To think there is very little benefit in earning more than 50k(518 Posts)
Loss of child benefit and now reduction in pension tax relief makes hardly worth bursting a gut to earn over 50k. People who earn just over 50k are generally the work horses in skilled jobs that ecomony needs to grow. Given that such people will be saddled with high student loans in the future, what will senior teachers, doctors gain from all their hard work?
Have my first
I need a 🎻 here too for you
I work 3 days a week (when not on maternity leave). I thought about going up to 4 but it wasn't worth it to me to miss another day with DCs when 40% will go in tax and we would lose child benefit and make our tax affairs yet more complicated. Yes, I would be better off, but I'm not at the end of the spectrum where it makes a real difference. The question is how much does the economy suffer because of people like me? I'm certainly no better than those criticised for cutting their hours so they can maximise their tax credits.
I was just thinking today that the only option for dc will be to get into high wage jobs. Used to be that you could live comfortably on middle incomes, afford a home, holidays, retire eventually. But our kids won't have that benefit. Will they?
So yabu of course there's a point to earning a better wage, often it's a stepping stone on the way to better wages again. There isn't some kind of cap whereby it's no longer worth making an effort. That's a very unambiguous and jobs worth attitude. It's like the £100k plus people complaining about the old 50p tax band...
Not to worry about the doctors - the juniors finish at under £50K and the consultants jump to £60K. Likewise senior classroom teachers earn under £40K.
Jumping a tax band is always a bit of a moment and I'm sure that a lot of people on £50K don't feel rich or even particularly comfortable but I would think that few would deliberately scale back work for child benefit.
Are you serious?! You take home around 50% of anything extra you earn.
If you don;t think it's worth making an effort to earn say £75,000 over £50,000 and taking home an extra £1000 a month then you really shouldn't be aiming at the kind of job might push you above £50,000
I have earned NIL, £50,000 and six figures.
Trust me 6 figures is better and I didn't work any harder than I did earning £50,000.
And if you're basing your decisions about earning over £50,000 on the fairly nominal amount of child benefit (unless you have a significant number of children - in which case your bigger problem is childcare costs) then I'm hoping you're not in the financial sector!
IME I worked just as hard and with less respect as a young professional on much less than 50k than I do now I earn a bit more. Also it's a good wagewhich plenty could never seem of, so in that sense YABU.
Having said that, the tax system is such that there's a massive drop of in the incentive around the higher rate threshold and I guess moreso if kids, child benefit is a concern. Add that to an expensive area and yes, there probably is a disincentive to strive for that 2-3% pay rise you won't see all that much of.
It's not the only broken point in the tax system though in terms of perverse incentives, but but is one of the more comfortable ones.
What they will earn from their hard work is a decent salary and a good life, owning their own homes which will be nicely furnished and in "respectable" areas, a holiday every year, meals out now and again and a good retirement.
The real workhorses are the cleaners and waitstaff, refuse collectors, factory workers, carers. People who do hard physical labour for very low salaries right up to state retirement age and then retire on tiny pensions.
I have never earned 50k in my life but I know that I am better off than a lot of people.
If this is genuinely what you think rather than being nastily provocative, you should be ashamed of yourself.
The combination of losing child benefit and 40% tax means that a high earner with 3 children loses a huge chunk of his/her earnings between 50 and 60k. Given that well paid jobs often have higher costs (ie Further yo travel, longer hours, more pressure, responsibility) there is no benefit to someone pushing themselves to earn more.
If someone loses 69% of what they earn (40% tax, loss of child benefit, higher student loan repayments) when they earn over a threshold of say 50k what moviation is there to work harder? Taxing the super rich (ie. Over 150k) has been shown to backfire. I believe that taxing middle income families further will slow down the ecomony. .
Incidently I am not a higher tax payer. Our family also gets child benefit.
It's OK. If you don't want your 50k, I'm happy to take it off your hands.
