National Insurance Hike Threatens Care Home Stability Amid Budget Increases

[Social Media]

 

The proposed rise in National Insurance (NI) contributions has sparked concerns over its significant impact on England’s adult social care sector, with experts warning that the additional costs could outweigh promised budget increases. Analysis from the Nuffield Trust indicates that these changes will cost care providers over £900 million next year—far surpassing the £600 million allocated to local authorities for social care in the recent Budget.

 

This financial strain is compounded by broader cost increases, including planned rises in the national minimum wage, which collectively could burden the care sector with an additional £2.8 billion in expenses. Industry leaders and analysts are cautioning that such pressures could lead to widespread closures, fee hikes, and disruptions to essential services for vulnerable individuals.  

 

Natasha Curry, deputy director of policy at the Nuffield Trust, emphasized the precarious state of the sector. “Already fragile after a decade of cuts, runaway inflation, and the effects of Covid-19, adult social care was in desperate need of relief,” Curry said. She described the Budget as one that “gave with one hand and took away with the other,” warning that without urgent government intervention to cover employer National Insurance contributions (ENICs), the sector faces potentially “catastrophic” consequences.  

 

The planned increase of 1.2 percentage points in ENICs, coupled with a reduction in the earnings threshold for employer contributions from £9,100 to £5,000 by 2025/26, is expected to significantly elevate operating costs for care homes. The report highlights that many of the 18,000 providers delivering adult social care in England may be forced to raise fees, refuse council-funded clients, or shut down altogether. This would disproportionately affect smaller businesses, which are more vulnerable to financial pressures.  

 

Industry figures are also sounding alarms over the potential impact on state-funded individuals. Nadra Ahmed, chairman of the National Care Association, criticized the Labour government’s handling of the issue, accusing it of reneging on pre-election promises to prioritize the social care sector. “Some providers are facing £250,000 of extra annual costs because of the tax change,” Ahmed stated, warning that the NI hike could drive some care homes into bankruptcy.  

 

To address these challenges, the Government has pointed to potential council tax increases, which are projected to generate just over £2 billion for all council services, and new funding measures such as a £600 million grant for social care and an additional £86 million for the Disabled Facilities Grant. A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson described the situation as an inherited crisis, stating, “We are determined to tackle the significant challenges and build a national care service so everybody can access the high-quality care they deserve.”  

 

However, critics argue these measures fall short. The Nuffield Trust report suggests that local authorities would need to allocate their entire council tax increases and the £600 million grant to social care just to offset the mounting costs. The Liberal Democrats have called for the social care sector to be exempt from the NI rise, advocating for immediate relief to prevent further destabilization.  

 

As the sector grapples with these financial pressures, many fear that rising costs will lead to a critical loss of capacity in an already overstretched system. Without swift government intervention, the reforms and relief measures intended to stabilize adult social care may arrive too late for many providers and the vulnerable populations they serve.

 

Based on a report by Daily Telegraph 2024-11-25

 

 

 

[Bday Prang]

Bearing in mind how quick Starmer and Co. identified pensioners as easy, slow moving targets  Its no surprise that they have set their sights on this extremely vulnerable and defenceless group of people who few actually care about and who have absolutely nobody looking out for them.  All about money,  and truly shameful.   

And still the boats arrive daily unhindered , their passengers guaranteed priority treatment,    Makes me feel sick

[soalbundy]

This is what happens when a country is broke and in debt, the interest paid on the national debt is now higher than the defense budget. I suspect, 'you aint seen nothing yet'.

[herfiehandbag]

Whilst I agree that the provision of social care for the elderly has been sore neglected by governments, Tory and "New" Labour (remember them) over several decades, rat trap Starmer and his equally grim visaged aparatchnik acolytes levying additional taxes on a distressed service isn't going to help!

 

Possibly the matter wasn't covered in the guidance notes binder for help desk operatives at Halifax Bank?

Edited 14 hours ago by herfiehandbag

[howerde]

3 minutes ago, soalbundy said:

This is what happens when a country is broke and in debt, the interest paid on the national debt is now higher than the defense budget. I suspect, 'you aint seen nothing yet'.

Correct, Starmer this week or next is due to to announce defence spending to rise to 2.5% of GDP, it is about 2% now and under Sunak who said it will be rising to 3% of GDP within 5 years,  this alone will add billions a year to the tax payer, unless they can cut billions else where,

[john donson]

12 hours ago, soalbundy said:

This is what happens when a country is broke and in debt, the interest paid on the national debt is now higher than the defense budget. I suspect, 'you aint seen nothing yet'.

 

why can the treasure department not 'print' their own money, because private banks steal the wealth in that way

[ericbj]

1 hour ago, john donson said:

 

why can the treasure department not 'print' their own money, because private banks steal the wealth in that way

I am no expert on economic theory, but believe the government could and should print money.  But only on condition that it is spent into the real economy to provide goods and services that are needed.

 

Otherwise, money (or to be specific, fiat currency), whether created out of thin air by commercial banks or otherwise, will result in 'inflation' (devaluation of the currency).

 

I seem to recollect reading that in France it was formerly the practice for the Banque de France to issue francs to the French Treasury.  But that this practice was discontinued at  the time of the Presidency of Giscard d'Estaing, and replaced by borrowing, at interest, from commercial banks etc.  The argument being that this would lead governments to be more careful with borrowing.

 

It is interesting to note that a number of French Presidents of the Fifth Republic were previously bankers.  From memory: Pompidou, Giscard d'Estaing, and Macron.