To start a thread about the new uc and how it affects entitlement to tax credit.(201 Posts)
Just as the title suggests.
How many people actually know how this will affect their personal circumstances?
Millions of workers will be affected and so many people will lose out.
This is not welfare cuts for the unemployed its anybody not working for 35 hours earning the minimum wage.
sorry entered too early , thats for for single parents
its 16 to 18 hrs for under 5 ,once you child is over five its school hours up to age 13 then over 13 years the 35 hrs comes into play thats how i understood it .
"If I can't complete my degree then I am stuck on shitty money - surely the government will see it is better to take the long term view."
Well you would think taking the long term view would be sensible wouldn't you? But are this government interested in doing that? Let's examine the evidence:
- One of the first things they did was restrict access to higher education. Putting the fees up will not bring in any extra money. However it will reduce the numbers of people gaining degrees, which senior Tories (Gove was it?) is on public record saying he thinks that's no bad thing.
- Part-time workers on UC will not be able to claim full UC. Many will not be able to make ends meet and will end up on benefits as a result. This is not good for their prospects
- Part-time workers will be forced to take jobs with more hours or better pay, even if the prospects are rubbish. This doesn't look at the long term view.
- Many under 25s are to be made homeless. (Half of these households are families with children) Those who find themselves on the streets or in poor and insecure accommodation will not be in a great position to study. Those who end up in B&Bs will cost the state more money than HB did - unless they remove provision for B&Bs, in which case they'll end up on the streets. It's well documented that homelessness (including living in insecure housing) affects people's long-term prospects, so this is not taking the long term view either
- The self-employed who fail to meet minimum wage by the end of the first year will be subjected to workfare and other measures. Seeing as most business advisers say new businesses should be happy to break even at the end of the first year, this will cripple many potentially very sucessful new businesses and is also ignoring the long-term view.
These are just a few examples.
This government do not believe in investing in people. Their recent speeches and announcement of new worker contracts gives you an idea of what they're up to.
They want you to sign away your workers' rights - for example the right to challenge unfair dismissal. They want us to be able to compete with developing countries, and / or countries with terrible records on employment and human rights. They want to create a workforce which is perpetually scared of losing the roofs over our heads, and too ground down to protest. Why would they need you to be educated? That's a luxury for the elite. They want us to be compliant, and grateful. And it'll be fair as no one will be able to afford bloody plasma TVs. Well except the rich, but that's OK as itll give us plebs something to aspire to. After all, we're all in it together.
Oh, and also a business where you can start earning cash in month 1.
That's what I mean morethan. Standard accounting systems smooth out peaks and troughs in expenditure (e.g. by depreciation) and match income to cost. There are many businesses (e.g. farming) where goods are only sold at certain times of the year. Sometimes it may take more than a year to be able to start earning cash.
It seems to me that the only way to start a new small business and receive benefits would be to still do the 35 hours of pretending to apply for jobs or only to start a business with no start up/investment costs. People who run small businesses and rely on WTC to meet the shortfall appear to be stuffed.
I just can't see what the government is aiming at. It seems half baked and not ready for implementation, which is a bit odd as they have had quite a long time to think about an alternative to the current system.
Does anyone know the situation for CIS workers. DH works self employed but through agencies so at the end of the week he gets paid by a company, tax taken off and gets a wage slip. But he still has to do a tax return at the end of each year. Thanks
If you buy stock one month which takes you under the minimum you can earn, i reckon a lot of people will just buy what they need with their own money (maybe savings) then the government will not have to give you the VAT back at the end of the year. Another scheme.
I feel so distressed about it all and feel we would actually be better off being un-employed (instead of self employed-but not making enough for UC) What sort of jobs are they expecting us to do on workfare?
It's a stupid system.
To claim you have to both be working but certainly in our household if we were both working there would be no need to claim - what is the point of that?
I am just so glad that luck has meant I've been able to be a SAHM whilst mine are little, I had always intended to work once my youngest started junior school (as you see from the plan in my earlier post) I think this will mean I have to work earlier than intended, once she is at infant school but at least my parents are now retired and she won't have to go to before/after school club. The only thing is if I get a job in a school (what I was doing before and the only thing i have experience in and my NNEB qualification) I won't be able to attend in school events/plays/assemblies. I probably won't achieve my dream of teaching but we will have a roof over our heads and food on the table, and I won't be relying on the government for a penny.
"If i was working 16hrd I would be earning more than I can in tc"
This is part of the plan isn't it? You both work to qualify but then you realise your not able to qualify as you earn jut over the threashold.
I hope to be in work by the time she is 5 but what if i cannot get a job?
Jobs here are like gold dust, especially those that fit in with school hours
I just assumed from what I've read that the new benefit rules would apply as long as there was at least one person in the household working. But I couldn't be absolutely sure on that.
I think there will be alot of money stuffed in tins, under beds etc. Not necessarily as avoidance to pay tax, but as a buffer to invent a job/hours when there is a shortfall. I know somebody already intending to do this.
Also I can't see how the gov can change the existing system for Ltd company directors, will they be considered as self employed rather than employees? Its an absolute nightmare and a disaster waiting to happen.
