New childcare tax break to be announced by the Government today - what do you think?

Also I think izzy is right about vouchers. When I got them they were in an electronic account and could be paid as I needed. Which provider are you with?

If it is indeed limited to under fives then I think that's just another Tory attempt to look generous whilst doing bugger all. Many, many women choose to stay at home for the relatively short time between maternity leave ending and dc starting school. Still more women return after the first child then stop work after a second for a couple of years. This 'policy' will do nothing for those women and I agree that sahps in general are losing out massively under this government. Personally I have worked when all my dcs were young. If I had an under five now this policy would possibly do something for me - but not for my friends who have chosen to stay at home for a time and whose decision frankly should be as respected and rewarded as mine. What is the return the government has given many sahms this week? Nicked their child benefit and now ignored them.

CONCESSIONS the money deducted buys cc vouchers. These then form a pot for paying across - my voucher provider has told me I can stockpile them and they will be valid if I give up work.

I don't see how they can be suddenly invalid as they are yours. Yiuxdobt bought them.

I think you may have been given wrong advice. I will be double checking withy provider myself tomorrow.

I find it so sad that mothers wanting to stay at home with their children are now looked down upon.When did this all happen?

Would be nice if for once mothers were helped to actually be with their children.

What children need or want( and their mothers)now comes rock bottom,in fact nobody in gov even bothers to look or ask the question.Those of us that have done it seem to be getting slated more and more these days.I really don't see how this gov can proclaim to be trying to help families-the reality is the complete opposite.

Concessions are you sure that you will lose the vouchers? It's certainly not a legal condition of receiving them - and in fact my DH left his job recently but retained the vouchers earned when he was in that employment.

ihategeorgeosborne Well said.

In any case, the main motivation is that it benefits children - in the same way that a couple of free playgroup sessions did when my DD was pre-school. If I remember rightly they had to be 2yrs 9months before you could take it up.

Much of the pressure for it came from education think-tanks, as it helps children of pre-school age to get used to a more structured environment, and mix with other children and adults.

Typical attitude towards "freeloading" SAHMs. Not to mention the fact that if we all decided to take up paid employment outside the home the increased demand for childcare would restrict its availability and drive up the cost even further.

I'm one of these single earning households that would benefit from a tax rebate in childcare. DH is the earner and I am a full time student. He currently saves he maximum in vouchers each month so I can getting degree. It's naive at best to suggest the single earning households don't need childcare.

I hate I know I need to retrain ASAP now we'll lose CB so why shouldn't we actually get something for a change.

namechanger
It is absolutely definitely the case that, for both DH and I, if we leave our current employment, we will forfeit any accumulated vouchers. We have looked into this very very carefully, as we both have shit insecure jobs are considering moving onto other roles, while at the same time we have each lovingly squirrelled away the maximum possible childcare vouchers while I am on mat leave with DD2, in anticipation of the many thousands of pounds we're going to start paying from next month when I return to work. Now, that forfeit rule may be part of the particular childcare voucher company our firms use or it may be something our employers have inserted (nb we work in totally different industries). But it is something which has exercised us hugely, trying to decide whether to take the risk of saving vouchers and watching them go poof/ trying to pay nursery in advance, or whether to simply not bother and then lose one year's allowance.
It is one of the many flaws of the current crappy scheme, but I don't see this new one helping us either.

I notice some on here seem to think that SAHPs shouldn't get tax relief for child care for the working spouse. Why the hell shouldn't they? What if I want to retrain and go back to college or University to do a course? What if I want to work as a volunteer to try and increase my skill set and experience to stand me in good stead for a future paid job? There are many reasons why single earner households would benefit from tax relief for child care. We don't all bugger off for the day and have facials and manicures you know.

Does anyone know when this proposed change is due to take place?

Exactly what Lily said further down.

I meant to add to my post, in relation to the free childcare subsidy, that most nurseries would face closure without it. Their profit margins are extremely small as it is.

I'm afraid I don't understand the point you're making. Most SAHP's I know worked and paid tax before having their children - in my case for 24 years. Their employed spouses pay tax.

The point of the free nursery places for two year olds (which I don't agree with, by the way) is that it is supposed to be beneficial for children, and it is a guaranteed subsidy for the childcare industry. It is not new money, it has been taken from the SureStart budget (that's why I don't agree with it).

Your argument reminds me of people who say "We don't have kids so why should we pay taxes so that other people's kids can go to school and get free childcare?" or "I never have to go to the Doctor so why should I pay my taxes so that smokers and drinkers get free health care".

The relevance of the NMW level (which is actually £6.19ph) is that the childminders in your area, asking for £7ph for extremely demanding work are not exactly pricing themselves out of the market, are they! I bet they have waiting lists as long as your arm.

Where do you think a childcare subsidy would come from, if not from more taxation?

Children need to be cared for, it's not as though that comes as a surprise to anyone surely? If you don't want to do it yourself, you pay someone else to do it.

Why moan about people who choose to care for their own children as though they are some kind of burden? Most SAHP's I know do some kind of voluntary work for schools and charities, or they are also caring for elderly parents.

Most childminders are parents who choose to do it despite the low pay so they can work at home and be there for their own children. If they all gave up and went out to work, who do you think would look after the children whose parents work outside the home?

The current voucher system was easy to do at source but a lot of employers pulled out as the maternity loophole that many women used meant it cost them to much to run it so thise that cannot claim them may now be able to.

Strix, not a windup re paying for others childcare. Currently one partner only working can claim the vouchers so the SAHP can have childcare. It always seemed a daft situation. If they want to help people work, then there should be safeguards in place to ensure all adults in the household work.

Have signed the e petition

I will be ruined if it is capped at 5yo! I literally will go to Downing Street and protest!

Have to pay for after school and before school care as me and DP both work full time 40 mins travel away from school.

It really gets my goat how people moan about the new CB policy / this new policy on only giving ccare help to working people "punishing sahps "

I would love to afford either me or DP to stay at home! Dual income families NEED childcare in order to work and pay tax.

sorry morethanpotato, it wasn't a real suggestion - I couldn't at that moment bring to mind a better shorthand for a nanny qualification!

Olgaga

I guess I meant "third party employment". Do you think it is fair for working third partied employed people to have to pay their own childcare and also that of those who choose not to work? Then, the cycle goes that thos employed people work longer to pay those taxes and see their own children even less so those who chose not to be employed can see theirs more.

What is the relevance of NMW when we are discussing a client fee and not a salary?

Childminders run a business, nurseries run a business, how could Government ever start to tell them what they have to charge people?

Lowering childcare costs won't work in my view... I can't see how it can be done. Raising NMW can be done but then the Big Employers would moan I suspect. Are salaries too low rather than childcare costs being too high? Nursery staff can often be on NMW or there about, so if Government increased NMW cost of childcare would go up.

Government subsidy of childcare could work but would it be available to all?

No, you can't pay the childminders less, but there could be subsidy

How will it be claimed back? Will it be managed through PAYE, or will another great raft of people be pushed into Self Assesment?

I am also outraged that the telegraph article makes this the woman's issue.

Strix so childminders in your area charge the NMW? How very dare they!

Strix it might be unpaid, but it is still work. That's why, if you do it for someone else's children and clean their house, you tend to get paid for it.

I think you mean paid employment, not work.