Child benefit to be scrapped for higher taxpayers - Page 2

Kitten · 04-10-2010, 22:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jonny69

No, but they have always been able to fiddle the system, not just over this.

I'm not saying it is 'just over this' but the point is that assets should be taken into account to some extent.

I can't say I disagree with it in principle anyway, but I've learned to keep my opinions to myself on this one as they aren't popular and I can't be jiggered arguing over it yet again!

vix · 05-10-2010, 12:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pickers

My family have always been hard working with jobs that are average income, and I have seen my peers with better off familys enjoying the delights of full Education Maintanance Allowance, which is based on parental income. Kid's parents who are SO well off that they didnt work full time, or took early retirement, were getting £30 a week. My parents worked 9-5 5 days a week and beyond and I got nothing because their combined income was just on the threshold.

OT but the sooner they scrap EMA the better!

An on topic, I'm not seeing this as a bad thing. You can either afford to have children or you can't. I can't afford to so am not (amongst other reasons.) The sooner this is realised, the better.

Matblack · 05-10-2010, 14:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by vix

OT but the sooner they scrap EMA the better!

An on topic, I'm not seeing this as a bad thing. You can either afford to have children or you can't. I can't afford to so am not (amongst other reasons.) The sooner this is realised, the better.

There is a certain logic to your statement but I think you are going to stay disapointed and unless the govenment starts castrating the poor it isn't going to happen.

MB

Jonny69 · 05-10-2010, 16:31

I didn't realise it was so low. I can't see how £20 per week will make much of a dent. It'll certainly put food in a child's mouth but in the grand scale of things it won't be a deal breaker on whether you can afford kids or not. Me and her bring in what most would consider quite a lot of money on paper but in real life it doesn't go very far, and we only lead very simple lifestyles. An extra £1K wouldn't allow us to be able to afford to have children, considering we'd have to drop part or all of one income.

Matblack · 05-10-2010, 16:50

I think there is a bit of a misunderstanding as to what Child Benefit is for, despite origianally being designed to increase child birth after WWII it is now supposed to ease the burden but not cover all costs of having a child. To be honest you are right it isn't going to make the difference between being able to afford a child or not but £20 tax free to a stay at home mum is a nice buffer.

Mums who are working and earning over £44k don't need it but Aitch is getting it at the moment and whilst she isn't working it's handy. I have a feeling however that come 2013 she wouldn't get it even if she was on maternity leave which I think is a bit off, its likely the award will be based on the previous years income which would mean she had been above the threshold.

I think the one person earning over £44k and you're out, but two earning £43k and you're in is a total fudge and it means some people who would benefit will not get it whilst some who don't need it will still get it. £44k isn't a massive income in London for example.

I am also interested in what will happen when someone on £43 is offered a £1k payrise. Effectively with two children on CB this is a £700 paycut and actually even more because CB isn't taxed. So there will be a bubble created between £43,999 and ~£46k because parents won't want to take a paycut by having a payrise

MB

Knipples · 05-10-2010, 18:18

When we were growing up, once my brother had started school, My Mum decided to go back to university to train to become a nurse. This meant that sometimes she wasn't home in time to get us from school. So she used our child benefit money (back then it was like £13 a week for me, and then £9 each for my brother and sister) to pay a sixth former from the local comp to walk us home every day and stay with us in the house til either she or my Dad got home. I know it really helped her. The family had been living on Dads wages whilst she was a stay at home Mum, and the child benefit then paid for the odd trip out. The 6th former stayed on and ended up just walking my brother home when my sister and me started at secondary school and got ourselves home.

By the time I went to college, she gave me the money every week, (by then it had gone up to £15) and I gave £5 of that a week to the girl who drove me to college as petrol money, and then I had £10 to do with what I wanted. I ended up getting a part time job as it wasn't enough to fund college expenses.

Stan_Lite · 05-10-2010, 22:18

First things first. I thought long and hard about posting - mostly because I've had a fair bit to drink and may well offend some people by being blunt - but, what the he'll, let's go.

