Talk

Advanced search

To wonder whether people are happy or not with the proposals Childcare costs

(20 Posts)
bigbarns Tue 18-Mar-14 19:14:02

Just that really. Yes the proposals are better than nothing at all and will of course provide support for those currently not able to access employer provided voucher schemes.
However, whilst I've only had a quick read of it during the course of the day, am I right in saying that to achieve the £2k per child saving you actually have to pay in £8k yourself? So for anyone on the existing scheme, whether they are a basic or higher rate tax payer, would be better off sticking with that (at least for one child - granted this new scheme does in theory allow you to save more if you have more than one).

sarahquilt Tue 18-Mar-14 19:29:42

I think it's a step in the right direction. I think it's important to have subsidised childcare so that it's easier and more rewarding for parents to work.

Albertatata Tue 18-Mar-14 19:49:30

I think its a good idea, helps the self employed as well and good that it is per child. Not read in depth though.

HappyMummyOfOne Tue 18-Mar-14 19:57:03

Childcare is a cost of working so it should be tax deductible so its a step in the right direction. Its also better in that all the adults in the household have to be working unlike the voucher scheme.

I won't qualify because dh is unemployed. Gutted to lose the vouchers but good news that self-employed will benefit. I guess I'm in a small minority of families who have a non-working parent but also a need for childcare so I'll have to suck it up. I do wonder about single parents though, I hope there's some small print which would allow them to qualify. If you're incurring the costs then you should get the help,

missmargot Tue 18-Mar-14 20:11:20

I'm pleased that there is something for self employed people at last, we can't take advantage of the voucher scheme so this would be a plus for us.

bigbarns Tue 18-Mar-14 20:19:27

I think the existing scheme is still available for those who want to stay on it.

bigkidsdidit Tue 18-Mar-14 20:21:04

DH and I both take £243 of vouchers. Will we be better off? In not sure. Still, if seems better than last year's proposal.

cogitosum Tue 18-Mar-14 20:21:23

I don't see why they couldn't have just extended existing scheme to self-employed confused

yorkie84 Tue 18-Mar-14 20:22:06

Would like more info before I decide. Dh is a hrt payer and I am self employed probably scrapingc16 hours. No idea if we will qualify.

bigbarns Tue 18-Mar-14 20:26:57

We both pay for £243 of vouchers, so pay just under £6k each from gross salary, one higher rate and one basic rate tax payer, we save over £2k per annum. I think we are therefore better off sticking on the old scheme - we are of course restricted to the £243 each though, which is ok for what we need.

bigkidsdidit Tue 18-Mar-14 20:44:03

DH reckons we'll be £116 better off under the new system. Tbh, for the sake of £10 per month I don't think we'll be bothered to do a tax return, but stay in the voucher scheme.

mumandboys123 Tue 18-Mar-14 21:23:19

I do wonder about single parents though, I hope there's some small print which would allow them to qualify. If you're incurring the costs then you should get the help,

why wouldn't single parents qualify? or are you suggesting that single parents don't qualify as 'working families'?

WooWooOwl Tue 18-Mar-14 21:30:16

I think it's a good idea because it's available to families only where both parents work and it will be available to more people, like those who are self employed or who work for employers that aren't in the voucher scheme.

why wouldn't single parents qualify? or are you suggesting that single parents don't qualify as 'working families'?

Of course not. All of the press coverage talked about "two working parents".

Bodicea Wed 19-Mar-14 13:15:11

It seems OK and a bit more fair as my DH can't collect the vouchers as he is self employed. I am currently collecting the full amount (£243) whilst on mat leave. But would be nice if we both could. I wonder how I will move in the new system as I will already have a savings pot collected during mat leave. Therefore my bill will initially be lower.
Do you have to work a certain number of hours? I am thinking of going back to work for 15 hours. Would I still qualify?

yorkie84 Wed 19-Mar-14 17:13:48

Think you need to work 16 hours.

mumandboys123 Wed 19-Mar-14 17:41:34

Of course not. All of the press coverage talked about "two working parents".

in a two-parent household. Not in a one parent household. I'm not sure why people seem to think that single-parent households would be excluded. Other than the usual 'all single parents are on benefits' or 'you shouldn't have children if you can't afford them' crap.

foreverondiet Wed 19-Mar-14 21:27:41

I am on voucher scheme which is better for us now - both higher rate tax payers we both get them and also childcare cost less as as we have au pair rather than nanny (when dc younger and we had nanny the new scheme would have better) Also faff of tax return? I do think it's fairer though - I had a friend who got vouchers - wife didn't work and he earned ££££ used it for nursery. I didn't see why the gov should have helped him with childcare costs. Is a bit of a faff with au pair though - need to get them ofsted registered.

pointythings Wed 19-Mar-14 21:33:01

I think the concept is fine and it's about time that working parents got some help with childcare.

I think the threshold is ridiculous. Another poster elsewhere explained it as fitting in with tax thresholds, but having thought about it that makes no sense, because

1) the taper for CB kicks in at £50k, which is not an income tax threshold, and then ends at £60k, which isn't either. So clearly is is possible to administer thresholds other than those already in the HMRC systems

2) this system is assessed on household income not highest earner income. Which is something they said was not possible to do with CB. So WTF?

Anyhow, if we're talking sensible thresholds, we should make it twice the higher (not top) rate of income tax, so a tad over £80k household income. Not £300k - anyone on that kind of money does not need subsidies, whereas people on lower incomes should get more of a subsidy.

DH and I won't benefit from this in any way as DD2 will be 12 before it kicks in and we haven't used childcare other than for holidays since she was 9.5 anyway.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now