As the scale of the hit working people face thanks to the government’s botched social care plan continues to emerge, new analysis reveals the extent to which the plan hammers ordinary families while leaving the assets of the wealthiest relatively untouched.

In the richest part of the country the proposed cap on care costs means homeowners in some of the richest parts of the country face losing just 6.5% of their assets. Yet in Mansfield, the average homeowner would lose a staggering 57%, forcing many to sell their homes and more to pay for care.

This comes despite a guarantee in the Conservatives’ 2019 manifesto “that no one needing care has to sell their home to pay for it”.

This follows analysis by the Resolution Foundation, who found that “the cap, which does not benefit households with less than £100,000 in capital, will be of relatively more help in the more affluent areas…it will offer most protection to those living in high wealth parts of England. This is not just because of the obvious reason that a cap set in cash terms offers far more protection to those with higher-value assets to lose.”

Andy Abrahams, leader of Mansfield Labour Group said:

“Local people will be hit 8.7 times harder than the richest parts of the country by these plans. This is further proof that this government cares more about people in Kensington and Chelsea protecting their rich friends than they do about people here in Mansfield.

“We were promised a proper plan to fix social care, and protection for our homes. Instead, we’ve got a slap in the face and a giant tax bill to boot – and what’s more Ministers admit these plans won’t even fix the creaking system the Conservatives have neglected for more than a decade.”

Jonathan Ashworth MP, Labour’s Shadow Health Secretary, said:

“Tory MPs are imposing on their hard-working constituents an unfair punishing tax rise which does not even fix social care, won’t prevent people selling their houses and risks care homes going bust.

“Social care is in desperate need, but the Prime Minister – along with every Conservative MP – was elected on a manifesto that promised to fix the system on a plan that had been developed and would mean no one would have to sell their home. On both, he broke his promise.”

Ends

Notes to Editors

• The analysis can be found in this spreadsheet
• Analysis looks at an illustrative homeowner in each local authority area who lives in and owns their own home. The home is assumed to be worth the median price in that Local Authority area (data from Office of National Statistics). The analysis also assumes that these illustrative homeowners have financial assets in line with the average for each region (data on financial wealth taken from the most recent Wealth and Assets Survey).
• Below is a list of 10 local authority areas in England that could end up paying the largest proportion of their assets for care costs.

ONS, Median house price statistics for small areas in England and Wales, Dec 2020 link

ONS, Financial wealth, wealth in Great Britain link

• The analysis looks at the maximum care costs this homeowner could incur for their social care if they have significant care needs. For many, this means they will hit the £86k cap, but for some with lower asset wealth, they will spend below the cap up until the point they’re left with £20k assets.
• The Conservatives’ 2019 manifesto said “that no one needing care has to sell their home to pay for it”.

Page 12, The Conservative and Unionist Party Manifesto 2019

• Resolution Foundation, Nationally Insured?: “the cap, which does not benefit households with less than £100,000 in capital, will be of relatively more help in the more affluent areas…it will offer most protection to those living in high wealth parts of England. This is not just because of the obvious reason that a cap set in cash terms offers far more protection to those with higher-value assets to lose.”

September 2021, Resolution Foundation link