Blog Post

Blog

National Insurance "tax cut"

Leigh Kent • Jan 09, 2024

The National Insurance cut for employees took effect on 6 January 2024. 

For many years, successive governments have been happy for the public to vaguely believe that national insurance contributions (NICs) are building up in some national benefit fund, rather than representing just another tax on income. While something called the National Insurance Fund does exist, as a House of Commons Library briefing noted back in 2019, “The Fund operates on a ‘pay as you go’ basis; broadly speaking, this year’s contributions pay for this year’s benefits.”


For politicians, the perceived difference between NICs and income tax made it possible to grab the headlines by reducing the basic rate of tax while receiving much less attention for maintaining or even increasing revenue by raising NICs. Last November, the Chancellor appeared to have finally given up on the distinction-without-a-difference approach by proclaiming that his cuts to NICs for employees and the self-employed were tax cuts.


If you are an employee (but not a director, to whom special rules apply), the cut means your main NIC rate (on annual earnings between £12,570 and £50,270) fell from 12% to 10% from 6 January 2024. The extra amount in your pay packet is broadly the same as if a 2p cut had been made to basic rate tax (which covers the same £37,700 band of income). However, from the Chancellor’s viewpoint, the NICs cut was cheaper, as there was no ‘tax cut’ on pension or investment income, both of which are NIC-free.



The employer’s NIC rate did not change, remaining at 13.8% on all earnings above £9,100. If your earnings are below £50,270, the theoretical advantage of using salary sacrifice to pay pension contributions has been marginally reduced but remains attractive, as shown in the table below, based on a £1,000 sacrifice. If you are among the growing band of higher or additional rate taxpayers, the financial advantage of salary sacrifice is unaltered. Either way, if you are not using salary sacrifice to pay pension contributions, it is still worth taking advice about the option. It is beneficial in most circumstances, but there are drawbacks to be aware of.

by Leigh Kent 17 Apr, 2024
The Office for National Statistics (ONS) has been shuffling its shopping basket.
by Leigh Kent 15 Nov, 2023
The rise in mortgage rates since early 2022 has taken its toll on house prices.
by Leigh Kent 16 Aug, 2023
Rising mortgage rates pose some difficult questions for one of the major providers of housing finance.
by Leigh Kent 23 May, 2023
Many life insurance providers now offer additional ‘perks’ to policyholders but are they worth it?
by Elliot Bolt 19 May, 2023
How do life insurance companies decide if I am a smoker? What about vapers? How can I find the best cover?
by Leigh Kent 05 May, 2023
If you are self-employed, the new tax year may be longer than you think.
by Leigh Kent 08 Feb, 2023
When it comes to student loans, the media focus is usually on tuition fees (outside Scotland), but there’s another loan that shouldn’t be overlooked – and that includes Scotland.
by Leigh Kent 11 Jan, 2023
If your employer pays for the fuel in your company car, it may cost you more than you expect.
by Leigh Kent 30 Dec, 2022
The government has rejected proposals to modernise cohabitation laws in England and Wales, leaving it up to individuals to arrange their financial affairs for partners and dependants.
by Leigh Kent 14 Nov, 2022
Nearly all children born between 1 September 2002 and 2 January 2011 were the recipients of a government handout – usually £250 or £500 – which was locked away in a Child Trust Fund (CTF). CTFs were introduced by the Chancellor at the time, Gordon Brown, with the worthy idea that every child would have some savings to their name when they reached the age of 18. It was hoped that parents and others would make regular top ups to the modest government payment to increase these coming-of-age funds. Like so many other well-intentioned resolutions, the CTF scheme was far from successful. The initial government payment was sent as a voucher to the child’s parent or guardian. If the vouchers were not used to open a CTF within 12 months, HMRC was left to open a default CTF for the child, with the CTF provider selected at random from an accredited list. No less than 30% of CTFs were opened this way. In 2010, the poor take up of CTFs encouraged the new Chancellor George Osborne to make a significant cut to payments. Eventually, from the beginning of 2011, the scheme was closed, albeit payments into existing CTFs, by parents for instance, were allowed to continue. By then there were 6.3 million children with CTFs. The latest detailed data from HMRC (from April 2021) revealed the total investment in CTFs, at that time, as nearing £10.5 billion, with more than four in five of them having a value of under £2,500. (The average value in April 2021 was £1,911 and is currently sitting around £2,100). HMRC now faces the opposite problem to the one it encountered at the start, when parents overlooked this new investment opportunity: CTF pots are not being claimed by 18 year olds. To quote a recent HMRC press release, “Tens of thousands of teenagers in the UK who have not yet claimed their matured Child Trust Funds savings could have thousands of pounds waiting for them”. It is likely that many teenagers (and their parents) have forgotten or were unaware of the CTF’s existence, especially if it was set up by default. To trace a CTF, go to https://www.gov.uk/child-trust-funds/find-a-child-trust-fund . CTFs were replaced by Junior ISAs, which stand more chance of being remembered at age 18 as they must be established by parents or guardians and do not involve any direct government contributions.
Show More
Share by: