Latest on tax rebate for Forces personnel in conflict zones

#21
Re: Latest on tax rebate for Forces personnel in conflict zo

FlagWagger said:
Lingyai said:
I was just looking at the regs to get a seamans' book, cos if you have one you can claim seafarers tax, I noticed that one of the exemptions is that you cannot apply if you are a servant of the crown. OK so that rules out matelots, so anyone know why the RFA qualify?
Perplexed of Bangkok :?:
Cos the RFA are merchant seamen not matelots.
So not servants of the crown then? Seems a bit unfair, but once again I suppose, life in a blue one :(
 

FlagWagger

GCM
Book Reviewer
#22
Re: Latest on tax rebate for Forces personnel in conflict zo

Lingyai said:
FlagWagger said:
Cos the RFA are merchant seamen not matelots.
So not servants of the crown then?
No, they even have unions to look after their welfare, in fact a current member of the Government know as Two-Jags/Shags/Jabs (delete as applicable) started out in said union (but not the RFA).

Lingyai said:
Seems a bit unfair, but once again I suppose, life in a blue one :(
But only for certain "crown supplied" shades of blue!
 
#23
Re: Latest on tax rebate for Forces personnel in conflict zo

Crown Servants... Yes but don't forget that Crown Servants have rights too. If not, why is there discussion about how much compensation the MOD is going to pay out to its deceived guinea pigs at Porton. The question really is, would the exemption for Crown Servants stand up in the European Court of Justice (the EU Court that is, not the Strasbourg human rights court) were there scope to bring a case testing this inconsistency out?

Also if you are classified as Crown Servants, how can the government get away with that pensions anomaly that doesn't apply to other Crown Servants who worked less than 12 years up to 1974? They cannot have it both ways!
 
#24
Re: Latest on tax rebate for Forces personnel in conflict zo

Always_a_Civvy said:
Crown Servants... Yes but don't forget that Crown Servants have rights too. If not, why is there discussion about how much compensation the MOD is going to pay out to its deceived guinea pigs at Porton. The question really is, would the exemption for Crown Servants stand up in the European Court of Justice (the EU Court that is, not the Strasbourg human rights court) were there scope to bring a case testing this inconsistency out?

Also if you are classified as Crown Servants, how can the government get away with that pensions anomaly that doesn't apply to other Crown Servants who worked less than 12 years up to 1974? They cannot have it both ways!
Ah but I bet they can.....
Under the one rule for one clause
 
#25
Re: Latest on tax rebate for Forces personnel in conflict zo

Look on the bright side guys you may not get your 2 grand plus but you only have to dodge lead and semtex for 5 months 3 1/2 weeks.

On the mordid note do the widows and dependants of those KIA get this payment or is a dody bag classed as uk soil ?

Pay them what they deserve and shove the smoke and mirrors (preferably broken and sharp edges first ) up tony and gordons ass
 
#26
Re: Latest on tax rebate for Forces personnel in conflict zo

Always_a_Civvy said:
Crown Servants... Yes but don't forget that Crown Servants have rights too. If not, why is there discussion about how much compensation the MOD is going to pay out to its deceived guinea pigs at Porton. The question really is, would the exemption for Crown Servants stand up in the European Court of Justice (the EU Court that is, not the Strasbourg human rights court) were there scope to bring a case testing this inconsistency out?

Also if you are classified as Crown Servants, how can the government get away with that pensions anomaly that doesn't apply to other Crown Servants who worked less than 12 years up to 1974? They cannot have it both ways!
But Crown Servants are different from Civil Servants (one employed by Tony, one by Queen Liz directly, technically) and pensions anomaly is because each scheme for each class of employee has a separate establishing warrant. The Pension Scheme pre-1975 was quite clear, in an age when non-state (ie "OAP") pensions were not a huge priority for anyone. The government didn't (for once) move the goalposts, it's just that ex-matelots became more aware of their situation in the last 30 years. C'est la vie....
 
#27
Re: Latest on tax rebate for Forces personnel in conflict zo

geoffrey said:
Always_a_Civvy said:
Crown Servants... Yes but don't forget that Crown Servants have rights too. If not, why is there discussion about how much compensation the MOD is going to pay out to its deceived guinea pigs at Porton. The question really is, would the exemption for Crown Servants stand up in the European Court of Justice (the EU Court that is, not the Strasbourg human rights court) were there scope to bring a case testing this inconsistency out?

