HMRC's time machine setting sights on all graduates!

[ChimpMaster]

So retrospective taxation is clearly an ongoing trend for UK government. It's the "new norm" no doubt.

All graduates should pay tax regardless of when they went to University, report says 

Graduates aged in their 40s and above who benefited from a free university education should pay a retrospective tax to help fund the current generation of students, a new report has suggested.
Researchers at the UCL Institute of Education have set out proposals for a new "all-age graduate tax" that could be used to bring down tuition fees that currently cost students up to £9,250 per year.
It comes amid reports that Philip Hammond, the Chancellor, is considering capping annual charges at £7,500 instead of the current level of £9,250, saving students at least £5,000. The Treasury has denied the reports.

An announcement could come within weeks as the Tories try to appeal to younger voters at next month’s party conference and the autumn Budget in November.

The Chancellor is facing increasing pressure to ease the burden of student finances after Jeremy Corbyn promised to scrap tuition fees.
He has already hinted that he would like to find a way of forcing universities to charge less for courses that do not significantly enhance the job prospects of students that take them.

The UCL report suggests that a tax on all graduates would be a happy medium between the current fees and loans system and a general election pledge by the Labour Party to scrap tuition fees altogether.

Professor Andy Green, one of the authors who complied the report at the Centre for Research on Learning and Life Chances (LLAKES), said fine details of the scheme would need to be worked out.*
But one suggestion is that a graduate tax could be graded, with graduates who paid nothing for their university education could be asked to pay one level of tax, while those who paid tuition fees at a much lower level than today would be asked to pay less.

The report's proposals are likely to prove controversial with older graduates who may not take kindly to the idea of being taxed on their education decades after they left university.
----------------------------

[SueEllen]

Well I know what parties I won't be voting for.

[Lance]

I'm glad I dropped out. Simply wasting tax payers money on the education (I never turned up for) and all that lovely full grant money I spent on sex, drugs and rock'n'roll.

EDIT : Someone on the news earlier was saying that there is no record of who got a degree prior to 2005 anyway so there's a good cutoff date

[xoggoth]

Total carp idea. In former years, only much smaller numbers, and generally the more able people, went into higher education and most have repaid far more than they got by taxes in higher paid jobs that that education gave them. Unlike today, when too many postpone any tax contribution while pursuing pointless qualifications that don't do much for them or the economy.

In that link:

He has already hinted that he would like to find a way of forcing universities to charge less for courses that do not significantly enhance the job prospects of students that take them

Great! Encourage even more students to do pointless courses!

[xoggoth]

EDIT : Someone on the news earlier was saying that there is no record of who got a degree prior to 2005 anyway so there's a good cutoff date

Quick! Quick! Get your CVs offline before the government finds them!

[NickFitz]

Flawed thread title: the UCL Institute of Education's Centre for Research on Learning and Life Chances is not HMRC

[TheFaQQer]

It comes amid reports that Philip Hammond, the Chancellor, is considering capping annual charges at £7,500 instead of the current level of £9,250, saving students at least £5,000. The Treasury has denied the reports.

But it doesn't save all students that amount at all - it saves the rich students money because they are the most likely to repay their student loans in full. For the majority who don't repay their loans in full, it makes no difference whether the loan is £9250, £7500, £50000 or anything else that they will never repay.

What would help the students is if the government didn't go back on the promise to increase the threshold at which loan repayments are calculated by inflation every year - students who took the loans out had the reasonable expectation that the terms and conditions wouldn't change and that the threshold would always increase in line with inflation. However, the last chancellor froze the threshold so that more lower-paid graduates get caught.

Cutting the loan amount is a regressive tax measure, dressed up to look like a good thing in the eyes of those who don't understand how student finance works.

[northernladyuk]

So retrospective taxation is clearly an ongoing trend for UK government. It's the "new norm" no doubt.

All graduates should pay tax regardless of when they went to University, report says*

Graduates aged in their 40s and above who benefited from a free university education should pay a retrospective tax to help fund the current generation of students, a new report has suggested.
Researchers at the UCL Institute of Education have set out proposals for a new "all-age graduate tax" that could be used to bring down tuition fees that currently cost students up to £9,250 per year.
It comes amid reports that Philip Hammond, the Chancellor, is considering capping annual charges at £7,500 instead of the current level of £9,250, saving students at least £5,000. The Treasury has denied the reports.

An announcement could come within weeks as the Tories try to appeal to younger voters at next month’s party conference and the autumn Budget in November.

The Chancellor is facing increasing pressure to ease the burden of student finances after Jeremy Corbyn promised to scrap tuition fees.
He has already hinted that he would like to find a way of forcing universities to charge less for courses that do not significantly enhance the job prospects of students that take them.

The UCL report suggests that a tax on all graduates would be a happy medium between the current fees and loans system and a general election pledge by the Labour Party to scrap tuition fees altogether.

Professor Andy Green, one of the authors who complied the report at the Centre for Research on Learning and Life Chances (LLAKES), said fine details of the scheme would need to be worked out.*
But one suggestion is that a graduate tax could be graded, with graduates who paid nothing for their university education could be asked to pay one level of tax, while those who paid tuition fees at a much lower level than today would be asked to pay less.

The report's proposals are likely to prove controversial with older graduates who may not take kindly to the idea of being taxed on their education decades after they left university.
----------------------------

Would they have to pay tax on income earned in the past?

[NickFitz]

Also, the UCL's report has it arse over tit. My degree in Philosophy might be seen to have contributed comparatively little to my career as a software developer, whereas some middle manager with a degree in Business Studies might be argued to have benefitted greatly from their time in academia.

So they should pay more as their degree was worth actual money, whereas I shouldn't pay any extra tax at all as my degree is in a subject universally acknowledged to be completely worthless

[TheFaQQer]

My degree in Philosophy might be seen to have contributed comparatively little to my career as a software developer

If a monkey codes in the jungle and there's nobody around to hear him curse, did the code compile first time?