Despite growing Tory reactions to reports of his plans, the prime minister is committed to “sustainable reforms” in the social care system.
Conservative bankers have reacted negatively to reports that ministers are ready to collect national insurance for system changes in England – a violation of their 2019 charter.
Critics warn that changes that would benefit older landlords in the Southeast at the expense of working families would undermine the government’s “level-up” agenda.
With the expected announcement earlier this week, Downing Street has released some details of the plan, written by Boris Johnson, Chancellor Rishi Sink and Health Secretary Sajid Javed.
“We are committed to long-term and lasting reforms in this area and that is what we will do, but there is no further speculation,” said an official spokesman for the prime minister.
“The challenges facing the social care sector are long-standing and unanswered, and this is the work that the Prime Minister is committed to.”
Earlier, a government minister acknowledged that there was no easy solution, but insisted that they take advantage of Mr Johnson’s chances of winning the 2019 general election.
Armed Forces Secretary James Happy told LBC: “It’s going to be difficult, there will be no consensus, but we have to try, because if you can’t do it with a majority of 80, when can you do it? “
However, former Secretary of State Jack Berry, leader of the Tory MPs’ Northern Research Group, warned against a policy that caters to older voters in affluent southern seats.
He said that when Mr. Javed was Chancellor, he was a firm believer in “no increase in employment tax” but it seems that he has undergone a “damask change” since becoming health secretary.
Mr Barry, MP for Rosendale and Darwin, said: “I don’t think it’s really reasonable for people who are going to work in my own constituency in East Lancashire, perhaps on lower wages than in other parts of the country, to pay taxes. People will move their homes to other parts of the country where house prices can be very high.
He told BBC Radio 4’s Today that since the national insurance was not paid by those who are retired, there is also the question of fair inter-provincial.
“It doesn’t seem right to me, especially after this epidemic where so many people have made great sacrifices to keep people safe, it has particularly affected the youngest, especially to work. “We then ask the workers to pay the people for protection in care.”
Reports suggest that lifetime contributions to care will be limited to about 80,000 and that National Insurance will be increased by 1.25% to between 10 10 billion and 11 11 billion annually.
Former Tory cabinet minister Sir John Redwood has warned against “stupid” tax increases.
“The job tax is especially stupid when you want to promote a higher and better paying job,” he said.
Former Tory Chancellors Lord Hammond, Lord Clark and Lord Lemont have all criticized the plan to increase national insurance, while former Prime Minister Sir John Major has called it “reactionary”.
Meanwhile, Labor leader Sir Kerr Starmer has also signaled opposition to his party’s proposal.
“We need to invest more in the NHS and social care, but National Insurance, the way it does it, affects the low-income earners, it affects the youth and it affects businesses,” he told the Mirror. Affects. “
The Economic Think Tank Institute for Financial Studies has suggested that lowering the basic and higher income tax rate by just 1.5 percentage points would increase the National Insurance Partnership (NIC) by one per cent and pass the burden on to generations. Will
Stuart Adam, senior research economist at IFS, said: “Choosing to increase NIC rates would mean that only 1.4 per cent of the extra income came from households with pensions – now 23 per cent of all households. becomes.
In contrast, these families will contribute 13.8% of the extra income if the basic and higher rates on income tax are increased.