I find it incredible that people who earn nearly twice the national average wage (which, in itself, is an inflated figure and in no way represents the earnings of the majority of the population) have the temerity to complain about the removal of such a paltry sum of money. Let's be realistic, a family with a single earner making £18k needs CB, a family with a single earner making £50k doesn't need CB - it may come in handy but it shouldn't be necessary. If you earn £50k and you are in a position where you depend on a benefit of £20 a week, let's face it, you've overstretched and have no-one else to blame but yourself.

The whole point of benefits is to help those who, through no fault of their own, find themselves in a difficult position financially. They are not intended to subsidise the frivolities of the middle classes.

When I had my kids I was a low earner and the CB was most welcome. In the unlikely event I was to start producing offspring again, personal guilt would make me donate my CB to the NSPCC, now that I'm earning a good wage.

As a slight aside to the OP; I'm actually enjoying the first few months of this coalition government. I'm not sure if it's the influence of the Liberals or through necessity but the austerity measures seem to be affecting many of the Tory voters who, presumably, vote Tory as they assume they are the party who will look after them and coddle their aspirations.

Don't worry,I'm not deluded enough to think the leopards have changed their spots - I'm sure it's only a matter of time before they find some way to shaft the working classes on the QT

Mark · 05-10-2010, 22:31

Agreed, to a point. I think the problem here is not that CB has been withdrawn from higher earners. It's the way it has been done and that it obviously hasn't been thought out.

Why should a couple jointly earning £85k be entitled to CB while a couple with Dad on £45k and Mum staying at home to look after the children have their CB taken away?

If they're going to take it away from the latter, then they should take it away from the former.

Same goes for the self-employed who pay themselves minimum wage and a massive dividend to avoid income tax.

PS - I'd whinge a fair bit if they took away my free bus pass, but nonetheless I accept that I don't need it. That said, I've been getting out much more since I have had it, so it helps get me out, and it helps the bus companies because they've gained another passenger.

Admiral Huddy · 06-10-2010, 08:26

It's not the point. Loosing the child benefit is of real no loss to me but it's the principle that is in question here. It's always an easy option for the government to hit the higher tax rate earner without the actually thinking the whole thing through. This is just a bit of Spin imo..

I would like to know why the benefit isn't being cut for those on standard rate of tax? They are earning, they don't "Need" it...? and let's face it, the word NEED is key here? My feelings are because they know its a majority of the electorate when the time comes round.

I earn a modest salary for which I pay a 40% tax on. Tax is relative.. the more you earn the more you pay. That's the fairness and its simple. I don't have a problem with that and I'm not even too worried about the CB being cut but the system has to fair throughout the social spectrum.

I would like to know why the people who NEED the benefit can still afford cigarettes, alcohol, and a full sky TV package. I'm not living with my head in the clouds here. Half of my wifes family are on benefits and what they get away with would make you cry.

I want to see reform right across the system. Encourage entrepreneurial individuals, reward hard workers... clamp down on layabout benefit scum that use the NEED to play the system!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark

Same goes for the self-employed who pay themselves minimum wage and a massive dividend to avoid income tax.

Not as easy as it once was.. and strictly speaking, this wasn't to avoid Tax, it was to avoid an individual paying both sides of the NI.

Kitten · 06-10-2010, 09:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Admiral Huddy

Not as easy as it once was.. and strictly speaking, this wasn't to avoid Tax, it was to avoid an individual paying both sides of the NI.

It's incredibly easy, and maybe that was the case once upon a time but it certainly isn't now as far as I can see. So many accountants advertise their services with describing ways to avoid paying the 'correct' amount of tax and I don't know a single contractor in this place, earning less than £400 a day, yet paying more than minimum wage tax. It's standard practice among self-employed people (who I think should get tax incentives albeit above board ones rather than those that are legal, yet morally questionable) and contractors.

