Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

The £100k childcare cliff edge - how is anyone meant to make this work?

262 replies

Saladleaf · 21/10/2025 22:06

I completely understand that on paper, a six-figure household income sounds like a lot. I’m not trying to be ignorant of the fact that many people are struggling far more. But for anyone actually living it, especially in the South East, the reality feels very different once you factor in childcare costs.

We’re looking at full-time nursery fees of around £2,500 a month per child, and I honestly don’t know how families are supposed to make it work once you hit the £100k cliff edge and lose access to the 30 free hours. It’s completely unsustainable.

I know some people say you can get around it by putting more into your pension so your income technically falls below the threshold, but that just isn’t realistic for everyone. With the cost of living, mortgage, and general expenses, we simply can’t afford to take home hundreds less each month. We already don’t have holidays, don’t buy new clothes, and don’t even have a car. There isn’t any more to cut back.

It’s not even about wanting handouts, it’s that full-priced childcare in this country is so eye-wateringly expensive that it makes working impossible for many women. The system actually discourages the lower earner, usually the mother, from staying in work.

A friend of mine is a good example. Her husband earns over the threshold, and she’s just spent years retraining into a new career that she’s passionate about, but is now entry level. We worked out that if they have a baby, it would literally cost them money they can't afford for her to keep working once childcare, rising mortgage payments and bills are factored in. She’d have to give it all up. It’s so demoralising.

And the whole system makes no sense. Two people earning £99k each can claim free hours, but one person earning £100k can’t. Someone on £50k with one child gets support, but a couple on £100k with two children get nothing, even though their childcare costs are double and they are taxed more. It’s not unreasonable to have worked hard, built a decent career and want two children, but the government seems to penalise you for it.

Other countries manage to offer affordable childcare to everyone because they see it as essential. Here it just feels like you’re being punished for trying to do well. For those of us in the South East, it’s even harder. Living costs are sky high, childcare is extortionate, and it’s not realistic to just move somewhere cheaper when your jobs and lives are here.

It feels like you’re being backed into a corner. I find it so demoralising that the system seems designed to push mothers out of their careers, especially when you’ve worked so hard to build one in the first place. AIBU in feeling like this?

OP posts:
Bearfan · 22/10/2025 07:14

QBTheRoundestOfBees · 21/10/2025 23:42

Yes and we also pay more tax here. I often question exactly what for.

But if you earn o er £100k you do still get childcare help in Scotland. But you pay 45% tax on £75k - £125k so the marginal tax rate for earning £100-125k is 67%. Add in 8% student loan repayment and that’s a 75% tax rate.

ProudCat · 22/10/2025 07:10

This is the problem with means testing. Solution = don't means test. Free childcare for all. Pay for it through increased taxes.

mustytrusty · 22/10/2025 07:00

When my dc were little I earned £8.50 an hour and the nursery fees were £4.50 an hour. There was no free hours for the majority of their time. I’m not saying this as a race to the bottom type comment just that it’s always been the same and at the time it’s crap and hard work and you don’t get any luxuries or extras in, but it’s not forever. It’s just part of what the deal is when you have children.
I think the sad part is that we have had family men and women in power for pretty-much ever and there’s been very little attempt to rationalise the way childcare works and make it high standard and accessible to everyone. Some of the scandi countries have got brilliant childcare models but we won’t learn from them or prioritise child care whilst they’re a non-voting group! Easier to chuck money at pensioners who will at least give a return through their vote.

Cantseetreesforthewood · 22/10/2025 06:59

Thing is, if you need ft childcare, and don't qualify for the 30 hours, your household income is in excess of 125k - 100k to loose the childcare, plus 25k minimum wage (unless a single parent)
I don't think it matters where you live, that is a phenomenally high household income. While the cliff edge is fundamentally wrong, there should be ways to survive on a household takehome of over 7k a month!

And yes, when mine were young literally my whole (professional) salary went into childcare - we got 15 free hours from aged 3. And life was tough - we budgeted. But costs went down, salaries went up, and now they are at secondary we are comfortable. It's definitely a game of short term pain for the longer term benifits.

MidnightPatrol · 22/10/2025 06:44

OhamIreally · 22/10/2025 04:01

This scenario does make you wonder if the policy was ideological in nature. It’s more likely to be the male partner earning the higher wage so the female partner steps back into the home.

