AIBU - expecting son to pay for his own 'luxury' groceries on top of rent

Are we still missing the point that DS does not contribute to the household? He doesn’t cook or clean, and he smokes where he’s been asked not to. This is the main point IMO, not what he’s paying.

I can’t envisage a piece of legislation that differentiates between a couple taking a 23 year old lodger unrelated to them for £500 pcm (or whatever) and them taking their 23 year old child back in for the same price (indeed, for effectively a lower price, if cooking and food bills are included).

For one thing, this is a system that often can’t make the NRP pay child support in the way they should. And that’s actual children, not young adults earning a reasonable wage.

Agree @BruFord

<ponders as to whether your question will be answered though>

If parents are scrutinized like landlords/businesses though, won’t the upshot be that they’ll be pushing their adult children to move out and avoid all this hassle?

I can see parents tolerating it through the early 20’s perhaps but by 25, surely they’ll have had enough. Then their children will have no choice except to rent if they’re not ready to buy.

A key purpose of the tax system is to disincentivise behaviour that is socially or economically undesirable.

Parents who exploit their DC should absolutely be taxed to the hilt.

Ah so the government profits. Got it.

Average adult in the UK spends 37-40% of income in rent/mortgage, so you are charging avery reasonable rate, because that includes utilities, food and subsidised transport (electricity for his car). I think if you can afford it and he is saving, then keep it at £500 but make him buy his treats separately.

Not necessarily. Someone might have to stay in a larger property to accommodate an extra person. If on UC credit you have bedroom tax. If it’s a single parent or there is a disregard for some reason you lose single person council tax. Bills are a lot higher if there is an extra person.

many, many parents sacrificed their own financial stability and futures eg savings, pension when their children were young. Adulthood is their chance to play catch up.

and if they think the grass is greener, go try.

You are not being unfair. You’re helping him budget for the future. If he can still save £1000 each month that will set him up for a deposit if that what he wants or to invest. After 2-3 years by time jn mid 20s if use compound interest he could have £40k saved

@SheilaFentiman Yes, if parents are supposed to financially support their children indefinitely, surely the concept of “adulthood” is meaningless.

A parent I know is currently dealing with the financial implications of her DD (25) getting pregnant. She lives at home with her parents (as does her bf) and she doesn’t contribute to household bills, she covers her phone, car insurance, etc. So are her parents now expected to keep a second generation? It’s not sustainable.

I think anything that parents charge beyond the immediate food and utility costs of DC living there should be taxed at 45%, yes.

Council tax and mortgage/rent are payable regardless of whether a DC is there or not, so they shouldn’t be subsidising them.

As per my posts, without your ridiculous hyperbole, my position is that all adults in a household earning a reasonable wage should make a meaningful contribution to the costs of that household.

Now, please do me the courtesy of answering my questions. You’re not Columbo.

@SilkySquirrel Are you saying that adult children shouldn’t pay for their own food, utility usage, share of the council tax, etc.? That their parents have to cover these expenses indefinitely?

Or are you saying that anything above those expenses should be taxed at 45%?

Right, so you do agree with parents profiting from their children.

That is an extreme minority view but I am glad you have clarified.

Yes, but I would toughen the rules so that any ‘board’ is taxed at 45% and parents are registered as landlords and subject to the relevant rules.

I would then empower and resource HMRC to carry out spot checks.

That would stop the profiteers.

Were any legal/taxation framework to be applied to family paying towards board and lodging, it would be the Rent a Room scheme (ie lodger) not a tenancy agreement.

The Rent a Room scheme allows £7500 tax free pa from lodgers ie £625 pcm

You don’t even need half of that for a non related lodger. And the government even tells those on any kind of means tested benefit like Universal Credit that they should be charging adult children towards their keep.

Yes, I have. Directly to you and to others. See my earlier posts. (ETA eg 17/01/2026 10:47 - a post which you quoted, so I assume you read it)

Now, about MY question to you - £500, clearly an affordable level for board and lodgings out of £1800 take home pay. Regardless of the parental landlord point, why are you stating it’s unaffordable?

ETA and my other question - what are your stats for your “out on their ear at 18” assertion?

My view is that the U.K. needs to move away completely from this backward and harmful culture of treating DC as tenants in their own homes.

I would empower HMRC to carry out inspections to ensure that all of these parental landlords are registered as such, are paying the requisite tax on their rental income and meeting standards in areas like fire safety and carbon monoxide monitoring.

Of course they won’t be, so let’s get some hefty fines issued and put a stop to the whole nonsense.

You have not explained why you think it is acceptable for parents to profit from their children.

That is not a common view either in the U.K. (despite the bonkers culture of charging rent) or anywhere else.

@SilkySquirrel

It IS affordable though. He has plenty of money left over. Or do you think he should be able to spend every single penny of his wage on shite and OP just suck it up and accept him living with her rent free forever more??

Yes, it is affordable. £500 out of £1800 take home is affordable.

Just writing stuff doesn't make it true.

ETA we get that you disagree with the ethics of parents charging adult children, but that's separate to 'what is an affordable amount for board and lodgings from take home pay of £x'

It’s not an affordable amount. The OP is profiting from him.

Lol have you seen the price of Glastonbury tickets? The price of a couple of festivals a year (plus spends) would add a fair old chunk to a deposit savings pot. If needing to save say , 30 or 40K for a deposit i think over a few years all these things add up.

My point was that saving, by definition, usually means some sort of sacrifice...if young adults are spending a large portion of their income on lifestyle or expensive phones when a cheaper one would do, or luxury food, carrying on as if they have plenty of 'spare' money, its hardly saving its just extended adolescence if its facilitated by being able to live at home.

If a DC is genuinely saving for a deposit then I think there's nothing wrong with parents charging very little or nothing to help them.

There are good kids who live at home, genuinely saving and gracious about being an adult in their parents home, ive seen them, their behaviour changes when they get back from uni..offering more help to their parents than tbey did before, surprising them with dinner etc but there are others who just seem to expect to be supported in the same way they were as kids financially when they could spend any spare pocket money on what they wanted and the 'saving for a deposit' thing is just sounds better than he/she lives at home..I think the latter group are a ticking time bomb for problems later down the line.

Families are very tight knit and there isn’t this terrible culture here of DC being out on their ear at 18.

Again with the hyperbole. What culture of DC being “out on their ear” at age 18? This m man is not 18, he is 23, and OP is not chucking him out, she is charging him an affordable amount for board and lodgings.

I would say there is zero culture of putting DC “out on their ear” at 18. Do you have stats on what proportion of 18 year olds are being forced to move out??