Makes perfect sense.
I shall quit my job tomorrow and go and be a teacher.
Not really because I'm rather to sensible to even try and make this nonsence make any sence
Child benefit is about £20 a week.
That's nothing compared to £50K - what are you on about?!
They'll gain a £50,000 a year salary. A nice home. Security. The knowledge that they can be made redundant etc and not have to dip into the kids savings to live. Sorry if I get on my soapbox here, but I come from an area where it's rare to earn £21,000 let alone £50,000. The average UK wage is £26,000, there's parts of the country where earning that much is as likely as winning the lottery. I can never see myself earning a £50,000 salary but I don't expect it. Those who are lucky enough to earn that much should be grateful.
Of course they have more stress and responsibility than others. But £50,000? After tax and NI that's over £700 a week. More than enough for anyone to live on, unless you live frivolously in which case it's your own fault. My mother is a carer and earns £18,000 a year. For that, she works harder than your average boss. Out on the roads from 7am until 10pm or later most days, not getting paid time spent travelling from calls, getting abuse from clients, families, being asked to work extra calls all the time. The forgotten workers, such as carers, do a much harder job for much less pay. IMO, people who earn £50,000 should be grateful. I'm sure they do work hard in their job, I'm not saying they don't. But the fact remains they are very lucky to be earning that much, to have had a good education (which you generally need to earn that wage), and to have enough to live very comfortably when there's people out there who can't afford to eat or put a roof over their heads.
Well said, Hedda. All the high earners need the 'workhorses' you mention, and bloody well ought to appreciate what they do.
Surely this is not how people think? My DH earns over £50k, I earn considerably less - but we live well and if we ever had a conversation about how we could rearrange our salarys to receive benefits I'd stick pins in my eyes!! It's our responsibility to help the needy yet not take the piss. I don't even know who does that anymore? Xx
If someone loses 69% of what they earn ... they get £490 for every thousand. £40 a month, which is a pair of shoes or four bottles of wine extra, each and every month. Just for a 2% wage increase.
If that's not enough for you, earn more thousands over your 50. If an extra 4 bottles of wine means nothing to you, you shouldn't be fretting about child benefit.
Yikes, what happened to my arithmetic?! £310, £26, you lost a bottle wine! Sorry. Same message, though.
if we ever had a conversation about how we could rearrange our salarys to receive benefits - you would be prats
They'll gain a £50,000 a year salary. A nice home. Security.
Not in London. You need double that to afford a one bed flat.
The problem is that when you combine the cost of living in an area commutable to London (and a two hour train ride doesn't count as a doable commute) and a child or two an income of GBP50k isn't a lot at all.
I am an auditor and work 16+ hour days for 6 days of the week for the first two months of the year plus work about 80 hours each week around quarterly filings (9 weeks of the year). The rest of the year a FT work week is about 60 hours. Everyone thinks we are well paid but it works out to be GBP13.80 per hour before taxes and that is with a degree plus post graduate exams and experience of 5+ years. If I worked 40 hours a week I would be making GBP28,700 gross and would qualify for all sorts of help, especially having a third child on the way. I think this is what the OP is referring to.
Luckily I live in the US and married a man who makes enough that I don't care what my salary is beyond it covering childcare costs. I am looking at the big picture and aiming to make far more than GBP50k in the future. Sadly if we were in the UK DH would be subsidizing my career choice. This is why the policies in the UK suck for the lower income spouse once children arrive.
Given that well paid jobs often have higher costs (ie Further yo travel, longer hours, more pressure, responsibility) there is no benefit to someone pushing themselves to earn more.
I call 'bollocks' on that. Frequently more wealthy people can afford to live near work and poorer people can't. I know poorer people with two jobs earning far less than I do who work massively longer hours. More pressure and responsibility? Possibly. But the most pressure I've felt is when my immigration status relied on my shitty low-paid job. Not when I was earning the most.
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.