The Student Room Group

UK government spend £5 billion on immigrants tax credits

The UK spends £5 billion a year on tax credits for immigrant workers (over 415,000) which is far more than benefits so is the major problem that unskilled workers are draining our economy

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2710158/Exclusive-The-inconvenient-truth-Mr-Cameron-ignored-crackdown-immigrant-benefits-Migrants-handed-5billion-tax-credits.html

Scroll to see replies

Housing benefit is the other big drain. Even if these people are working they are costing us cash.
Original post by Ace123
The UK spends £5 billion a year on tax credits for immigrant workers (over 415,000) which is far more than benefits so is the major problem that unskilled workers are draining our economy

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2710158/Exclusive-The-inconvenient-truth-Mr-Cameron-ignored-crackdown-immigrant-benefits-Migrants-handed-5billion-tax-credits.html


Immigrant pay tax probably much more than they recieve in credits.

Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Old_Simon
Housing benefit is the other big drain. Even if these people are working they are costing us cash.


Housing benifit is also taken from british citizrns too.

Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by ridwan12
Immigrant pay tax probably much more than they recieve in credits.

Posted from TSR Mobile

No they don't. The vast majority are at or below minimum wage often with children. Hence even in work they pay little tax but receive tax credits, housing benefit, child allowances etc. Plus access to free education and healthcare upto and including university.
Original post by Old_Simon
No they don't. The vast majority are at or below minimum wage often with children. Hence even in work they pay little tax but receive tax credits, housing benefit, child allowances etc. Plus access to free education and healthcare upto and including university.


There was some data produced recently that showed that on the whole immigrant workers paid more in to the system than they took out of the system...

Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by InconspicuousGuy
There was some data produced recently that showed that on the whole immigrant workers paid more in to the system than they took out of the system...

Posted from TSR Mobile

Highly dubious data and blatant propoganda (Government lies).
Isn't that fair though? In the past, the British Empire colonised a massive proportion of the world and extorted countries in the past - they had a huge drug-trading and slave-trading business.

Now, we should start thinking humanity as a whole and not say "the immigrants are draining the economy of this country" etc.

I don't like how people separate human societies by countries. I believe we are one.

Besides, the UK is a first world country so everyone in it shouldn't complain about it (IMO); there are people starving to death in third world countries.

Many rich people try to keep the poor countries poor so they can continue to extort them year after year.

Additionally, the world is supposed to be competitive. People say the weak perish and the strong live; but I think we should help the weak.

Unskilled workers are not draining the economy - it is creating more competition. That's good as then people may be more willing to work hard, improve their skill sets and become more worthy employees that would benefit the company more. Competition is something that raises standards. Perhaps more of the work should be automated.

The thing that could be draining the economy is jobs that could be automated.

Cigarettes? Those are draining the economy. Yes, they bring a lot of tax in, but the tax comes from the people themselves and money is being poured in to create cigarettes and advertise them. The total net profit in the country would therefore be negative in creating such a poison (cigarettes). Cigarettes also cause health problems which may increase NHS's workload and expense (I'm not saying smokers should not get healthcare, I think everyone deserves healthcare). Similarly, many repetitive jobs should start being automated like other countries have started doing. Yes, it may increase unemployment, but the total net profit of a country would increase? Maybe the increases could be given as benefits, but IDK. I'm not an economist. But, I think they should set a cap for benefits and rework the benefits system. For example, benefits should generally not cause an unemployed person to receive more money than a full-time worker. I don't think benefits should be scrapped as benefits are important to help people. It's easy to say that benefits should be scrapped if you are a rich person, financially secured or not require benefits.
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by Old_Simon
Highly dubious data and blatant propoganda (Government lies).

But unless you can give us a credible source which refutes that, it's your word against the government's. You need data to back up your claims.

[QUOTE="Sayonara;48876893"]Isn't that fair though? In the past, the British Empire colonised a massive proportion of the world and extorted countries in the past - they had a huge drug-trading and slave-trading business.
No-one alive today played any role in that. If you start thinking in terms of historical misconduct every country would owe things to other countries.
Now, we should start thinking humanity as a whole and not say "the immigrants are draining the economy of this country" etc.
Idealistic nonsense. The citizens of a country pay tax and work and get public services and a salary in return. We have little obligation to people who don't pay into the system.
I don't like how people separate human societies by countries. I believe we are one.
Idealistic claptrap.
Besides, the UK is a first world country so everyone in it shouldn't complain about it (IMO); there are people starving to death in third world countries.
Look up the fallacy of relative privation.
Many rich people try to keep the poor countries poor so they can continue to extort them year after year.
The UK gives £10billion each year in international aid.
Additionally, the world is supposed to be competitive. People say the weak perish and the strong live; but I think we should help the weak.
This is based more in ideology then logic. Yes we should help the weak, but the weak in our country. The weak in other countries are the responsibility of other countries.
Unskilled workers are not draining the economy - it is creating more competition. That's good as then people may be more willing to work hard, improve their skill sets and become more worthy employees that would benefit the company more. Competition is something that raises standards. Perhaps more of the work should be automated.
Competition drives down prices and the salaries of unskilled workers as the immigrants are prepared to work for less.
The thing that could be draining the economy is jobs that could be automated.