It would seem odd for this to be their intention, given the objective of providing support for childcare in the first place is to increase the number of people working…!

CoffeeFluff · 22/10/2025 06:38

It’s so bad. I’m in the same position. Two kids in nursery, almost £30k in debt three years in as a result.

YesImaman1100 · 22/10/2025 06:29

OhamIreally · 22/10/2025 04:01

This scenario does make you wonder if the policy was ideological in nature. It’s more likely to be the male partner earning the higher wage so the female partner steps back into the home.

It's cute that you think this government or any other would have the intelligence to think with that level of detail.

OhamIreally · 22/10/2025 04:01

Swissmeringue · 22/10/2025 00:34

Honestly this was a major factor in me giving up work. Fortunately it turns out I bloody love being a SAHM but I'm acutely aware how dependent on DH it's made me and feel guilty that I'm wasting five years of higher education and all my professional experience. But even though I was reasonably well paid, because his salary precludes us from any help with childcare, once you factor in nursery, after school club and my twice weekly commute into London we're actually better off if I just don't work at all.

This scenario does make you wonder if the policy was ideological in nature. It’s more likely to be the male partner earning the higher wage so the female partner steps back into the home.

Allswellthatendswelll · 22/10/2025 00:36

usedtobeaylis · 21/10/2025 23:28

Whether you have a point or not, couching it in faux concern for women who earn vastly less then that astronomical amount is gross.

One 100k salary covering 2 people, because the lower earning partner now can't work, is equal to two 50k salaries. I hardly think that's astronomical.

Swissmeringue · 22/10/2025 00:34

Honestly this was a major factor in me giving up work. Fortunately it turns out I bloody love being a SAHM but I'm acutely aware how dependent on DH it's made me and feel guilty that I'm wasting five years of higher education and all my professional experience. But even though I was reasonably well paid, because his salary precludes us from any help with childcare, once you factor in nursery, after school club and my twice weekly commute into London we're actually better off if I just don't work at all.

Allswellthatendswelll · 22/10/2025 00:34

Lilactimes · 22/10/2025 00:04

may not be the most popular choice but I had a European nanny who was young and learning English over here. I paid a basic wage and NI and then topped up with cash in hand… so about £1,800 - £2000 per month net for her for 2 kids but one was in school. So after school pick up in addition to the baby. I also had a cleaner so she didn’t have to do any cleaning. Her hours were 8.30am until 7pm or when I got home if my work held me up. I paid holiday pay for her and she had food at my place. Throughout this period of my kids being young I was in 95k - 115k pa as a single mum.
Couldn’t afford to do it correctly via a nanny agency so went cash in hand nanny. Both kids have now graduated with first class degrees and are fab.

Cheap European nannies really are not a thing anymore!

All the people coming on to say "well I managed 10/15/20 years ago" are massively missing the point! COL is SO different now. Also the argument is about how ridiculous the threshold is.

DurinsBane · 22/10/2025 00:23

ttcat37 · 21/10/2025 22:44

Old days? How long ago are you talking? Do you mean during a time when it was easy for a family to survive on one wage, so if both parents chose to go to work, childcare was actually affordable…?

15 years ago when mine were nursery age there was no free childcare apart from the 10 hours for playgroup the term after they turned 3. I hardly knew any mums who weren’t stay at home mums back then (though to be honest I hardly know any now either)

DurinsBane · 22/10/2025 00:11

Out of interest, if you don’t go on holidays, have a car or spend money on new clothes, what do you spend your money on?! Is your mortgage massive?

Lilactimes · 22/10/2025 00:04

may not be the most popular choice but I had a European nanny who was young and learning English over here. I paid a basic wage and NI and then topped up with cash in hand… so about £1,800 - £2000 per month net for her for 2 kids but one was in school. So after school pick up in addition to the baby. I also had a cleaner so she didn’t have to do any cleaning. Her hours were 8.30am until 7pm or when I got home if my work held me up. I paid holiday pay for her and she had food at my place. Throughout this period of my kids being young I was in 95k - 115k pa as a single mum.
Couldn’t afford to do it correctly via a nanny agency so went cash in hand nanny. Both kids have now graduated with first class degrees and are fab.

ttcat37 · 21/10/2025 23:57

cestlavielife · 21/10/2025 22:52

20 years ago
Childcare costs were huge. But as now they are for limited time.

