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.
Anyone heard about new changes to c'tax benefit and having to pay 20% when on benefits?(72 Posts)
Thats it really, has anyone else heard of these changes? I found out about them today, apparently people of working age(under60) will have to start paying 20% towards their council tax becuase of money deficits within councils.
The thing worrying me is the child maintainance aspect, they will now count this as a income and people will be means tested. I think thats shocking since no other organisation counts child maintainance as income as its for the upkeep of the children.
On ringing the information line, they couldnt give me any more information or tell me when this may be put in place but im assuming it could be this april
THE GOVERMENT SAY PROTECT THE PENSIONERS FAIR ENOUGH IF THEY ARE ON A LOW INCOME BUT WHAT ABOUT THOSE ON LARGE PRIVATE PENSIONS! Cares and the disabled are being hit hard! And when pip comes in in april hit even hardered THIS GOVERMENT ARE HITTING DISABLED PEOPLE THE MOST AND ITS ABOSOLUTELY SHOCKING!!!! VOTE THEM OUT NEXT ELECTION THEY MAKE ME SICK MAKING THESE VUNERABLE PEOPLE ECASPE GOATS FOR SAVING MONEY!! AND GIVING THE RICH TAX CUTS!!
hmm so on £5 a week there be asking for £1of that ( ex does not work or his wife)
Oh and before anyone says anything about why i don`t work its due to my disability and being ds3 carer
i too am a single parent on benefits and quite frankly i dont know where i am going to get this extra money from, whilst i apprieciate we use the services but we are all rweady barely managing on income support as it is. they are reducing benefits and charging us more in ct. if NRP actually paid a reasonable amount of child support in the first place we probably wouldnt be on benefits. The goverment are a joke. i have two disabld children so cant work, but i actually work hard caring for my children with no support from socail care if i put them in a home it would cost the tax payer thousands more and then i would be able to get a paid job pay council tax. This new system is totally unfair.
I have emailed the council asking if my calculations are correct so will wait and see what they reply.
Also apparently if my exp doesnt pay CM one month, Im to ring the council straight away and my amount i have to pay will be amended, just like that. Cant see itll be that simple myself...
Thought id resurect this thread after receiving a letter from my council today, it makes no sense whatsoever but I think the jist of it is- my council tax(if i were not on full council tax benefit) would be £73 (25%single discount) x 12= £876 a year - 20%= £176 per year i will have to pay towards now which works out at £17.60 a month but also they will take 20p for every £1 in child maintainance so thats £30, so altogether £47.60 a month I will now have to pay!!!...I have no idea where that money will come from, itll have to come out of the childrens maintainance money, which seems really wrong.
I stand to be corrected on this but the letter is very unclear and I hope someone more knowledgable will come and tell me ive got this wrong but i fear I havent
Does anyone know if the full amount of maintenance will be taken towards council tax bill?
Im on income support but get £38 a week maintenance when he pays but would the full amount just go to council tax now?
Pensioners are protected because they are retired and not able to earn. And also to qualify for the state penison they will have made the necessary quota of NI contributions.
'she remains a drain on the system and jess likely she is to ever contribute meaningfully to society.'
Contributing isnt just about money. My aunt lost her job as she had to care for her husband and has been doing so for 5 years now. She gets £58. a week Carers allowance (plus rent and CTB). Where will she find any extra to pay council tax? Of course, she could put him into a home. Remind me how much homes for people with dementia cost a week? Oh, and when she turns 65(?) she wont get Carers anymore.
I reckon she contributes big time. She cares 24 hours a day 7 days a week. No holidays.
I also love the assertion that motherhood is "no work at all". The state is getting a pretty fucking good deal out of single parents (invariably women) who take time away from the coalface to do the hard, unrelenting donkey-work that is raising their children on benefits; it would cost far more in state-subsidised childcare for all of them to work or even as in days gone by for their children to become wards of the state.
You're not only bitter, you seem not to have basic research skills, or you would know that your ill natured claims add up to little more than idle speculation, assumption and ignorance.
But the state did pay for your existence and it paid for you to work. It paid more than it would have paid were you not in employment. You are not a net contributor but a recipient, which is why it is pretty fucking rich for you to come down all hard-ass on zumba for taking less money from the state than you did while you were working in a low-paid job.
