Letter: British pensioners are among the poorest in Europe
In the year ending March 2022, pensioners in the UK paid £19.5 billion in income tax.
This tax was collected from pensioners whose total income - including State Pension, private pensions, and other taxable earnings - exceeded the £12,570 personal allowance threshold.
If say the £200 Winter Fuel Payment (WFP) were spread out over a full year, it would equate to approximately £3.85 per week (£200 divided by 52 weeks).
Shame it could not be added to the State Pension instead then there would have been no means testing.
Even with the Triple Lock system, which ensures the pension rises annually by the highest of inflation, wage growth, or 2.5%, the UK State Pension remains below the minimum wage and is one of the lowest in Europe.
For example, pensions in France, Spain, and Germany tend to be significantly higher. In contrast, pensioners in Luxembourg receive up to £5,426.93 per month, significantly more than in the UK.
As for the £10 Christmas Bonus has remained unchanged since it was introduced by Edward Heath's Conservative government in 1972.
If it had been adjusted for inflation, it would be worth around £165 today. Some estimates suggest it could be closer to £130.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
14 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Britain has lost 1,100 pubs and restaurants since Budget
Britain has lost more than 1,100 pubs and restaurants since Rachel Reeves's Budget, underlining the devastating impact of the Chancellor's tax raid on the hospitality sector. Bars, restaurants, clubs and pubs are closing at a rate of two every day according to new figures from data providers CGA and AlixPartners, with 1,122 venues shutting since last October alone. Graeme Smith, of AlixPartners, said: 'After a period of relative stability for pub and restaurant businesses last year, the first half of 2025 has proved more challenging, with the net closure rate increasing again – the big question for hospitality is what happens from here.' The step-up in closures comes after the Chancellor raised costs for employers in her October Budget, with the changes coming into force from April. Hospitality businesses have been hit particularly hard by changes to employer National Insurance contributions. The headline rate rose from 13.8pc to 15pc, while the threshold at which employers must start paying it fell from £9,100 to £5,000 per year. It means employers must pay the tax on the wages of many part-time staff who until recently were exempt. Estimates suggest the rise in National Insurance contributions has added £1bn to hospitality wage bills. Meanwhile, Ms Reeves's decision to increase the minimum wage by 6.7pc has pushed up costs for the hospitality sector by £1.9bn. Kate Nicholls, the chairman of UKHospitality, said the new figures showed in 'the starkest terms the impact of government-driven cost pressures '. She added: 'Two hospitality venues closing every day is not just a statistic; it represents the hollowing out of our high streets and communities. Independent businesses, the lifeblood of our sector, are being disproportionately crushed under the weight of unfair taxation and soaring employment costs.' The UK now has 98,746 licenced hospitality venues, including sports and social clubs. That total is down by more than 16,000 since before the Covid pandemic hit in March 2020. Ms Nicholls said the sector faced 'the very real risk of being taxed out of existence'. The new figures come amid mounting concerns that the Chancellor's planned shake-up of business rates will pile further pressure on large hospitality companies. Ms Reeves is planning to impose higher levies on companies with bigger premises in order to reduce the rates paid by businesses with smaller sites. Large pub groups including JD Wetherspoon and Fuller's have warned that the planned shake-up will trigger more closures. Sir Tim Martin, Wetherspoon's chairman, said: 'Higher business rates will exacerbate the already ferocious tax disadvantage that pubs are currently labouring under, inevitably resulting in increased home consumption and less pubs.' The British Beer and Pub Association has suggested that one pub would shut every day across Britain this year. CGA's figures show restaurants have seen the most closures over the past year: 633 closed in the year to June, while more than 100 casual dining chain branches and 326 gastropubs have shut. Ms Nicholls demanded 'urgent, decisive action to relieve the burden on a sector that should be a powerful engine for economic growth and job creation across the entire country'. Andrew Griffith, the shadow business secretary, said: 'The revelation that hospitality venues are closing at the rate of two every day as a result of this Government's choices is very concerning. 'It shows how these staples of high streets and communities are hitting breaking point under the weight of hikes in rates, jobs taxes and employment costs. If everyone in Whitehall worked a shift or two in hospitality this summer, they might understand this better.' A government spokesman said a recent survey by Lloyds Bank suggested UK business confidence was 'the highest in ten years', adding: 'We know the vital importance of hospitality which is why we are protecting pavement pints and al fresco dining, have cut alcohol duty on draught pints and are reforming business rates. 'The tax decisions we took at the Budget last year mean that we have been able to deliver on the priorities of the British people, from investing in the NHS to cutting lists as we deliver on the Plan for Change.'
