Talk

Advanced search

Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. Free legal advice is available from a Citizen's Advice Bureau, and the Law Society can supply a list of local solicitors.

child benefit -is the £44000 earning limit being brought in 2012 or 2013

(13 Posts)
lotti37 Sat 30-Jul-11 09:43:01

thank you

LawrieMarlow Sat 30-Jul-11 09:45:18

I thought it was from April 2013 ie tax year 2013-2014 but could well be wrong.

Will try and find out.

LawrieMarlow Sat 30-Jul-11 09:48:17

Everything I have found so far says "by 2013" without giving a specific date. Changes do generally happen in April although not always.

<keeps looking>

LawrieMarlow Sat 30-Jul-11 09:53:20

This says that

"Child Benefit will be frozen from April 2011 to 2013 and then withdrawn from higher rate taxpayers from 2013" which sounds like April 2013 onwards.

LawrieMarlow Sat 30-Jul-11 09:57:25

This (published just after the press release in October 2010) says that it doesn't say exactly when it would start - just "by 2013".

lotti37 Sat 30-Jul-11 10:15:49

i thought it was april 2013. thanks. they should work it out on a household income rather than an individual income. seems unfair to me if one of you does not work the other does but are over the limit.

LawrieMarlow Sat 30-Jul-11 10:21:10

I agree it should be on household income - I did write to my MP about it as at that time we would have been affected by it due to my small income and H's larger income (currently not higher rate but by then would be as they are going to reduce the income at which you pay higher rate tax, although the personal allowance is going up).

Two people could both earn say £43k and get child benefit, which is worth more than its value as to get the same amount you would need to earn rather more gross whereas one person could earn £44k and not get it.

H has moved out (not due to child benefit grin) so at the moment it shouldn't be a problem for me but I am quite sure there will be at least more debate on this before it is implemented. There is also the possibility I think that families where one partner does not work would still receive it so that they get HRP and then it would be taken out of the higher earners tax. All feels not very well thought out.

CogitoErgoSometimes Sat 30-Jul-11 11:11:58

I get a little fed up with the 'my partner earns a fortune and I earn nothing so it's not fair' argument. As a single parent, my individual and my household income are identical by definition, and both take me over the threshold. Aside from a discount on my council tax I get no benefits, no breaks, no extra help, no top-ups. However, I take the view that I (and anyone else in the HRT bracket) am very fortunate to earn as much as I do and would rather someone who needs it more than me will still get CB or extra tax credits or whatever's in the pot.

LawrieMarlow Sat 30-Jul-11 12:13:15

Cogito I should have mentioned that for single parents it is the most unfair. As I am one now I should have mentioned it but I suppose as I wasn't one when the proposals came out I was still thinking about how it would have affected me, which is selfish but I suppose that I am grateful that at least I don't have that to affect things now.

What I find most unfair is that people who will be earning just over the higher rate tax band will get an overall cut in pay that if they earned a little bit less they wouldn't. I am sure some people will be paying more into pensions or maybe working slightly fewer hours so they overall get more money.

CogitoErgoSometimes Sat 30-Jul-11 14:36:31

Single parents on a good income have always got zip extra help - but really, why should we? Used to get CTC, which I didn't turn down obviously, but I never understood why anyone would give benefits to people on incomes as high as £55k.

The concept of a higher rate tax band IME is unfair by definition. Because we have different tax rates that kick in at particular earnings thresholds, if you're just over that threshold you're not a lot better off than if you're underneath. Peg CB to it and it's just another income stream that cuts off. Whatever the middle-income version of the 'poverty trap' is, that's it. 'Middle-income trap'?. I worked out recently that if my income halved, my take-home pay (with CB added back) would only go down by a third. I'd love a flat income tax rate but as it would be shouted down as 'the tory government looking after their rich mates' it's unlikely to happen. smile

As for working fewer hours to keep qualifying for CB, I don't think that's a wise move. My DB working in a branch of the civil service once turned down the chance of promotion because (quote) 'I won't get overtime any more and I'll be worse off'. 20 years on he's stuck in the same job on the same payscale, whereas if he'd taken the promotion opportunity he'd probably be on double the salary by now, even with the overtime.

mercibucket Sat 30-Jul-11 14:52:53

It could well be worth working slightly less hours or paying a bit more into pension if you are right on the edge of the higher rate threshold. Dh will be just over(remember it will start at a lower pay rate by 2013) and we'd losE several grand. Think we'll pay more into pension n charitieS n keep the cb

mranchovy Sat 30-Jul-11 22:54:54

When this was announced in October 2010 it was definately going to be brought in from 2013 and it was definately going to be enacted in the 'next available finance bill'. Now the 2011 Finance Bill was definately completely silent on Child Benefit, and there have been no further announcements from the Treasury on the subject.

There are huge technical problems associated with implementing this so it will be interesting to see what happens next confused

LawrieMarlow Sat 30-Jul-11 22:56:27

That's interesting mranchovy. I did think it all sounded a bit more complicated to implement than was being suggested at first.

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