Wednesday 16th March 2016

(8 years, 8 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Question
15:15
Asked by
Baroness Seccombe Portrait Baroness Seccombe
- Hansard - - - Excerpts



To ask Her Majesty’s Government by how much the amount a person can earn before paying tax has changed since the 2010 Budget; and how many people have been affected by this change.

Lord O'Neill of Gatley Portrait The Commercial Secretary to the Treasury (Lord O'Neill of Gatley) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, since the 2010 Budget, the amount a person can earn before paying tax has increased by more than 60%, from £6,475 in 2010-11 to £10,600 in 2015-16 this tax year. Next month, it will increase again to £11,000, and in today’s Budget the Chancellor of the Exchequer has announced that it will rise by a further £500 in April 2017 to £11,500. A considerable number of taxpayers will benefit from these changes.

Baroness Seccombe Portrait Baroness Seccombe (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, that is an amazing figure, which I am sure we will all appreciate. It is especially important for young people. However, tax is only part of the issue; wages are also important. Can my noble friend tell the House how much the increased minimum wage will help the young, and how many will be affected?

Lord O'Neill of Gatley Portrait Lord O'Neill of Gatley
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, I welcome my noble friend’s phraseology. From October 2016, the new national minimum wage rate will mean a pay rise of up to £450 a year for nearly half a million young workers. The Government will increase the main national minimum wage rate to £6.95, 25p more than the current rate. This is the largest increase since 2008 in cash terms. It is expected to reach its highest level ever in real terms, surpassing its pre-recession peak.

Lord Campbell-Savours Portrait Lord Campbell-Savours (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

On the question of the tax take, why did the Chancellor not deal with personal service companies today?

Lord O'Neill of Gatley Portrait Lord O'Neill of Gatley
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I anticipated that a number of things might be asked at this session so shortly after the Budget had been announced, and I encourage many noble Lords, if they have the chance before next week’s debate, to read the Red Book. They will then be more aware of the real details of what has been announced, including, I think, something in this area.

Lord Newby Portrait Lord Newby (LD)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I thank the noble Baroness for reminding the House of an extremely successful Liberal Democrat policy. Given that the Chancellor has already broken two of his three fiscal targets, will the Minister now agree that they should be abandoned along with the cuts in spending and benefits, which particularly affect the poor and the disabled and which the Chancellor claimed were necessary just to meet those failed targets?

Lord O'Neill of Gatley Portrait Lord O'Neill of Gatley
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, of course I am not going to rise to that bait, but I would like to point out—and it is another reason why I encourage people to study the Red Book in close detail—that, in contrast to the mood among many observers and certainly in the media, the target for this year’s nominal budget deficit has come in lower than forecast at the Autumn Statement. The only reason that it is at the same level as a share of GDP and that the overall current debt level to GDP is higher than desired is the evident other news that the level of nominal GDP was significantly lower than before. In terms of policy, and on the contrary to what was said in that question, the plan is very much in place and on target.

Lord Clark of Windermere Portrait Lord Clark of Windermere (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, the Minister has quite rightly taken pleasure in announcing the higher level of income that people can earn before they start to pay tax at 20%, and of course we welcome that. But there is a group of people who, it was announced in the Budget, will lose 100% of their income. I am talking about disabled people in receipt of personal independence payment. The Chancellor evaded the details of that decision, so I wonder if the Minister can advise the House of the Treasury’s estimate of the number of disabled people who will lose part or all of their benefit.

Lord O'Neill of Gatley Portrait Lord O’Neill of Gatley
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, I plan to make some longer comments specifically about this sensitive issue next week when I open the debate on the Budget. There are some very important complexities behind the policies which, frankly, were misunderstood in the way they were reported at the weekend.

Lord Lexden Portrait Lord Lexden (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, the second part of my noble friend’s original Question asked,

“how many people have been affected”,

by raising these tax thresholds. Can my noble friend give us the figures to show the extent to which people have benefited from the changes?

Lord O'Neill of Gatley Portrait Lord O’Neill of Gatley
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, as a result of the changes announced in the Budget today and in the summer Budget 2015, 31 million individuals will see their income tax bill reduced in 2017-18. This is close to an additional 1 million whose income tax has been reduced as a result of the previously announced measures. A typical base-rate taxpayer is going to pay notably less—just over £1,000 less tax in 2017-18 than back in 2010-11—while a typical high-rate taxpayer will pay more than £1,100 less than would otherwise have been the case. Let me add that this is the first time that there has not been an even stronger benefit for the lowest-income earners over the whole of that period.