Telegraph
14 minutes ago
- Telegraph
The village pub I run is being taxed to death
At 5pm on Saturday, my pub sat empty. The beer garden was open, the sun was shining – yet there was not a single punter to serve. If you didn't know already that Britain's pubs are in crisis, then this sorry sight would have hammered home the catastrophic impact of Rachel Reeves's tax raid. For the hospitality industry, we've never seen a situation quite as bad as this. As well as an apocalyptic backdrop of soaring costs and rising levies, landlords are also battling an unprecedented shift in consumer behaviour. Families no long view a pit stop at the pub as an everyday social activity, but rather as a special treat. And I don't blame them. When the average price of a pint rose above £5, we crossed a psychological threshold that turned what used to be one of Britain's favourite pastimes into a luxury. No landlord wants to raise prices, but it is now the only way for us to recoup costs and survive in the face of higher taxes. Somehow, the Westminster elite is yet to grasp all of this. Despite the devastating effects of the Chancellor's National Insurance increase, there is talk of further tax rises this autumn. This would not only seal the fate of many more pubs and restaurants across the UK but also further unravel the country's social fabric. The pub was once a place to enjoy each other's company. A hub where people of all backgrounds could come to congregate, socialise and get out of the house. But tax rises have ripped that apart, as hard-up households choose the cheaper option of staying at home instead of popping out for a drink and a chat. Whatever we do to attract customers, visits keep falling – as people just aren't using the pub in the same way as old. I was confronted with this depressing reality at The Wonston Arms on Saturday afternoon. Despite our award-winning status, which includes being named Camra National Pub of the Year in 2018 and recently being awarded Hampshire's best boozer by The Telegraph, we did not have a single customer. In my 10 years running the pub, which is wet-led and does not serve food, I'd never experienced anything like it. It was one of the most shocking moments in what has been a dreadful year for the industry – one dominated by closures and job losses. Since the Chancellor's Budget, I have tried to strip all unnecessary costs from the business in the hope of putting us on a stable financial footing. I've got rid of Sky TV, scaled back our weekly opening hours from 35 to 27 and gone from having three full-time staff to running the pub myself, occasionally with the help of my wife and the odd part-timer. The volatility of trading and our ballooning tax bill have made it impossible for us to hire in the same way we used to. We're not alone. Every single landlord I speak to is now saying that costs are unbearable. And the worst thing is that we can't say everything is going to be alright next weekend, or the weekend after that. Trading in the hospitality industry today means survival, not success. This is why I am calling on the Government to cut VAT for hospitality in the next Budget. Avoid the temptation of tax rises and give us a reason to invest. No one in this game is here to sit still. We all want to grow, attract more business and strengthen our ties to the local community. I invite Sir Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves to personally come down to my pub to see how hard people like me are working. For all the pictures of politicians pulling pints and the countless promises to save Britain's pubs, it is now time for them to show they mean it.
The Herald Scotland
42 minutes ago
- The Herald Scotland
Now will the small minds of the SNP twig what voters care about?
Gus Connelly, Calderbank. Time to trim constituency Yet another bright light in Holyrood is dimmed, as Deputy First Minister [[Kate Forbes]] announces her intention to stand down from politics in 2026. Ms Forbes certainly lit up the Chamber back in 2020 as the first female to deliver a Scottish Budget (incidentally at short notice) and she brought great ability and commitment to her new-found position. To be an MSP in such a rural and geographically taxing constituency as Skye, Lochaber & Badenoch would be difficult for anyone, but for a mum with a young child it presents a scenario which raises questions. Should the Boundary Commission be considering geographically halving the constituency to make it manageable? Should Parliament be looking for options for such a widely-spread constituency? The make-up of constituencies should be manageable in the interest of constituents and their representatives. Catriona C Clark, Falkirk. Read more letters How much did Sturgeon cost us? In her paean of praise for Nicola Sturgeon's 'many achievements', Ruth Marr (Letters, August 2) draws a veil over the costs to the public purse of these policies. With regard to the SNP's abolition of prescription charges, perhaps one example will suffice to illustrate the financial impact of this policy. The cost to NHS Scotland in 2023-24 for paracetamol prescriptions alone was £14 million. Adding pharmacy dispensing charges of £7m brings the total cost to £21m. A Google search reveals that a pack of paracetamol can be bought for around 90p in any supermarket. Alan Ramage, Edinburgh. • It is notable that the list of "achievements" by Nicola Sturgeon given by Ruth Marr all involve her spending other people's money. I wonder if Ms Marr can come up with an example of Ms Sturgeon making a positive contribution to achieving economic growth in Scotland. She certainly made many negative contributions like destroying the ferry service to Arran and allowing her erstwhile