYE system. Pensioners may have a variety of income sources from a variety of savings. The current system does not gather the data from those different sources especially effectively. More mistakes are made and the codings are more complicated.
The age group that we are considering is growing. One in five people are over 60; by 2010, that number will have increased to one in four; and, by 2025, it will have increased to one in three. The problems caused by the complexities that I outlined will therefore increase.
Why has not the problem been tackled until now? First, we might cynically say that the sums involved are relatively small. The Inland Revenue and previous Governments have paid little attention to the amounts involved and the overall issue. The Inland Revenue has established customer groups for people and companies that owe the tax man a lot of money, but not for those who owe little or nothing. Perhaps that is understandable, but in an age when more customer-focused methods are, I hope, being considered, that ideology must change.
Another practical reason why this issue has not be considered is the staffing cuts that the Inland Revenue has faced, especially under the previous Government. There are reasons why the matter has not been addressed, but it is time to do so, as is made clear in the Chartered Institute of Taxation report.
I could illustrate with a litany of examples, many of which are very emotive, the problems that many pensioners face with current Inland Revenue practices for administering the tax system. Pensioners have written to the institute to tell it about their disabilities, the fact that they have been widowed, the many problems involved in their lives as pensioners and how dealing with tax forms has been made difficult. However, I shall not do so, on condition that the Paymaster General gives me a nod of assurance. I should like her to assure me that she will re-read the report. For the record, she has shown that she has a copy of the report with her. I should like her to assure me that she will study it a second time so that I need not cite the examples.
The Paymaster General (Dawn Primarolo) indicated assent.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |