National Insurance hike “yet another burden on working age people”, says IEA expert
20 July 2021
SUGGESTED
Healthcare
Julian Jessop quoted in The Telegraph
16 July 2021
Economic Theory
IEA research referenced in Washington Examiner
20 July 2021
Lifestyle Economics
15 November 2024
Commenting on the planned increase in National Insurance, Professor Len Shackleton, Editorial and Research Fellow at free market think tank the Institute of Economic Affairs, said:
“Hiking National Insurance will be yet another burden on working age people at a time when jobs are insecure, inflation is rising and wages are squeezed.
“Much of the public may believe that National Insurance pays for the NHS, and social care would just be a natural addition. But NI is not ringfenced and is simply an income tax by another name, albeit with different exemptions, starting points and arbitrary changes in rates which don’t coincide with tax bands.
“It is wrong to place the burden of this tax squarely on the shoulders of younger workers, without extending NI to post-state pension age taxpayers to help pay.
“A rise in employer as well as employee contributions may give the illusion that businesses will help pay, but economists agree that workers ultimately pay for ‘employer’ NI through lower pay. Employers can only pay workers what their work contributes to the business; if the state takes a larger chunk there is less available for wages.
“We should consider a long-overdue merging of NI with income tax. This would not only save money for employers and government but could redress some of the inequities in our overly complex and badly designed tax system. It would also make it much more obvious who pays what.”
ENDS
Notes to editors
Contact: Emily Carver, Head of Media, 07715942731
IEA spokespeople are available for interview and further comment.
“Hiking National Insurance will be yet another burden on working age people at a time when jobs are insecure, inflation is rising and wages are squeezed.
“Much of the public may believe that National Insurance pays for the NHS, and social care would just be a natural addition. But NI is not ringfenced and is simply an income tax by another name, albeit with different exemptions, starting points and arbitrary changes in rates which don’t coincide with tax bands.
“It is wrong to place the burden of this tax squarely on the shoulders of younger workers, without extending NI to post-state pension age taxpayers to help pay.
“A rise in employer as well as employee contributions may give the illusion that businesses will help pay, but economists agree that workers ultimately pay for ‘employer’ NI through lower pay. Employers can only pay workers what their work contributes to the business; if the state takes a larger chunk there is less available for wages.
“We should consider a long-overdue merging of NI with income tax. This would not only save money for employers and government but could redress some of the inequities in our overly complex and badly designed tax system. It would also make it much more obvious who pays what.”
ENDS
Notes to editors
Contact: Emily Carver, Head of Media, 07715942731
IEA spokespeople are available for interview and further comment.
SHARE
