Soldato
Well that depends on circumstances.
If I was a single person here, 50k would be a really good salary.
Tax in UK
- Thread starter aspiring
- Start date
Well that depends on circumstances.
If I was a single person here, 50k would be a really good salary.
Man of Honour
Until you get to the 8th level on Hell and you need better AC.
We already have far too many people taking more than they contribute.
Record number of Britons receiving benefits that amount to more than they pay in tax, study finds
Analysis by think tank Civitas shows 83% of all income tax is paid by 40% of British adults. The study's authors say the "net dependency ratio" is the highest on record.
Increasingly a small minority are forced to carry the burden for the unproductive majority. Whether it's the state pension, benefits, or anything else, this is not sustainable and unless we do something we risk the system collapsing onto itself.
what are DB pensions?
depends on your career?
Soldato
Defined benefit. Not usual these days and obviously safe if they are a government one but they are more risky for companies so it’s usual to have a defined contribution pension.
Soldato
Of course in some careers £50k + is normal. For the majority of people, it is not easy to get a job north of £50k. It is not an easy salary to come by, you can't just walk into a £50k job, from what I have seen of job adverts in my area.
Last edited:
Caporegime
Well I've just learnt about High Income Child Benefit Charge. 
Lots of people seem to forget this. You have to remember that we're on a tech forum so most people earn a good wage but it's not representative of the UK as a whole.
Last edited:
Man of Honour
When I got to a 50k salary as a single person at the time with no kids, there were points where I didn't know what to do with it.
I'd been paying off a big chunk of debt for years - and when that was cleared, for a while it really was like "What do I do with all this money"
Man of Honour
Sucks doesn't it.Well I've just learnt about High Income Child Benefit Charge.
The 50k threshold is really annoying, especially with kids, as said above.
If one of you goes over 50k, you have to start paying child benefit back, but you can both earn 50k and keep every penny, what is that all about......
Try to do your best for your family and take all the OT available and then it's taken for lazy people to sit at home and do nothing.
And with wages going up more than normal (7.3% average on news this morning)people will be hitting at 50k threshold sooner, which I'm sure the government are loving.
To not pay the tax or child benefit back, I can pay money into my pension and keep my taxable income below the threshold, but then I don't have more now for the higher cost of living.
If one of you goes over 50k, you have to start paying child benefit back, but you can both earn 50k and keep every penny, what is that all about......
Try to do your best for your family and take all the OT available and then it's taken for lazy people to sit at home and do nothing.
And with wages going up more than normal (7.3% average on news this morning)people will be hitting at 50k threshold sooner, which I'm sure the government are loving.
To not pay the tax or child benefit back, I can pay money into my pension and keep my taxable income below the threshold, but then I don't have more now for the higher cost of living.
£100,000 a year single salary allows for more expendable cash each month however, its certainly not a lavish lifestyle. This includes living in cheaper locations in the UK. You get to worry less about (within reason) monthly outgoings or bills going for meals - however it is all relative.
Last edited:
Man of Honour
I've said this before.
But if as a household you each earn £99,999 - that's a combined income just shy of 200k.
You're entitled to 30hrs free child care per month and tax free childcare.
If 1 of you earns 100k and the other earns say 20k that's a combined income of 120k.
You are NOT entitled to 30hrs or tax free child care. And as a household you have a lot less.
It doesn't seem right to me. It should be based on household income not individual income.
Soldato
Of course it does depend on other circumstances, but a £100k salary if you already bought a normal house a few years ago, with no kids and normal bills would easily enable very nice holidays a few times a year, a new car, lots of high end PC toys. Or if you're not into any of that you could easily save £1-2k a month. So I think to say £100k is not enough for a lavish lifestyle is plain wrong. Yes you're not buying yachts or £3k a night New York penthouses, but its a very very good monthly number. Of course, you'd have to work for it too, £100k a year jobs are rare.
Depends what you as an individual define as lavish.
I would also say 100k jobs a year now are not that uncommon in certain IT fields.
Last edited:
We already have far too many people taking more than they contribute.
Record number of Britons receiving benefits that amount to more than they pay in tax, study finds
Analysis by think tank Civitas shows 83% of all income tax is paid by 40% of British adults. The study's authors say the "net dependency ratio" is the highest on record.news.sky.com
Increasingly a small minority are forced to carry the burden for the unproductive majority. Whether it's the state pension, benefits, or anything else, this is not sustainable and unless we do something we risk the system collapsing onto itself.
Its coming.
Hard choices (unpopular choices) are going to have to be made.
When the majority start supporting tax increases and more state support, that's when you're into "screwed" territory.
The effects are starting to be felt now. But I don't see it getting better, but worse.
How long before state pension his 80?
I suppose we should take "average" conditions and compare various wages?
What's the average house.. 270k?
On 100k that's a good life.
Split that between a couple (50/50) and you can probably throw in kids and still have a nice life.
Its all about that house/childcare. That's the thing that changes things.
But if your house is 500k. You will eventually benefit from that later in life. If you're on 100k from (let's say) 35 years old. You may be in an "OK" position now. Because you have that big mortgage. But you will reap the benefits later. (ie moving to a cheaper area to retire).
Someone on 50,living a better life now (my choice) doesn't have that option.
Its the same choice.
I could probably be on 80 and my partner 45 in a more expensive area. Rather than 55 and 30 (like we are) And trade now for later. But it's my choice (as it is for those on 100k living for later) to make that call.
What's the average house.. 270k?
On 100k that's a good life.
Split that between a couple (50/50) and you can probably throw in kids and still have a nice life.
Its all about that house/childcare. That's the thing that changes things.
But if your house is 500k. You will eventually benefit from that later in life. If you're on 100k from (let's say) 35 years old. You may be in an "OK" position now. Because you have that big mortgage. But you will reap the benefits later. (ie moving to a cheaper area to retire).
Someone on 50,living a better life now (my choice) doesn't have that option.
Its the same choice.
I could probably be on 80 and my partner 45 in a more expensive area. Rather than 55 and 30 (like we are) And trade now for later. But it's my choice (as it is for those on 100k living for later) to make that call.
Last edited:
Man of Honour
I think that's a very generalistic post. Lavish is very subjective as well.
As a single person then yes you'll have more disposable income but as for buying a nice car and so on nah unless you lease it.
I do agree that paying bills and going on holiday will be done easily if you don't have other debts or high monthly outgoings.
Permabanned
But we often hear from those doing well in that if you want a better outcome then get a better job.
Well if your struggling on £100k then move somewhere cheaper!
Well if your struggling on £100k then move somewhere cheaper!