05-10-2010, 16:31	#14
Jonny69 Noob Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Socialist Republik of Kent Posts: 5,032	I didn't realise it was so low. I can't see how £20 per week will make much of a dent. It'll certainly put food in a child's mouth but in the grand scale of things it won't be a deal breaker on whether you can afford kids or not. Me and her bring in what most would consider quite a lot of money on paper but in real life it doesn't go very far, and we only lead very simple lifestyles. An extra £1K wouldn't allow us to be able to afford to have children, considering we'd have to drop part or all of one income. __________________

05-10-2010, 16:50	#15
Matblack Baby Bore Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Svalbard Posts: 9,770	I think there is a bit of a misunderstanding as to what Child Benefit is for, despite origianally being designed to increase child birth after WWII it is now supposed to ease the burden but not cover all costs of having a child. To be honest you are right it isn't going to make the difference between being able to afford a child or not but £20 tax free to a stay at home mum is a nice buffer. Mums who are working and earning over £44k don't need it but Aitch is getting it at the moment and whilst she isn't working it's handy. I have a feeling however that come 2013 she wouldn't get it even if she was on maternity leave which I think is a bit off, its likely the award will be based on the previous years income which would mean she had been above the threshold. I think the one person earning over £44k and you're out, but two earning £43k and you're in is a total fudge and it means some people who would benefit will not get it whilst some who don't need it will still get it. £44k isn't a massive income in London for example. I am also interested in what will happen when someone on £43 is offered a £1k payrise. Effectively with two children on CB this is a £700 paycut and actually even more because CB isn't taxed. So there will be a bubble created between £43,999 and ~£46k because parents won't want to take a paycut by having a payrise MB __________________ "we had roots that grew towards each other underground, and when all the pretty blossom had fallen from our branches we found that we were one tree and not two"

05-10-2010, 22:18	#17
Stan_Lite Stan, Stan the FLASHER MAN! Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: In bed with your sister Posts: 5,483	First things first. I thought long and hard about posting - mostly because I've had a fair bit to drink and may well offend some people by being blunt - but, what the he'll, let's go. I find it incredible that people who earn nearly twice the national average wage (which, in itself, is an inflated figure and in no way represents the earnings of the majority of the population) have the temerity to complain about the removal of such a paltry sum of money. Let's be realistic, a family with a single earner making £18k needs CB, a family with a single earner making £50k doesn't need CB - it may come in handy but it shouldn't be necessary. If you earn £50k and you are in a position where you depend on a benefit of £20 a week, let's face it, you've overstretched and have no-one else to blame but yourself. The whole point of benefits is to help those who, through no fault of their own, find themselves in a difficult position financially. They are not intended to subsidise the frivolities of the middle classes. When I had my kids I was a low earner and the CB was most welcome. In the unlikely event I was to start producing offspring again, personal guilt would make me donate my CB to the NSPCC, now that I'm earning a good wage. As a slight aside to the OP; I'm actually enjoying the first few months of this coalition government. I'm not sure if it's the influence of the Liberals or through necessity but the austerity measures seem to be affecting many of the Tory voters who, presumably, vote Tory as they assume they are the party who will look after them and coddle their aspirations. Don't worry,I'm not deluded enough to think the leopards have changed their spots - I'm sure it's only a matter of time before they find some way to shaft the working classes on the QT __________________ Just because I have a short attention span doesn't mean I...

05-10-2010, 22:31	#18
Mark Screaming Orgasm Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Newbury Posts: 15,194	Agreed, to a point. I think the problem here is not that CB has been withdrawn from higher earners. It's the way it has been done and that it obviously hasn't been thought out. Why should a couple jointly earning £85k be entitled to CB while a couple with Dad on £45k and Mum staying at home to look after the children have their CB taken away? If they're going to take it away from the latter, then they should take it away from the former. Same goes for the self-employed who pay themselves minimum wage and a massive dividend to avoid income tax. PS - I'd whinge a fair bit if they took away my free bus pass, but nonetheless I accept that I don't need it. That said, I've been getting out much more since I have had it, so it helps get me out, and it helps the bus companies because they've gained another passenger.