|
| | |
Group: Administrators
Last Login: 15 September 2008
Posts: 81, Visits: 309 |
| Dear Members, We have produced a simple to use ready reckoner which allows employers to quantify increases in their Social Security payments following the changes which come into effect next year. I hope you find it useful.
Regards Administration Teamwww.guernseychamber.com
|
| |
| | |
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 24 June 2008
Posts: 4, Visits: 5 |
| I don`t have an issue with having to pay SS pro-rata to that I earn and I don`t necessarily agree with an upper limit on SS or IT. Would I think differently if I was in that situation? No I don`t think I would.
Both are Tax which we as a society agree is the way to raise funds. Really there should be a sliding scale and the greater you earn the greater percentage you contribute. I know there is allowance which sort of gives this but it still means middle earners are hardest hit in reality. Give the lower earners better allowance and take from those who can afford it without casing as much hardship.
Why will there an additional 1% employers contribution to pay and nothing on employees? This will hit the small and middle sized employers - the middle bracket which seem to be bearing a lot of the burden to make up deficits.
Why not 1% on employees? - I`d gladly give them a 1% rise at the start of the year, feeling it only fair. Is it thought that employers would not do this? Next year employees are going to be looking at pay awards to match RPI and we confidently speculate this is going to be high. Am I wrong in believing that Guernsey is an employees market and thus why 1% on employers contribution?
I haven`t found any one, and I`ve stumped Lyndon with this, why do employers have to pay an employees contribution? Why not the whole lot paid by the employee? As long as they get the same in their wage packet its no different.
Currently employees don`t realize what is actually being contributed for them selves. If say, an employee had £ 50 odd taken out instead of £ 25 odd then would they be more vocal about where it goes and what it is spent on?
Can someone enlighten me why there is an employers contribution?
It also does not give an indication of what they would be paying as self employed and thus makes self employment more attractive. The trend of self employment is increasing and as much as we need this to an extent it makes being an employer more difficult in recruiting. Having a load of one man bands that all compete for the work that only requires a one man band gives good competition but means recruiting for a larger team for works that require substantially more than a one man band is a problem.
Unfortunately many employees speculate that self employment is so much rewarding than employment until they actually try it. After the initial euphoria of large amounts of money coming in the reality of overheads, annual costs and Tax bills catch up with them. The reality is that I have seen so many chase big money to only find that they are no better off, there seems the increased trend that people only want to answer to themselves.Also its dificult to return to employment as there is a stigma that they have failed.
True there is the opportunity to work long hours and hard to make that bit extra. Some of my best employees have been self employed and they know the reality.
|
| |
|
|