Also if you are classified as Crown Servants, how can the government get away with that pensions anomaly that doesn't apply to other Crown Servants who worked less than 12 years up to 1974? They cannot have it both ways!
But Crown Servants are different from Civil Servants (one employed by Tony, one by Queen Liz directly, technically) and pensions anomaly is because each scheme for each class of employee has a separate establishing warrant. The Pension Scheme pre-1975 was quite clear, in an age when non-state (ie "OAP") pensions were not a huge priority for anyone. The government didn't (for once) move the goalposts, it's just that ex-matelots became more aware of their situation in the last 30 years. C'est la vie....
When I was a civil servant (many years ago, I admit) I was told that we were Crown Servants - thus when a shelf came crashing down (high shelves not affixed to the wall properly) breaking a colleague's leg - they had Crown Immunity and she got nothing - well apart from sick leave on full pay! :roll:
 
#28
Re: Latest on tax rebate for Forces personnel in conflict zo

Lets not forget that there are an awful lot of RN and RM serving on the ground out here these days. Plenty of those should be eligible.

As to the issue of six months continuous service, etc - R&R is an entitlement and part of the Op Welfare Package. If taking it automatically breaks the qualifying period for this bonus then no one will be entitled and the Government would catch hell from everyone.

Lets wait and see what the regs will be. I'm more concerned at how long I'll have to wait to get it?

SF
 
#29
Re: Latest on tax rebate for Forces personnel in conflict zo

Hansard will be available online tomorrow. I will post the info as soon as I can. That might answer some of the questions here. The regulations will follow and I'll post those too if Geoffrey doesn't beat me to it! :wink:
 
#30
Re: Latest on tax rebate for Forces personnel in conflict zo

I just had an awful cynical idea about the “bonus†to be paid by the MOD:

If a civilian is abroad for over 6 months he won’t pay tax in the UK for the whole year… but the new proposal will just cover the tax paid by a private or lance corporal for the 6 months or so they are away, so they will still be paying income tax for the other 6 months… so it is actually only half as good as first thought. They should just pay the military a proper wage and there would not be a problem!

Also, the MOD has been under heavy pressure over the disgraceful lack of Support Helicopters… with ministers saying that they could not have foreseen the demands put upon the military in today’s world… but Parliamentary Committees have been saying for years that there are not enough battlefield helicopters, so the government did know. The whole idea of military is that you can cope comfortably with peacetime demands, so you can cope with the extra demands of warfare. But, when it comes to helicopters the MOD has struggled to cope with peacetime demands, and are now overwhelmed. This is a political mistake and needs to be acknowledge as such. There is also the issue that helicopters are not a priority for the RAF, as there are more helicopters in both the RN and Army than in the RAF… Why is this relevant to the pay issue? Because it has driven the SH issue off of the news. I just heard the Minister in the PM programme on radio 4, and the interviewer totally missed this issue.
 
#31
Re: Latest on tax rebate for Forces personnel in conflict zo

stumpy said:
I just had an awful cynical idea about the “bonus†to be paid by the MOD:

If a civilian is abroad for over 6 months he won’t pay tax in the UK for the whole year… but the new proposal will just cover the tax paid by a private or lance corporal for the 6 months or so they are away, so they will still be paying income tax for the other 6 months… so it is actually only half as good as first thought. They should just pay the military a proper wage and there would not be a problem!

Also, the MOD has been under heavy pressure over the disgraceful lack of Support Helicopters… with ministers saying that they could not have foreseen the demands put upon the military in today’s world… but Parliamentary Committees have been saying for years that there are not enough battlefield helicopters, so the government did know. The whole idea of military is that you can cope comfortably with peacetime demands, so you can cope with the extra demands of warfare. But, when it comes to helicopters the MOD has struggled to cope with peacetime demands, and are now overwhelmed. This is a political mistake and needs to be acknowledge as such. There is also the issue that helicopters are not a priority for the RAF, as there are more helicopters in both the RN and Army than in the RAF… Why is this relevant to the pay issue? Because it has driven the SH issue off of the news. I just heard the Minister in the PM programme on radio 4, and the interviewer totally missed this issue.
When I was a travelling field engineer I was only allowed to stay in Britain for 12 weeks per year in order to claim back my tax. Only managed it for 3 or 4 years. Sickness or training in the UK did not count as part of the twelve weeks
 
#32
Re: Latest on tax rebate for Forces personnel in conflict zo

stumpy said:
...I just heard the Minister in the PM programme on radio 4, and the interviewer totally missed this issue.
If you want journos to ask these questions you need something like BAAF to fully brief them. When I was a Charity Secretary it used to amaze me that even the Medical Reporters had little idea of what their brief entailed and you really did have to spoonfeed them. That is what is needed here, I'm afraid. :(
 
#33
Re: Latest on tax rebate for Forces personnel in conflict zo

Might make my trip to Afganistan in January that little bit more bareable. Royal Navy is the desert "Nelson will be turning in his grave".
 
