What's the single biggest thing the government could do to help parents?

good point.

I think I have a reflex sarcastic reaction whenever I hear people who live in the uk moaning about tax. what I probably should say instead is "try living in Europe"

Yes I agree that inheritance should be taxed but unfortunately the way it works right now is inequitable.

The poor don't pay it because they are below the threshold. The rich don't pay it because they can hire trust specialists and tuck it all way nicely and neatly. So who pays? The middle income families who are not wealthy enough to afford fancypants planning but inherit a house. That's simply not fair.

Actually QC, GB's removal of pension tax credits is not the real problem with penson funds. Thatcher started the problems when back in the 80's she allowed pension fund surpluses (built up because of a rampaging bull market) to be taken back inot a companies balance sheet, causing increased valuations of companies, and further fuelling the rampaging bull market. It screwed up the whole premise of long term investements in pensions funds and meant that many funs did not have enough surpluses to ride the low market returns when teh inevitable crash happened, or were able to cope with a less (OK significantly less) favourable tax treatment

I think all inheritance should be taxed (and I speak as someone who has recently benefited hugely from an inheritance) It's the one area of tax that I think should be truly re-distributive.

SP - no my dh pays horrendous amounts of income tax. Sorry, but if hiwbb is only a few years off tax credits your tax bill is not horrendous. But you know what, I don't actually mind paying such huge amounts of tax - I just have a few issues with the way it's spent

And childcare is not an expense caused by working - it's an expense caused by having children. If you start to subsidise working parents childcare, you are saying that WOH is a better thing to do than SAH. Far better IMO to give children tax allowances that working parents (whether that be oen or two parents) could use to offset childcare bills than to make value judgements about which choice is better by financially advantaging one

very very few people actually need to live in an inherited home though. Actually I do think they should change the law on that - they should allow people to live in inherited houses for life without paying IT. But it should become payable in full when the house is sold.

dinny - sorry I said wittering. you didn't answer the question though did you?

I don't even understand my pension it's so complicated

Well the question was directed at dinny but there are two stealth taxes that particularly annoy me.

Firstly the removal of the dividend tax credit on pension funds. That particular raid has cost everyone who pays into a pension scheme VERY VERY dearly.

Secondly, uncapping NICs. If you pay insurance to get pretty meagre fixed rate benefits (unemployment, state pensions etc) then surely your contributions to it should be fixed?

Not if they're living in it. Sorry SP we'll have to agree to disagree. You will not convince me that it's ok to tax inheritence because some people don't get any?!?

hardly think I'd describe four words as 'wittering on', thanks very much.

sorry, Mo'H you won't get any sympathy from me. the living don't have to remortgage to pay inheritance tax, they can simply sell the property they inherited. Lots of people never inherit anything.

what is a stealth tax though dinny? are there taxes that we don't know about? if you mean non-income tax, do you object to cigarette tax? if you object to certain taxes, say which ones, don't just witter on about stealth taxes.

Not when the living have to remortgage to afford to pay the tax?!?

Writing off the outstanding debt from the CSA will just be like saying "you carry on not paying matey boy cos we really don't knw what to do about it" which I think is the wrong message. I am of the opinion that the CSA is beyond repair but I don't know what the solution is... I think the CSA warrents a discussion thread all of its own. Unfortunately I find it's one subject I lose my temper with. I'm so angry and upset and stressed out by the whole thing

Expat, renting is cheap at the moment compared to house prices - the reason many people are calling this a bubble.

stop bloody stealth taxes.

And GSS, more people would be able to accept financial responsbility for their children, without being driven nearly to suicide in some cases, if the CSA was scrapped.

taxing the dead is better than taxing the living surely?

The amount of money it costs to recover it is not worth it IMHO. And the arrears my husband owes is entirely down to CSA incompetence and a finger in the wind assessment after years of no contact (during which he paid maintenance direct to his ex btw). And you needn't think they'll bother chasing money he only owes to you. They'll only be bothered about money he should have paid instead of any benefits you received. But I'm not getting into a CSA debate on this thread.

for me personally it would be the

CSA and Tax Credits.

The stress from the incompetencies in these organisations have at time reduced me to tears and I am positive that I am not alone in that.

Decent affordable pre-school childcare.

More accessible childcare that fits around school for working parents.

Unnecessary taxing - taxing people who want to remortgage as a couple, taxing people for buying already horrendously priced houses, taxing people for dying if they've managed to die in credit.

Build masses and masses and masses more houses so that the cost of housing becomes more related to incomes.

Flexible working.

I don't think CSA arrears should be written off, why should the state give up on justice? The major reason maintenance isn't paid is not because of CSA incompetence (though that is a factor), but because absent parents choose not to pay it. We wouldn't need the CSA if everyone accepted financial responsibility for their children. I'd be livid if the five years maintenance owed by my ex was written off.

sorry...actually I agree that a non working partner should be able to transfer their tax allowance (this is what they do in Spain), but only AFTER the tax system is made a bit more equitable with eg. the return of the 10p tax band.

but prufrock, hiwbb's dh pays HORRENDOUS amounts of income tax apparently so probably earns as much as several full timers...

I agree Prufrock. It doesn't seem fair at all.

But bozza, if two people are earning the same salary as hiwbb dh, then they are only doing the same hours as him, so 2 peopel working part time, with the non WOH one looking after the children.

Ditch tax credits and administer it through the PAYE system. A modern version of married couple's tax allowance if you like.

Raise the income thresholds for getting help with childcare costs. And ANY hours should be OK if that means you need childcare.

Longer maternity leave on close to full pay (as opposed to £106 a week or whatever) and/or better statutory materniy pay. Six months full pay, six months half pay for example.

Write off all CSA arrears since most of them are only owed to the Government and have built up through CSA incompetence. Then set up a system that works and doesn't punish those who are trying to do the right thing. I would suggest a "self-assessment" type system that could then deal with people on variable incomes. Send in P60 at end of year to check correct amount has been paid.

Disagree with hopeitwontbebig (although I hope it won't be also! ):

"If DH and I were to be jointly earning his salary, the tax would be split over both our allowances and we would be SO much better off each month. He works bloody hard for his wage and suffers the stress of his job as a result."

If two people are jointly earning your DH's salary they are also doing two sets of hours, paying out childcare and suffering the stress of juggling family life (arranging childcare and relief childcare and doing the chores at night) so why should our income be comparitively less per hour?