allies in the Green Party to introduce measures like National Planning Framework 4 that are strangling economic development all over Scotland. I also wonder if Ms Marr is aware that her hero's actions in relation to the ferries, including having the Glen Sannox launched on her direct orders six months before the ship was ready so that she could upstage the Conservative Defence Secretary when he was announcing new jobs, and her contribution to the closure of the Grangemouth oil refinery by further high-handed actions, have resulted in the new "greener" ferries actually being responsible for more emissions of carbon dioxide than their conventionally powered predecessors. This is because the diesel fuel that the conventional ferries use can be brought to Ardrossan by electrically powered railway trains but the Liquefied Natural Gas needed to make the new ferries "greener" has to be transported from Essex on diesel-powered lorries. You couldn't make it up. Peter Wylie, Paisley. Indy target should be two-thirds As GR Weir (Letters, August 2) has not answered my simple question as to how he would define his 'stable majority" for independence, allow me to propose two-thirds for consideration. In my view, irrespective of how, when and by whom the decision to hold another inevitably divisive referendum on independence is taken, the stable polling majority sufficient to justify it must be understood in advance, and to achieve independence the actual voting result must at least confirm that polling majority. That result can then be taken as the settled will of the people at that time. The same requirements would apply to any subsequent calls for a rejoin referendum. As Mr Weir will know, to change the constitution of the [[SNP]], the principal advocate of independence, requires at least a two-thirds majority (Article 27), so nationalists should have no difficulty in supporting my proposal. Alan Fitzpatrick, Dunlop. Why can't they admit mistakes? Kevin McKenna's interview with Jackie Baillie on Saturday (''I hated how Sandie Peggie's daughter was used', says Scottish Labour deputy leader', The Herald, August 2) highlights an uncomfortable but increasingly familiar feature of our politics: an unwillingness to accept responsibility for past decisions. In December 2022 Scottish Labour gave full support to the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill. The party whipped its MSPs to vote in favour and, with their backing, the legislation was passed by the Scottish Parliament. Since then, the well-publicised cases of Isla Bryson and Sandie Peggie have shown that public concern is widespread – particularly about allowing individuals to legally change their gender through self-identification, thereby acquiring all the rights of their preferred gender. Labour now appears to be pivoting in response to that unease. Jackie Baillie attempts to distance the party from the fallout by suggesting Labour's support of the bill was dependent on key amendments and a future consultation with the UK Government. This rings hollow. If those amendments were so crucial, why did the party not withdraw its support when they were not accepted? And what purpose does consultation serve after a bill has been passed? This kind of political hedging only deepens public distrust in the integrity of politicians. Would it not be more honest and more effective to simply say "Sorry. We got this wrong"? George Rennie, Inverness. How will Nicola Sturgeon be remembered? (Image: PA) Let the media into Gaza The first and continuing victim of war is truth. Despite evidence from non-Palestinians, western doctors among them, about the near-famine conditions in Gaza, it has not come as a surprise to watch and listen to Israeli officials claim it is a lie that Palestinians are facing starvation. From what I have seen from interviews with [[Israel]]i citizens, they too believe the world is subject to Hamas propaganda. There is a way for the world to see, without bias, the actual conditions under which Palestinians are now compelled to live – reverse the present [[Israel]]i policy and let the world's media into [[Gaza]] so that we can all see for ourselves from objective reporting. If not, why not, is the question Keir Starmer should put to his [[Israel]]i counterpart. As for Hamas, is it not past time for those in its leadership languishing in the safety of Qatar to be asked why, given its ability to construct miles of tunnels in Gaza, it did not build shelters for the population when it must have known that Israel would respond to the atrocity of October 7 with a fury not seen before? Jim Sillars, Edinburgh. Shame on Ian Murray The Secretary of State for Scotland's antipathy towards the Scottish Government is persistent, but surely reached a new low when he castigated Public Finance Minister Ivan McKee for using the word 'genocide' during a BBC broadcast discussion about recognising the state of Palestine ("Minister confirms Scottish Government 'genocide' in Gaza position", heraldscotland, August 3). Ian Murray wants the courts to decide what is genocide, presumably before the UK Government acts, and despite the fact that the UN Special Committee, Amnesty International and Médicin San Frontières have all used the term to describe the continuing Israeli actions in Gaza. In addition, reports from the front line bring us daily reports of massive fatalities, destruction of infrastructure, displacement of communities, murder of aid workers, and human rights abuses, all of which meet the criteria for genocide. But Ian Murray wants to wait on the courts, and by doing so extends the United Kingdom's complicity in the despicable acts of the Israeli state. Shame on him. Graeme Forbes, Edinburgh.