#34
Re: Latest on tax rebate for Forces personnel in conflict zo

It's already been said and "Des" should take this on board: If they were paid enough in the first place, you wouldn't have to worry about them having to pay tax.

One of this extra spineless Scot's points in his speech was that UK Servicemen and women are paid more than most of their NATO colleagues, which is probably true, but that means only that our allies treat their Servicemen and women considerably worse than we treat ours.

Mr Browne, if you are worth your Secretary of State's money, all of my colleagues on ops are worth the same, at least, because they are there for you, whereas you are where you are for yourself.
 
#36
Re: Latest on tax rebate for Forces personnel in conflict zo

come_the_day said:
It's already been said and "Des" should take this on board: If they were paid enough in the first place, you wouldn't have to worry about them having to pay tax.

One of this extra spineless Scot's points in his speech was that UK Servicemen and women are paid more than most of their NATO colleagues, which is probably true, but that means only that our allies treat their Servicemen and women considerably worse than we treat ours.

Mr Browne, if you are worth your Secretary of State's money, all of my colleagues on ops are worth the same, at least, because they are there for you, whereas you are where you are for yourself.
What is the buying power of the wages in the home country??
RIPOFF BRITAIN means that you pay more for everything so can afford less.
I heard them saying UK pay is higher than the yanks, it may well be at $2=£1 exchange rate but the buying power means that the yank is earning twice as much as the brit as the usual exchange on prices is £1 =$1. Look at almost any product, in the USA it is $xx in the UK £xx
They also have the PX system which kicks the NAAFIs ass all over the place.
 
#37
Re: Latest on tax rebate for Forces personnel in conflict zo

come the day wrote: One of this extra spineless Scot's points in his speech was that UK Servicemen and women are paid more than most of their NATO colleagues, which is probably true, but that means only that our allies treat their Servicemen and women considerably worse than we treat ours.

Yes - probably true, but then many of the other countries aren't as expensive to live as the UK is and the assessment is probably based on basic salary. Also, our Junior Ranks cannot really be counted in this statement as they're on a pittance for what they do.

Speaking from experience, most of the NATO troops from the various countries draw considerable additional allowances whilst on operations; in fact it's a primary factor in getting them to volunteer. Some even end up with as much as double their normal salary which when converted back to their own country in terms of spending power, works out considerably more favourably than we get.

For other countries there are things such as Medical cover long after leaving their service, better pensions, better compensation for wounding and death, etc.

Yes we are well paid by comparison (across the board) but these other countries leave us in their dust when it comes to the extras.

SF
 
#38
Re: Latest on tax rebate for Forces personnel in conflict zo

For all those on active service my sincere thanks for the great job you are doing. Whilst I agree in principle to the latest "initiative" of this dubious government in giving you a tax break, I am somewhat concerned that you will get zilch in your pay packets. Please be warned, it is only a headline grabbing stunt. Labour currently lag in opinion polls - what better way to get the public onside. With the majority they have why not legislate for it if they are serious?? They manage to legislate for all the other rubbish in double quick time!
This goverment led by the Blair/Browne consortium has spent 9 years perfecting the art of smoke and mirrors with all range of policies and legislation-viz: 3years imprisonment for theft of mobile phone, 3 strikes and you are out (look what happened to Ray Mallinson Chief of police in Cleveland), creative accounting such as schools and health service, £1m invested in each year totals £3m to you and me, this outfit adds it up as £1m in year one, £2m in year two and £3m in year three; - total £6m invested.
In all probability the Chiefs of Defence have been instructed to either break your 6 month deployment with a period of R&R or end the deployment 2 weeks short of the stipulated 6 months, that way you do not qualify for this bounty.

My hopes and prayers go with you that I am wrong, but the gut feeling is you are being shafted -yet again.

Moderator, please post this on the ARRSE site as well, cheers
 
#39
Re: Latest on tax rebate for Forces personnel in conflict zo

Just a small point folks, the minimum qualifying period will be 2 months otherwise the lightweights in light blue would NEVER qualify.

Whilst I am also somewhat cynical both about the lack of a full tax rebate and more importantly about the details of WHEN it will be paid, especially given the imminent introduction of JPA, I am still over the moon at this nice little earner.

Never fear though, I'm still not vote for the [email protected]!!!
 
#40
Re: Latest on tax rebate for Forces personnel in conflict zo

This minimum qualifying period is a lot of rot, how many people will find themselves being deployed for just a few days under the required number.

It should be a simple daily rate which you get from day 1 paid per day.

Another question though is how will it affect things like housing benefit for the lowest?

Peter
 

Top