Councillors Expenses

[The Godfather of Manx House]

As ever, top response from JW. I'm no sure many on *here* know how lucky we are at times to have his advice / council.

 

Even with 'one for, one against" (JW knows what I mean), I couldn't talk highly enough about this chap ...

 

...GOMH*...

[thebees]

Yeah - John is extremely ace. If I ever needed legal help & I could catch him before he ran away from me.....

[John]

If one attends 50 committee meetings a year at £30 a meeting. Claims 200 miles at 55p a mile.

That amounts to £1610 a year. This is not taxable.

Times 18 councillors, some of whom will claim more of course, it is £28.980. Possible tax to the gov would be, at 10%, £2.898.

Is this right?

 

Incorrect details Pat, we dont get milage, we CAN claim an allowance of £30 for a meeting we attend, as long as that meeting is for a recognised Commitee or civic duty.

I can only speak for myself, I am allowed by my employer to attend 3 meetings a month, this costs me £300 in unpaid time off, i can therefore claim if i so desire £90 back.

That I think equals approx 30 meetings a year, give or take a few that i don't attend or if ill/holiday etc.

 

Like i answered you openly on the Martin Clunes thread I declare my payments, its the tax man that told me they where non taxable. So you start a thread about it.

 

 

Not the council intoto, but committees meet regularly and 50 meetings a year is probably being conservative for some councillors.

There are some, the unpopular ones, that attend few meetings I suspose. I'm thinking on average.

 

 

Tis true, I must bu un-popular..lol

 

I agree, 'expenses' is as misnomer. I think they are termed 'members allowances' or some such. The cost of doing the job should not be taxed, agreed, however any amount paid as a wage should be taxed.

As a councillor my expenses weren't taxed but my allowances certainly were.

This question arises because our resident councilor (sic) said his allowances aren't taxable. The tax office seems to think otherwise though and the council were reluctant to release figures of allowances/expenses paid to councillors. The tax people may be treating each councillor differently depending on taxable status of course.

The point is moot of course as I have no intention of becoming a councillor, so it matters not to me one way or the other.

 

As above the rles are made by the IOMG Income tax, not any of the Councillors etc

 

You really can't actually just be nice. Can you? SIC !!!!

 

 

Someone asks a question and doesn't want to get something out of it.

I can see why you're suspicious, you've obviously been here a long time.

 

 

So why ask it? If as Mojo has said you are not interested in the answer, Have you asked if Peter K, pays tax on his expenses? lets be honest they probably claim more on their Tynwald millage than i get for a year in expenses.

 

Not antipathy, more apathy. (the excluded letters are an anagram of 'nit', stranger than words).

JF seems a nice enough fellow, we have spoken and I don't think there's a problem there. Just because I ask a question about Douglas council doesn't mean I'm having a dig at him.

My membership of LV doesn't come into it at all as far as I am concerned. It certainly doesn't exclude me from asking a general question on an open forum as it's nothing to do with LV.

You haven't read the statement correctly, is that my fault also.

 

 

Thankyou, i like to think I am a normal nice person, you have lost me on the rest.

 

Who's JF?

 

 

He means me.

 

Who's JF?

 

Indeed.

 

Pat you know who i am , I am that guy you wish you were..lol

 

[keyboarder]

Pat the dog.

[John]

Pat a cake

[Stavros]

I find it quite strange to start a thread about this subject only to go off it again shortly afterwards.

 

Pat, I think this thread could/should be filed under the "Point score failed" category.

[manxman2]

unlucky pammy..

[piebaps]

Phew. A bit of research needed but I found it in the end.

 

The Local Government Act 1985 covers the payment of allowances and expenses to Councillors and specifically Schedule 2 of the Act.

 

Section 5 of Schedule 2 says

 

"Any sum payable under this Schedule shall be exempt from income tax and shall not be brought into account by the Assessor of Income Tax as part of the income of the recipient."

[John]

Is that yellow steam i see...lol

[Macoon]

Never mind councillors expenses. Given that the UK parliament is embroiled in MP's expenses, over representation by MP's and the cost of politics shouldn't our news bodies here be doing the same? Isn't this worthy of a separate and serious thread by someone who has the authorisation to start one?

 

We have 30 times the representation here compared to the UK ie 30 times as many MHK's for every resident s is the case for the UK. What a massive waste of public money and this ignores a totally wasteful unelected MLC body.

