Sorry for the delay in replying to this, PD.
PinkDalek wrote:I wouldn't be so critical, as that page also includes a choice:
Taxable interest received with tax taken off
Taxable interest received with no tax taken off
So perhaps the charity should have put Please ensure you enter the NET amount (when applicable).
Anyway, they do appear to be aware of the changes, at least with regard to the abolition of the Income Tax deductions from bank interest, and if you enter the gross interest received the calculator will not assume you've had tax deducted.
You are right. So I tried again. The result gave me a tax owing that was about £250 higher than my calculation.
PinkDalek wrote:You can check this when you get to the final page. Ensuring you click on How we calculated your tax when you get there.
I did this and all was revealed. Well, not quite all. The Age UK tax calculator was telling me I was a HR taxpayer in 2016/17, so the calculation would give a different result from mine, which assumes I was a BR taxpayer.
All in all, I think
I can see how to make a calculation that will agree with the Age UK version - unfortunately while you can see the results with How we calculated your tax
, you cannot see the precise details. This is the problem.
While I can see how to calculate to agree with the Age UK version, that doesn't mean I agree they are correct. Then again, I cannot say they are incorrect. I just don't know.
It all seems to be down to that Personal Saving Allowance again. I took it as an allowance not a zero tax band for 2016/17 (but won't for 2017/18 as per HMRC). By my idea of this (which may well be wrong) this would result in my just missing being a HR taxpayer, as with my own calculation. To me, the Age UK calculation seems
NOT to be doing this, rather just using the PSA as a zero rate band (I think). This does make me a HR taxpayer and so my PSA would be £500 rather than £1000 and some of my dividends would be charged at HR tax. As per the Age UK calculation.
On that link you gave, Gengulphus discusses several points in detail (although originally focussed on a somewhat different query) and I think
, if I understand correctly what he is saying, it implies my calculation might be correct. This would imply the Age UK one is wrong. But I really am not sure. I need to print out posts from that thread - I cannot get a printer friendly format as, looking at the old TMF site, sadly the discussion board archives now seem unavailable.