Cigarettes? Those are draining the economy. Yes, they bring a lot of tax in, but the tax comes from the people themselves and money is being poured in to create cigarettes and advertise them. The total net profit in the country would therefore be negative in creating such a poison (cigarettes). Cigarettes also cause health problems which may increase NHS's workload and expense (I'm not saying smokers should not get healthcare, I think everyone deserves healthcare). Similarly, many repetitive jobs should start being automated like other countries have started doing. Yes, it may increase unemployment, but the total net profit of a country would increase? Maybe the increases could be given as benefits, but IDK. I'm not an economist. But, I think they should set a cap for benefits and rework the benefits system. For example, benefits should generally not cause an unemployed person to receive more money than a full-time worker. I don't think benefits should be scrapped as benefits are important to help people. It's easy to say that benefits should be scrapped if you are a rich person, financially secured or not require benefits.
[/QUOTE
Cigarettes are a huge industry which bring in a lot of money and the cost to the NHS is counterbalanced by the tax on the cigarettes.
Reply 9
Tax credits subsidize employers at the expense of the taxpayer, why not point the finger at the culprit, not the victim?
Original post by tengentoppa
But unless you can give us a credible source which refutes that, it's your word against the government's. You need data to back up your claims.



No I don't. You are the person claiming that immigration brings net benefits to the welfare system not me.
Original post by tengentoppa

Cigarettes are a huge industry which bring in a lot of money and the cost to the NHS is counterbalanced by the tax on the cigarettes.


That doesn't change the fact that money/value of goods (overall) is lost due to the production of cigarettes. They could just increase the tax slightly for everyone. Cigarettes are dirty. They don't seem that way to many because they have been legal for a very long time.
Original post by Sayonara
Isn't that fair though? In the past.


Gonna stop ya right there. The past is the past. No-one alive had anything to do with it, so we shouldn't be bled to make up for it.
Original post by Old_Simon
No I don't. You are the person claiming that immigration brings net benefits to the welfare system not me.

And there is data to back that up, which you casually dismissed as propaganda. Unless you have contrary evidence to back up your refuting of that claim, your argument carries no weight.
Original post by Sayonara
That doesn't change the fact that money/value of goods (overall) is lost due to the production of cigarettes. They could just increase the tax slightly for everyone. Cigarettes are dirty. They don't seem that way to many because they have been legal for a very long time.


And why should the taxpayer fund the dirty habit of the few? A tax on cigarettes allows people to pursue their habit but also ensures non-smokers aren't forced to pay for the healthcare of smokers. The system works, there's no need to change it.
Original post by Sayonara
Cigarettes? Those are draining the economy. Yes, they bring a lot of tax in, but the tax comes from the people themselves and money is being poured in to create cigarettes and advertise them. The total net profit in the country would therefore be negative in creating such a poison (cigarettes). Cigarettes also cause health problems which may increase NHS's workload and expense (I'm not saying smokers should not get healthcare, I think everyone deserves healthcare).


The government get an estimated £10 billion from the taxation of cigarettes. £3 billion of that is then spent on the NHS healthcare for the smokers and their related diseases. Cigarettes are fueling our economy if anything. Also they make people die earlier which means they are less of a burden to the Government in their old age, as they wont need much of their pension.

Also when was the last time you saw cigarette advertising?
Original post by tengentoppa
And there is data to back that up, which you casually dismissed as propaganda. Unless you have contrary evidence to back up your refuting of that claim, your argument carries no weight.


Even your "data" itself admits it is rudimentary and underpinned by a very significant number of "assumptions". On it's own face it was and is wide open to distortion and manipulation.
As Maker points out, money spent on tax credits is not a sign of social flaws on the parts of migrant (or indeed native) workers collecting them. All means based in-work benefits are a symptom of the actual problem - that private enterprise is allowed to pay people less than is necessary to live on, and the taxpayer is forced to subsidise this.

Raise the minimum wage to an actual living wage, remove the need for in-work benefits. Then either lower taxes or use the tax revenue you've saved to shore up another useful area of public spending.
Original post by Sayonara
Isn't that fair though? In the past, the British Empire colonised a massive proportion of the world and extorted countries in the past - they had a huge drug-trading and slave-trading business.

Now, we should start thinking humanity as a whole and not say "the immigrants are draining the economy of this country" etc.

I don't like how people separate human societies by countries. I believe we are one.


This is the most naive and stupid post in the thread.

In the past the Palestinians supported Hitler so i guess until the death rate there reaches 6,000,000 then they should just sit and take it.

Spoiler



You believe we are one? So you think that Americans, and Israelis, and Saudis, Iranians, and Russians, and Brazilians can just magically get along because we are human?

Tell me, how would the carnival in Rio work in Saudi, where women are forced to cover up and avoid meeting male strangers?

How would Rwandans and Serbians who have committed genocide against identical looking people in there own countries get along?

How would San Francisco and Moscow mix when one had the US's first gay mayor and the other openly persecutes gays?

The naivety is giving me diabetes.
Here's what it's costing,
To keep a family of 4 , 1 of them working on minimum wage, working 37.5 hours a week & living in london


Working tax credit,

91.10 per week or £4,737 per year

Child Tax Credit

£116 per week or £6,050 a year

Housing Benefit

£213 per week or £11,070 a year

Child Benefit

£35 per week or £1,770.60 per year


Total Benefits per week £454.51

Total Benefits per year £23,634.52


Total income tax & N.I deductions from pay for the year
£982.72

total deficit
£22,651


These figures do not include NHS, maternity exemption or schooling so the figures are probably a lot more.
Hell if I was from poland or Romania I'd come here too and get £22,651 a year tax free cash. the problem is I would seriously love to give everyone free money & a house but we don't live in fairy land the U,K has limited resources your standard of living will go down if you give out cash to everyone, there has to be a limit.
Original post by Old_Simon
Highly dubious data and blatant propoganda (Government lies).


The same government that plans to halve the time benefits can claim benefits? The same government that's being assessed by the European Commission to see that this doesn't constitute abuse?

Quick Reply

Latest