You say that you didn't claim housing or council tax benefits but actually you could have done and many single parents in your circumstances do, all of which costs money.
You have one child. One child to feed, one child to organise, one child to help with homework, one child to fund childcare for.
What if you had had three? Three sets of nursery fees to pay, three packed lunches to make? That would take your £420 a month up to £1280. Would you still have been claiming less than someone not working?
You don't know everyone's individual circumstances, you don't know Zumba, how dare you declare yourself a worthier person!
My point is that by not working at all I'd have had my full rent and council tax paid, along with income support and child tax credits, which added up to far more than I got. Single parents are never ideal unless they can afford to not receive state help, I fullyadmit that and recognise that in those four years I needed state help but I had no choice and worked damn hard in difficult conditions. Staying in the same job meant I now earn more and have just got a promotion, so hope to carry on contributing more and more to society over an entire working life time. If I'd have given up my job, I'd have been fucked and probably still unemployed now ds is almost 7. Yes I am bitter that I broke my back working full time when ds was little when some mothers like zumba just expect the state to pay for their entire existence, with them doing no work at all.
You know that I just told you I was taking more from the government when working than when not? Was I, in fact, being a drain on society when working? Was I being a drain on society when not working?
When you are claiming childcare, you are taking more from the tax and welfare balance than you are putting back in. Your childcare was 420 a months and seventy per cent of that was paid by the government, so you were contributing nothing, nothing at all, to the financial balance of this country. You have no right to call someone a drain on this country's resources when you are only slightly less of a drain yourself.
LuluMai, if you were getting the childcare element of WTC (which you say you were), you were also getting other WTC and also CTC. Trust me, that would all have been hundreds of ££s a week more than the £7.93 you paid in tax.
I wasn't minimum wage, earned more than that but was on a low wage.
Wallison, your calculations are way off. My full rent was about 600 a month, my council tax something like 60, I paid both of those which if I had been on benefits would be paid for. I also paid tax and income tax, I can't remember how much as I earn a lot more now and this was going back a few years. Nursery was about 420 a month, 70% paid for by tax credits, so it's nonsensical to say I was costing more than zumba. The long term advantage is that I've stayed in work and now pay in more than I receive and will hopefully for the rest of my life. The longer zumba is out of work, the longer she remains a drain on the system and jess likely she is to ever contribute meaningfully to society.
I used to get 70% of my childcare paid, plus tax credits.
I was taking more from the government in childcare costs and tax credits than I ever received unemployed.
It is not cost effective for the government to sent single parents of preschoolers to work unless they refuse to support them while they work. It costs more for the childcare than a single parent can earn.
But child maintenance is income is it not. It is money coming into the house. I read about somebody on a thread a while ago and she knew someone getting £4,000 a month maintenance (yes that's right) and this person still qualified for tax credits. I thought that was totally shocking. But I would sympathise with a person on very low income already struggling having to pay more bills.
In fact, unless your 70% of childcare costs, plus the rest of WTC and the rest of CTC amounted to less than £7.93 a week (which is what you would pay in tax on a minimum wage full-time job), you were a net recipient of benefits for all the time you were working at that job. You were getting a lot more than zumba is for staying at home, to the tune of £100s a week.
If you got 70% of your childcare paid, plus the other element of WTC and CTC as well, you were definitely getting out a lot more than you paid in. A lot more.
You don't get the 70% unless you are pretty much on minimum wage, which means that the tax you paid would nowhere near have covered what you were getting in in-work benefits, even without housing and council tax benefits. Yes, you weren't exactly taking and giving 'nothing' back, but you were taking a fuck of a lot and only giving a nugatory amount back.
Nope I didn't receive a penny of housing benefit, paid full rent, and paid full council tax and normal PAYE on my wage. I did take out of it in tax credits, as many working families do (two parent and lone), but I was constantly paying into the system and cost the state far less than if I had no worked at all (tax credits have never paid for full childcare, I got the max at 70%). People like zumba are simply taking the from the system and giving nothing back.
Not to mention the cost to the taxpayer for your free prescriptions.
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now »
Already registered? Log in with:
Please login first.