Source · Select Committees · Treasury Committee
Recommendation 16
16
Paragraph: 107
However, when compared to the Dilnot Review’s recommendations that had been legislated for but which...
Conclusion
However, when compared to the Dilnot Review’s recommendations that had been legislated for but which have not yet been commenced, the Government’s proposals are less generous in how they treat the means tested contribution made by local authorities. As a result, while most people will pay less as a result of the proposals overall, those who have a longer care journey and have assets of between £20,000 and £106,000 will pay far more towards their own care than they would have done under the provisions of the Care Act 2014. Even if people within this cohort do not as individuals end up needing care, they are still exposed to far greater financial risk of having to contribute £86,000 of their own money in full than would have been the case under the provisions of the Care Act 2014. It is regrettable that a such a large cohort of people are still exposed to the possibility of incurring these high costs, which make up a large proportion of their assets. Compared to the original Dilnot proposals, this will be regressive.
Paragraph Reference:
107
Government Response
Acknowledged
HM Government
Acknowledged
I thank the Committee for welcoming our social care charging reforms. The new £86,000 cap will end people’s worries that they may face unpredictable care costs, with roughly two thirds receiving some state support for care costs under the announced reforms. Department for Health and Social Care analysis has also shown that it is highly unlikely anybody within the means test would deplete their assets to anywhere near the theoretical maximum level set out by Sir Andrew Dilnot.