I am very confused by all of this.
Currently DH works 37 hours at £8.02 an hour and I am a SAHM my youngest will be 5 in November 2014.
We took a longterm view that I am doing an OU degree with a view to doing a PGCE (I was a teaching assistant prior to having children) and timed it so that I will be qualified and hopefully beginning a job September 2017 (when my youngest is almost 8 and starts junior school and my eldest is at secondary school and able to walk youngest down to her nans so no childcare costs).
As I understood it I would have to stop claiming tax credits when I began the PGCE (a year long course) as it is full time education, which we feel we could just about manage for a year.
Will I be expected to work at least 16 hours once youngest is 5? if so this messes up my plan as in order to complete my degree within this timeframe I would have to do 2 OU modules together the year youngest is in year 1 (32 hours study a week) which I wouldn't be able to manage whilst working 16 hrs.
If I was working 16 hours a week I would be earning more than we receive in tax credits so wouldn't be claiming UC anyway as we wouldn't need it. In our case it would be in the governments interest to give us the tax credits/UC until I begin my PGCE as at the point of qualification I would earn more and therefore pay more tax than working 16hrs at NMW as I would not claim UC if I had a job in either circumstance.
If I can't complete my degree then I am stuck on shitty money - surely the government will see it is better to take the long term view.
I know you wouldn't buy equipment at the wrong time, if you could help it. But the small businesses and self employed who are entitled to tc/uc are not earning a lot by definition.
Some people have to replenish stock and buy goods and services for their business on a just in time basis. Whilst I agree this is not an ideal way to run a business some have no alternative, reasons such as lack of stock storage, short shelf life. These people have to buy at certain times and if this takes your earnings under the nmw for that week you lose benefit.
Im pretty sure pumpkinsweetie, that once your youngest is 5 if your dh is only earning minimum wage you will have to go and work too, to avoid in work conditionality the household must be earning full time at a min of £7.22ph
Well, following accounting principles, you don't buy all your equipment in January and think "Gosh I had a sh** January look at all those costs and no sales!", you spread the cost of the equipment over it's useful life (depreciation) and the tax system recognises this with capital allowances.
Not sure what principles the UC is following - the how much money can you stash in the biscuit tin under your bed school of accounting?
I thought the conservatives were supposed to support "strivers" and be anti red tape.
What happens if i am a sahm with a child under 3, and dh works fulltime on mw, would we still get help?
Im asking this as currently dh is redundant but we are hoping he gets a job soon which will be mw.
It's all confusing for me
Thanks Couthy, so as long as you earn that between you then you would be ok? For instance, if I learn leas than £7.22 an hour but dh earns more than that we'd be ok?
The self employed come under more scrutiny than the employed. Its a nightmare and many small businesses will suffer because of the stupid hoops you are expected to jump through.
I don't think we'll qualify anymore. I know there are a couple of loopholes for some situations for s/e. But we like to be able to sleep at night. (Ha, look at the time)
I am not standing in a job centre for it to make no difference at all. Ok, if it helped business fine, someone else will have to tick their box.
We won't starve (just about). I don't mind losing the money so much as I know there are people worse of than us.
Anybody less than 35 hours x min wage forget it. Unless I am mistaken.
I can't see how anybody will be able to replenish stock, buy tools and equipment how can you work without these. Unless you have a good turnover you won't be able to get these so easily. (more red tape)
When you are attending Jobfare meetings and compulsory courses etc you are losing work.
Cake. Given my previous calculations, the minimum you would have to earn as a couple would be 16hrs at £7.22 for the 'designated main carer' of the DC's, plus 35 hrs at £7.22 for the 'designated main earner'.
Not an easy feat tbh.
It may not be brought in until October 2013, but with an 18 month lead time on ESA appeals currently, and knowing that the majority of people with my disabilities only get ESA in appeal, that would take me to April 2014 before my appeal date. Which would put me firmly in UC territory.
Because what they go us allow the appeal, then almost instantly call you in fog a medical assessment, which loses the ESA you have just been awarded, and as you can't appeal more than once every 6 months, you would have no choice but to claim UC...
They really do have it all worked out.
Thanks for pasting that link to the icaew, minou minou
To quote the link:
"Self-employed earnings will be computed on an adjusted cash basis which is entirely at odds not only with the GAAP-based assessment of trading profit currently used for tax purposes, but also the simplified cash basis HMRC is proposing for periods from 6 April 2013."
I thought the reporting system for self employed people applying for UC described in aufaniae's post way up thread seemed a bit odd (i.e. using reporting methods that would never be used by any accountant), but I thought I had somehow misunderstood it and that it couldn't be that bad. It appears that it is.
"We are strongly of the view that if implemented as they stand, these proposals will do severe and lasting damage to the small business sector in the UK." - not from some left wing think tank, but from one of the most 'establishment' professional bodies in the UK.
Don't think this has been posted already - short piece about the efect on part-time workers - johnnyvoid.wordpress.com/2012/06/19/how-universal-credit-will-destroy-part-time-work/
As I understand UC gets rid of existing benefits and makes one payment to a household based on their income and dependant on their circumstances. So the cut off point will be different for each household.
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.