Talk

Advanced search

Here some suggested organisations that offer expert advice on SN.

AIBU in thinking that people in the higher tax brackets...

(37 Posts)
bigpolarbear Fri 25-Jul-08 22:08:02

should stop moaning about not receiving as much of the diability element of tax credits which are after all, means tested? I just feel that DLA/Carers Allowance is a separate issue and people should be entitled to that regardless of earnings, whereas the tax credit system is primarily to support families on low incomes.

It pisses me off when people with very high incomes moan that they don't receive the same amount of disability element. There are people really struggling on low incomes FFS!

bigpolarbear Sat 26-Jul-08 11:11:03

Bumping for any opinions?

daisy5678 Sat 26-Jul-08 11:25:02

I don't moan, but it does (silently) annoy me that my supposedly high salary, which leaves me with £400 a month after mortgage and childcare, deems me ineligible for the disability element of tax credits. I get about £10 a week off tax credits. I'm not even in the higher tax bracket!

J is on high rate care DLA and his disability is not made up for by my 'high' salary, so I guess I get a bit annoyed that I get the same tax credits as someone earning the same as me but without the disabled child, if that makes sense.

I don't think that I am on a high salary. I am a single parent and my salary is less than a couple's combined salary, even if they were on a low income.

I think what really annoys me about the tax credits system is that they will not pay for my childcare. As J can't go to normal after school childcare (school said no for H&S reasons, plus he did go once as a trial and ended up attacking a kid), I employ someone who is brilliant with him who picks him up and takes him to our house for the hour or so until I get back from work. She's not a registered childminder so I can't claim for her, and because she's working in my home she couldn't be a childminder anyway. So that's over £300 a month on childcare that I get not help with.

So yeah, I think I should get the disability element. It annoys me when it says on the form "severe disability premium = £X" and then "amount deducted because of your income = £X".

What you mean by 'very high' and what they mean by 'very high' might be two different things. But, according to them, I guess I have a very high income. Trust me, I don't in reality, which is why I whinge in my head and why perhaps these 'people in the higher tax brackets' are 'moaning' too.

daisy5678 Sat 26-Jul-08 11:26:16

So yeah, I think that you are being unreasonable.

jimjamshaslefttheyurt Sat 26-Jul-08 11:35:50

I have had to take a job that fits around ds1 school bus, there is no after school care available for him in the city. And no holiday care available in the city. This has meant doing a funded PhD (full time but flexible, so I can stop to meet the school bus, feed the kids put them to bed then go back to work). Doing this has meant I've lost carer's allowance. I'm doing the same amount of caring as I ever did, but because I'm studying full time get zilch.

I don't think there's anything fair about the system. If I didn't have ds1 I would be earning double probably and the household wouldn't be eligible for tax credits at all.

We have paid thousands over the years for basic services that should be state provided. So yep I feel a bit miffed that we don't get the higher rate disability element as financially his disability has had a huge effect on the family.

I'm more miffed about not getting carer's though.

bigpolarbear Sat 26-Jul-08 11:38:15

Give me sleep, yeah I understand what you mean. I was a bit annoyed last night when I posted! It's difficult isn't it as you say one persons high income is different from anothers. The point ultimately is that the tax credit system designed to help low income families not families with high incomes and high outgoings I suppose.

jimjamshaslefttheyurt Sat 26-Jul-08 11:40:16

Not even if those high outgoings are because there's a disabled child in the house?

Given that tax credits overpaid me by 15 grand last year (despite repeated phone calls and letters from me) I think that if they tightened up on the cock ups they could pay everyone the disability premium and have shed loads left over.

bigpolarbear Sat 26-Jul-08 11:45:30

Jimjam, I agree with you re carers allowance. This, and DLA, shouldn't be means tested and probably should be higher.

I just wanted to ask the question re tax credits specifically.

jimjamshaslefttheyurt Sat 26-Jul-08 12:08:05

Oh I don't know. The whole tax credits system is so warped. I think it is utterly crazy that higher rate tax payers get tax credits at all tbh. I would far rather the higher rate boundary was set higher and we didn't get tax credits.

bigpolarbear Sat 26-Jul-08 12:19:14

"I think it is utterly crazy that higher rate tax payers get tax credits at all tbh" Jimjams that's exactly the point I am trying to make I guess.

We only have DWs income and the tax credits and I look after the children, 2 with SN. We are grateful for the state help that we get. God knows how long this help will be around but if it is abolished, the people with high incomes, their circumstances wouldn't change that much but people on low incomes who should be helped by tax credits will be much worse off.

jimjamshaslefttheyurt Sat 26-Jul-08 12:24:16

Well hopefully it would be replaced by something sensible.

But if they're saying that people paying higher rate tax need tax credits then tbh I don't see why they shouldn't receive the disability element as they will be in general worse off than people on the same salary without a disabled child (we certainly are).

I don't think they should be administering anything to do with disability though tax credits though.

And I do honestly believe they should raise the higher rate threshold and remove tax credits to the higher paid accordingly.

bigpolarbear Sat 26-Jul-08 12:38:21

Fair point jimjam.

daisy5678 Sat 26-Jul-08 15:02:21

I'm not ON the higher tax rate. Yet I still don't ge the disability bit.

And I have high outgoings because of needing a house with a garden for my hyper son to play in. If he was NT, could have got by with a one-bedroomed flat, I guess. Ditto with the childcare. An NT child could go to normal cheap childcare. I HAVE to earn a good wage to be able to pay for that. In my profession, you can earn more as you take on more responsibility. I have taken on more to earn more, but then tax credits etc. get taken off me. Would actually make more sense to give up reposnibilities and be on tax credits.

There's an implication with your "The point ultimately is that the tax credit system designed to help low income families not families with high incomes and high outgoings I suppose." that I spend too much/ choose to/ whatever? No choice really.