 

We should be publicly asking for all MHK and MLC salaries and expenses to be published as well as details of all the top up payments for MHK's to sit on various government boards and committees. The solution is fixed terms for both houses and a limit on total time you can sit as either - take it away as a 'career' choice which it has become for many. A minimum educational standard wouldn't hurt either.....

[Dodger]

Never mind councillors expenses. Given that the UK parliament is embroiled in MP's expenses, over representation by MP's and the cost of politics shouldn't our news bodies here be doing the same? Isn't this worthy of a separate and serious thread by someone who has the authorisation to start one?

 

We have 30 times the representation here compared to the UK ie 30 times as many MHK's for every resident s is the case for the UK. What a massive waste of public money and this ignores a totally wasteful unelected MLC body.

 

We should be publicly asking for all MHK and MLC salaries and expenses to be published as well as details of all the top up payments for MHK's to sit on various government boards and committees. The solution is fixed terms for both houses and a limit on total time you can sit as either - take it away as a 'career' choice which it has become for many. A minimum educational standard wouldn't hurt either.....

 

From the PAG website http://www.positiveactiongroup.org/html/ty...pay_levels.html

 

"MEMBER PAY AND ALLOWANCES April 2008

Basic Pay And Expenses for all members £’s

Salary 36,441 Expenses* 6,178 Total 42,619

Post Allowance Total Per Month

Chief Minister 29,153 71,772 5,981

Speaker 21,865 64,484 5,374

Minister 18,221 60,840 5,070

President of Tynwald 18,221 60,840 5,070

Treasury Member 14,576 57,195 4,766

Chair of Civil Service Commission 14,576 57,195 4,766

Departmental Member 10,932 53,551 4,463

Chair of Statutory Boards 3,644 46,263 3,855

 

* As receipts are not required for this payment it is not unreasonable to include in total reimbursement.

Additional:

Personal Pension Contributions;

Members who lose their seat at Election receive 6 months lump sum severance.

 

MEMBER PAY AND ALLOWANCES April 2007

Basic Pay And Expenses for all members £’s

Salary 35,006 Expenses* 5,935 Total 40,941

Post Allowance Total Per Month

Chief Minister 28,005 68,946 5,745

Speaker 21,004 61,945 5,162

Minister 17,503 58,444 4,870

President of Tynwald 17,503 58,444 4,870

Treasury Member 14,002 54,943 4,579

Chair of Civil Service Commission 14,002 54,943 4,579

Departmental Member 10,502 51,443 4,287

Chair of Statutory Boards 3,501 44,442 3,703

 

* As receipts are not required for this payment it is not unreasonable to include in total reimbursement.

Additional:

Personal Pension Contributions;

Members who lose their seat at Election receive 6 months lump sum severance."

 

Open and accountable Government!

[Albert Tatlock]

Members who lose their seat at Election receive 6 months lump sum severance."

Next time - they should be forced to go and queue up with the other 900 at the dole office - and get a bit of direct experience of just why they might have been ousted.

[John]

Thats fair enough, but you do have to give up your employment when elected, so would put people of standing if they knew that if not re-elected they are up Shiit creek without a boat let alone a paddle. Still may force them to do a better job.

[Ssendam]

Commissioners are entitled to £30 per meeting under current legislation, (which frankly is not a great deal of money if you consider the length of the meetings and the time required to wade through papers and prepare), but I believe a significant number of them opt not to receive any cash.

 

Personally I think that any attendance payment (as a pose to a reimbursement of expenses) should be assessable to income tax else it makes a mockery of the tax system which is based on ability to pay, (and I didn't realise that such payments were not assessable).

 

I'm not sure the exact position of our MHK / MLC's salaries and expenses, are they not as transparent as the UK? (or as the UK is now perhaps I should say?)

 

Just my 2p

[John]

Commissioners are entitled to £30 per meeting under current legislation, (which frankly is not a great deal of money if you consider the length of the meetings and the time required to wade through papers and prepare), but I believe a significant number of them opt not to receive any cash.

 

Personally I think that any attendance payment (as a pose to a reimbursement of expenses) should be assessable to income tax else it makes a mockery of the tax system which is based on ability to pay, (and I didn't realise that such payments were not assessable).

 

I'm not sure the exact position of our MHK / MLC's salaries and expenses, are they not as transparent as the UK? (or as the UK is now perhaps I should say?)

 

Just my 2p

 

 

The problem is the Councillor or Commissioner does not make the rules, so therefore we do not choose whether to declare or not.