I’m sure they felt huge, but in reality people had more money left over then. Salaries have stalled, house prices and rent have gone through the roof, as has the general cost of living.

LadyLapsang · 21/10/2025 23:51

It’s an incredibly negative nudge and caps aspiration. When you think how long we are expected to be economically active in the UK, I have now been paying NI for over 47 years and tax for over 45 years, we should be able to make help with pre-school care universal (beyond just the 15 hours from 3). I think part of the problem is some low - medium earners do not appreciate the cost of the public services they use in relation to the tax they pay. Many will not be net contributors but don’t realise, whereas the 100K plus earners will be paying a lot of tax but likely getting very little in return.

QBTheRoundestOfBees · 21/10/2025 23:42

SillyBilly1993 · 21/10/2025 23:23

It’s even worse in Scotland. The SNP made a manifesto commitment to improve funded childcare, they have been given the money to match England’s policies under the Barnett formula…and yet children won’t get any funded childcare until they are 3-3.5 years old.

They can get it from 2-2.5 years old if you give up work though :)

They won’t go to school until 4.5-5.5 years old too, so we have another year of paying for childcare too.

My child’s nursery fees are £3,000 a month.

Why do the SNP hate women so much?!

Yes and we also pay more tax here. I often question exactly what for.

DrinkFeckArseBrick · 21/10/2025 23:41

Agree. Its mad that we have a system where someone earning 99k is worse off, if they get a 10k pay rise. Doing well and being promoted should never lead to a net loss just because you have nursery age children. A system that's designed to make people earning just over the threshold, better off if they work part time, is fuckinf nuts

QBTheRoundestOfBees · 21/10/2025 23:40

Try being a single parent where your income is over the threshold for child benefit but two people each earning half get to keep it, and you also get taxed more at the higher rate. The system is full of anomalies which don’t make sense.

OriginalUsername2 · 21/10/2025 23:37

See I don’t understand this because on one hand you want to avoid paying more tax on earnings after your first 100k but on the other you want the tax to pay for everybody’s childcare, not just the lower earners.

SharpPinkDuck · 21/10/2025 23:36

This and piss poor maternity pay below min wage needs to be urgently reviewed. It’s keeping women seen as the SAHP doing a task that is not valuable while the husband goes out to earn the money.

jayni149 · 21/10/2025 23:35

Totally agree, OP. I have done absolutely all that I can to stay under the threshold - dropped to 4 days a week, put all my bonus and more into pension. Work asked me to go back to 5 days a week recently and I calculated that they would need to pay me >£80k more just to "break even" (i.e. for me to end up earning 25% more after tax than I do now). Adding a 5th day would make me close to £2k a month worse off. How can that make sense??

There's usually very little sympathy for a "woe is me" attitude from high earner, but this is a case of "woe is the economy". I'd be contributing a lot more into the system in all respects if this threshold wasn't so distortionary.

MidnightPatrol · 21/10/2025 23:31

FunnysInLaJardin · 21/10/2025 23:27

and how about, there were no subsidies for us and so our £90k was all we earned to pay for child care.

What was going on 20 years ago isn’t really relevant to the impact of policies which are impacting behaviour today.

It’s not a ‘who has it worse’ competition, it’s a discussion about the peculiarities of the current tax / benefits system, and how that’s impacting people’s choices about work.

FunnysInLaJardin · 21/10/2025 23:31

Labamba78 · 21/10/2025 23:27

We have had to space our children out to ensure the oldest is at school before we have another. Otherwise we’d be paying in excess of £4k for nursery fees which despite me being a high earner (my partner isn’t) we don’t get help. We can’t afford that when the mortgage on our 3 bed terraced house in a London suburb is now £3,500 a month.
I appreciate I earn well and am lucky to do, but it does sting that friends have a higher collective household income than us and receive 30 free hours.

this was us 20 years ago. £90k income, £3,500 mortgage.

We had to have a 4 year gap between our DC for the same reason and so sorry if my heart doesn't bleed for those who have to forgo a £20k salary increase in order to get childcare subsidy

JazzyBBBG · 21/10/2025 23:29

I haven't had to pay nursery fees for about 6 years now but shudder at the thought. With the cost of living right now I can't even imagine having to pay this as well yet I earn much more than I did back then. It is completely unsustainable and the system is as usual all wrong.

Swipe left for the next trending thread