§ Sir John StanleyTo ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what percentage of adults not in full-time education pay income tax at the rate of 40 per cent.
§ Mr. Norman LamontLatest estimates for 1991–92 are that 1.6 million individuals—some 31/4 per cent. of adults not in full-time education—are liable to income tax at the higher rate.
I regret that no information on the educational status of these individuals is available.
§ Mr. Nicholas BrownTo ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will estimate, on the same basis as the ready reckoner published in the autumn statement, what is the effect on a one-earner, two-child family of spending in 1992–93 the same sum on(a) a 1p cut in the basic rate of income tax, (b) raising income tax thresholds above their indexed levels and (c) raising child benefits, assuming (i) no change in income support and family credit rates and (ii) corresponding changes in income support and family credit rates.
§ Mr. Maude[holding answer 24 February 1992]: The cost in 1992–93 of (a) a 1p cut in the basic rate of income tax, is estimated to be £1,950 million, which would be worth roughly £2.50 a week to a married man on average male earnings, compared with statutory indexation.
(b) That amount would pay for an increase in income tax personal allowances and thresholds of 7 3/4 per cent. which would be worth almost £2 a week to a basic rate taxpayer, compared with statutory indexation.
(c) On the assumption that each child benefit rate was increased by the same cash amount, £1,950 million would pay for an increase of
- (i) £4.50 per week per child if there were no corresponding changes to income-related benefit rates; or
- (ii) £3.05 per week per child if adjustments were made to income-related benefits to ensure all families received the same increase.