Tory Marriage Tax - makes me feel a bit icky

too angry to comment

It seems weird, not because of what it is but because of what it will replace. As I understand it, it'll take the place of the benefits for families with children which Labour have introduced? Surely the Tories are the "party of the family", not of the childless married couple...

This system is already in place in Germany and I can assure that noone I know there gets married or remains married to save tax money.

My BIL delayed his divorce for this reason, but they were split up and living in separate houses.

MP is right though, about the transference of tax allowance to the higher earner. This means that women go to work and have hardly anything to show for it at the end of the month. Very demotivating.

When we were in Germany, I stopped working a year before DD was born. DH automatically earned so much more that I was able to take a part time job (one day a week) and we had an income not much less than when I was working full time.

abra1d i find your attitude offensive

no, you are a right its not a knee-jerk reaction to the loose morals of this generation.

its a knee-jerk reaction to the need to the tories ever more desperate attempts get the middle class vote wavering voters in the bag.

Governments have always used taxes to influence behaviour. It is not a knee-jerk reaction to the loose morals of this generation.

Well I believe that they should not be used in that way. Especially for spurious purposes like promoting marriage rather than co-habitation, because of ill-founded moralistic beliefs based on no true comparison between committed co-habiting and married couples.

You believe that marriage is a good thing - that doesn't mean that a gvt making it a tax concession will make any significant improvements to the lives of those who need it. As mp points out, certaon couples will benefit most, many feckless married pelpe will laugh all the way to the betting shop, etc etc. Even if you believe in the process of getting married (as opposed to living together)

But taxes do have a dual purpose.

"Taxes are a government's way to influence behaviour. If a tax rebate influences marriage, and consequent stability of society, then that can only be a good thing."

Taxes are to pay for the things we need as a society, not a glorified Nectar Point scheme with rewards for individuals who do as the nice man in gvt says.

Those of you who support this proposed tax break on 'moral' grounds: do you mean marriage as opposed to single paernts? Mumof2, is that what you meant?

It IS a waste of money, the reward will largely go to the middle classes

And as a working mum, I don't WANT to transfer my tax allowance to DH - it would effectively mean that anything I earnt would be automatically taxes, whereas at the moment I can earn up to 6k without it being taxes, which at least feels as though it's worth doing - if that money was ALREADY tax-free it would definitely disincentivise me

head in hands, despairing - are we back in the dark ages?

Taxes are a government's way to influence behaviour. If a tax rebate influences marriage, and consequent stability of society, then that can only be a good thing.

Let's face it, since living outside of marriage became acceptable, standards of behaviour have gone down the pan.

I am genuinely surprised to read the level of support for reintroducting this tax benefit (and yes i am married myself).

more to the point its an absurd waste of money.

but they often claim to be living apart, or maybe thats just my experience?

I dont understand your post mumof2. Current tax and benefit system treats married and unmarried couples the same. "Not marrieds" do not get any special treatment.

had to post. defo agree with t/f tax allowance that would be a huge help.
we both work, married. not looking any favours
But please explain to me why the couple not married, get financial help when preg., help with childcare costs?
am i naive? do they say they live apart?
we could not afford private nursery but the not marrieds can?
something not right with the system

Me too! I felt distinctly uncomfortable. Why does a married couple need a tax break? For what possible reason?

Oops - my musings really werent worth a double post. Sorry.

"The tax and benefit system should reward desired behaviours."

But this proposed policy merely rewards the state of marriage. It does not and could not judge the behaviour within the relationship /family unit.

A man on his third marriage who has walked out on two other families will be "rewarded" in the same way as the ideal tory couple Cameron may have in mind.

I agree with the OP and Haveitall - its ill thought out and icky.

"The tax and benefit system should reward desired behaviours."

But this proposed policy merely rewards the state of marriage. It does not and could not judge the behaviour within the relationship /family unit.

A man on his third marriage who has walked out on two other families will be "rewarded" in the same way as the ideal tory couple Cameron may have in mind.

I agree with the OP and Haveitall - its ill thought out and icky.

Encouraging people to enter into marriage on the basis of a few hundred quid cash seems v irresponsible, Skidoodle.

But it might, of course, add to even greater numbers of divorce as people discover that, no, it really wasn't worth it, and discredit this whole notion of marriage, per se, being worthy of tax concessions.

It is misogynist because the whole idea of 'married cou[ples tax' comes from the days when a man took financial responsibility for supporting his wife, as a chattel, if you like.

Abra1d: the days of parents needing to agree that their adult daughters may enter into marriage are long gone. Is all your thinking based on such out of date concepts? If the Croation cousin chooses to get married, she can. Family hoo-ha it may entail, but then you might think that if she wants to marry but quails in the face of her family she simply hasn't got the determination that any long-term relationship demands. And so falls into the categories of non-married relationships which are erroneously compared with married couples.

Has anyone done a study of the children of co-habiting parents who stayed together until the child was 18, with those of married parents who stayed together for the same length of time? Because that is the only way you could determine whether the actual married status makes a difference.

Or, studied the effect of a family break up on children whose parents were, and were not, married?

Well, I'll leave you smug marrieds to discuss it amongst yourselves as it's "nothing to do with single people". Cheerio.