I don't have that high an income. It's not even at the higher tax bracket.

My point is that I only get the same tax credits as someone earning the same as me with no SN child. And that can't be fair.

Sidge Sat 26-Jul-08 23:15:26

We're in the same boat as givemesleep. DH has a decent wage, not high tax bracket but still a decent wage really. However I had to give up work to care for DD2 so we manage on his income yet bought our house based on 2 incomes (moved before DD2 was born.)

Moving isn't an option (and we are in the cheapest area here anyway) and yet after all our fixed outgoings we have about £3-400 a month left, which just about covers food.

But on the tax credit form it says "severe disability element xxx" but is reduced to NIL due to income.

So because DH has a job and works hard for his family we no longer have a disabled child to raise? That makes no sense to me.

daisy5678 Sat 26-Jul-08 23:37:58

Agreed, Sidge!

wannaBe Sun 27-Jul-08 00:04:45

the thing about disability allowances though is that they are generally there to enable people with disabilities, or with dependents with disabilities to pay out for things they wouldn't have to otherwise. So regardless of earnings those with disability in their lives automatically have higher outgoings. I don't think earnings should have an impact tbh, I think people should be entitled to the same. Also people on higher tax brackets, although having a higher disposable income, do also contribute a greater amount to the tax pot, so it does seem a little unfair to say that because they pay more tax, they are entitled to less.

It would be like telling someone with a health problem that he was entitled to less treatment on the nhs because of his tax bracket.

<<<minor highjack>>> jimjams not sure if you got my email - we're coming down on Monday going back Friday if you're around?

bigpolarbear Sun 27-Jul-08 08:20:46

My point is that Tax Credits are there to help low income families out of poverty. You've all mentoined mortgages high outgoings etc, but true low income families even with tax credit help generally can't even dream of buying their own home.
DLA is there to provide financial support for everyone with disabilities, but Tax Credits are different.

jimjamshaslefttheyurt Sun 27-Jul-08 09:20:25

But bigpolarbear tax credits are not there only to help the absolute poorest. If they were then no-one above a certain wage would receive them. If the 'average' family with X amount coming in is deemed to be in need of tax credits then another family on X amount with a child with a disability is going to be worse off that the average family.

I think it's fair enough to have an issue with tax credits (they're shite, they don't help those who need it most etc etc agreed) but I think you're mistaken in making a particular point about those who have higher incomes and a disabled child. We are still far worse off financially than those on the same income but without a disabled child.

LeonieD Sun 27-Jul-08 09:21:57

Message withdrawn

jimjamshaslefttheyurt Sun 27-Jul-08 09:24:01

wannabe- sorry replying now, am my usual unorganised self....

Tclanger Sun 27-Jul-08 10:56:50

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

bigpolarbear Sun 27-Jul-08 13:19:16

jimjam, tax credits are there to help the lower incomes or at least they were.
People who have mentioned mortgages, wanting a garden and paying for SALT are lucky to be in a position to have those choices. Why compare themselves to people on similar incomes but who don't have children with SN? Try thinking of those much worse off. If I'm unreasonable in thinking that then fine I can live with that.smile

jimjamshaslefttheyurt Sun 27-Jul-08 13:33:06

BUt people aren't comparing themselves with those worse off financially. Or at least I'm not and nor is anyone else who has posted on here. I'm comparing myself with someone on the same household income - who like us will receive tax credits - but who has many more choices than us about when to work, where to work, access to cheaper childcare (childcare at all come to that) and without the expenditure we have related to our son's disability (which has been thousands). As other's have already said his disability hasn't suddenly disappeared (and nor has the cost associated with it) just because we earn more.

So I think YABU. If you think that tax credits are spread to wide that's a different argument. If you think that tax credits are a total shambles I would agree with you. But I think YABU to pick on those who receive tax credits (because of their income) but apparently are able to afford to live without the disability premium. There must be people at the threshold who are worse off because their income is too high for the disability premium but the increased incomes doesn't make up for what is lost.

bigpolarbear Sun 27-Jul-08 13:57:18

I hear what you're saying jimjam, but I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this onesmile, I'm still right tho, lol.wink

r3dh3d Sun 27-Jul-08 14:10:18

I think the other thing, BPP, is that higher-tax families with SN kids are often caught in a different trap ...

Before kids, DH and I were both earning good salaries. Everything rosy. When DD1 came along, we moved out of London and bought a house in commuter country in Surrey. With the mortgage that entails.

Then we had another child. Then I had to give up work due to DD1's constant hospital admissions. We now have me plus a live-in carer at home (between the two of us we can just about handle DD1 and DD2 together, DD1 needs hands on 1:1 or 2:1). We have half the original income and much higher outgoings. But SS won't pay for DD1's care because we are perceived as "affluent". So my parents are paying for that out of their retirement funds. sad. We can't get legal aid to challenge SS's decision (which is illegal btw) - because of the value of the house. We can't get tax credits because of DH's income, though the mortgage eats most of that. We can't move because we can't take DD1 out of her school which has been excellent for her - plus we need the room, both for the live-in carer that we can't afford and because DD1 and DD2 can't share a room.

Now don't get me wrong - I'm not saying oh-woe-is-me; woe is not me. I've got a good roof over my head and 2 kids I love to bits - DH too, though I see little of him as he is working himself into the ground to try and hold all this together. But in terms of disposable income we aren't doing so well. And I imagine there are plenty of families caught in the same trap much worse off than us.

I'm not sure whether I think we should or should not get tax credits - just don't know enough about them. But I do think the poverty trap is magnified immensely by having a disabled child, to the point where you have to be very well off indeed to have as big a disposable income as someone without a disabled child who qualifies for tax credits.

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