tell me I've dreamt this - DC proposing to give tax breaks to the middle classes (who can already afford this) to help them pay for their cleaners/nannies/gardeners????

Are you not better off getting tax from me at 40 % than a cleaner on a much lower wage, perhaps even under the threshold?

It is not that it costs the tax payer nothing more that in a time when some people are losing even the most basic things and are struggling to eat/heat their homes etc it seems like a bit of a kick in the teeth to do this.

Surely some (many?) cleaners will be under the tax threshold? I don't know how many hours they do on average, sorry. And then as molly says you have lost the tax from the employer. NI will be paid though.

I get the tax thing. I think.

Although will it generate income as they are losing money from the orginal tax payer. I may be being thick, my excuse is that I am a little woozy from medication.

You are not looking at the tax impact of all this, chaps.

This is a tax break that costs the taxpayer nothing. And in fact generates lots of extra tax through being able to trace the employees and catch lots of tax. This is a GOOD THING. It really is

They are spinning it like it will create jobs.

In reality it will give tax breaks to those who can already afford it, and do nothing for those who cannot. Its probably a gimmick to make up for the loss of CB.

I agree with childcare being tax deductible. I physically cannot get to work without having childcare. I earn too much to get any tax credits but not enough to pay for full childcare. So this would have been a great help for both low and middle earners.

However I can work without my cleaner. I suspect it is only higher earners who have cleaners and I just do not think at this time that supporting people on higher wages is a priority. I can afford to pay for my cleaner, if I couldn't I would do it myself , no great hardship.

I typed out a huge post and lost it, but basically I agree with blueydragon.

The cleaner thing - surely if everyone is out of the house all day there isn't so much mess?
Sorry just a random thing but I've always wondered about that!

Lots of people work 11 hour days 5 days a week without a cleaner. It is not an essential. I say that as someone who does use a cleaner Si this is not jealousy or some kind of inverse snobbery.

I accept the point about perhaps having more tax going into the economy. Although when people fiddle benefits that is a great crime. When people fiddle the system by paying their cleaners cash in hand that is understandable.

Childcare is excluded from this idea, bluey.

What's wrong with having a tax break that helps those who work with the support structures they need to do that work? I work 11 hour days 5 days a week, by choice and for a very good salary. Yes I can afford my support (childcare and cleaner), but they enable me to work and pay in a large chunk of tax and NI for me and for my nanny, and my cleaner pays her own tax and NI. I'd happily sacrifice child benefit - it should be means tested - and I don't begrudge paying tax (if well spent) but if I dropped out of the money earning economy there would be 2 people out of work and one earning less, which is ultimately not good for anyone. Why shouldn't that be recognised by the state?

what KalSkirata said
Dscam really is a idiot

I think it's a brilliant idea, as a tax practitioner

See, the majority of domestic employees are paid cash in hand. So by giving the employers a tax break, it costs the government virtually nothing. Nada. However, what happens is that the employees are traceable and taxable, and the government raises money by getting tax it otherwise would not have got.

Unfortunately, although it would be nice to extend this to childcare, this would actually cost the government big time, because nannies mostly declare tax, and so do nurseries and childminders.

So I can see the tax logic in this.

Affordable childcare for all income levels, that's what families really need. It would incentivise work amongst single parents whose only option would be a minimum wage job. It would also encourage more stay at home parents with prospects of a fairly decent wage to go out and work and therefore be paying tax. Win win. Shame they actually cutting childcare help from tax credits.

If it encourages those with enough money to pay another person that would otherwise have no work, I think it has potential
A cleaner working 20 plus hours a week cash in hand and not declaring it is wrong IMO
Agree French system is better

I can see an argument for childcare, we have had to have a huge gap between our children so we could afford childcare. But should I be able to offset my cleaner? I don't think that should be a priority. I have nothing against people who have cleaners or gardeners, I have both, but they are a luxury. I think if people are working so hard that they cannot clean their house or mow the lawn we need to look at the hours we are working. Perhaps if we all agreed not to work instant hours we could create new jobs which woud help the economy.

I still dont see why buying in help should gain you a tax break. Unless its for a vital service like personal care because you are incapable. I'd love a cleaner/gardener/servants but I wouldnt expect any tax help or anyone to subsidise what are frankly luxuries.
Childcare however, for working parents, isnt a luxury.

Childcare is speficially excluded from his comments and that is the thing that would really make a difference.

A family quite often needs to "buy in" help. Whether it be childcare, housekeeping, gardening or personal care. Why shouldn't that be addressed through the tax system? After all you are employing someone, just not through the medium of a company.

With a huge ageing population and fewer sahm parents these are vital services and there are people who would be better at them and find them more fulfilling to do than be NMW slaves for a multi national corporation.

Hours and duties are more likely to be reciprocally flexible which is certainly more attractive to lots of people than being chained to rigid working practices and hours.

It could work very well.

If you are so busy that you are in need of domestic help then you should pay for it yourself. It is not a necessity like food heating etc it is just one more way the richer in society are being supported in their choices and those without have no choices at all! This is to get figures for those in work down by keeping track of low earners and making life easier for those who lets face it already have it quite easy. If you aren't paid enough to have a cleaner then you will have to do it yourself like the bloody rest of us.

If the money is there , this may be a good idea. But if money is so limited that we are making cuts that affect children, the elderly and disabled, why is there money for this?The priorities for this government again seem to be to help those that have, whilst hurting those that don't.

I want a government that recognises that that we need to make the vulnerable a priority, not a government that relies on the rich to throw a few pennies at the poor to make themselves feel good.

Well if you got your tax break you could do what you wanted with the cash, you could help your family, save for your future or donate to your chosen charities.

At the moment it all gets suckered into HMRC and Westminster so you could be contributing to all sorts of schemes that you may disapprove of or see no no value to.

This way, you get to choose how your money is spent, surely you know better than the government how to spend your own money?

I would far rather pay for my cleaner/ gardener without a tax break and focus spending on the most vulnerable in society.

There are plenty of people who work in domestic settings who do that because they are under the radar and can continue to claim maximum benefits while earning £10 ph tax free on top of that.

While you bitch about Philip Green and Vodaphone consider how much money their companies bring in to the economy.