Make Child Benefit a Means Tested Benefit.

[Whatabonkersworld]

So, the Winter Fuel Payment has been made means tested. According to the government older people have no need for any help to pay their winter fuel bill.
In a dose of reality here's another massive cost saving exercise. The annual bill for Child Benefit is something over £12bn. I suggest Child Benefit also become means tested and only parents who receive tax credits are eligible. Those unemployed would receive a stipend added to their universal credit, but would not be eligible for Child Benefit. This would become a strictly working persons benefit. This would save the country a huge amount of money and will hopefully pay for the inevitable pay increase recommendations for the rail workers and consultants which will shortly be coming round for negotiations.
How how does everyone like them Bananas!

And the op begrudging child benefit. Literally arguing about who should lose their benefits, that’s what this country has been reduced to in a few short weeks,

its shameful.

What the hell has happened here, Labour is in a few short weeks and people are arguing about who should pay, children, middle earners, pensioners.

Pay for the black bloody hole in Labour policies they argued didn’t exist.

its the same old shit, tax and spend. Tax and spend. It’s what Labour does and it cripples us.

There's not many people I find on Mumsnet who come across as callous with their comments, but you do.

You know who has been in power for more than a decade until this summer don't you?

The huge national borrowing is the issue. Labour didn't cause that.

Tax and spend is fine. It means at least we have public services and don't have to spend as much on private this that and the other. It might not be your preference but it balances.

"Don't tax but still spend" has been a disaster. Honestly, the random nonsense the conservatives have been proposing and implementing in recent years is so off-brand. They deliberately chose first a buffoon as their leader and then a pleasant chap whose only claim to fame was "Eat out to help out".

There's not many people I find on Mumsnet who come across as callous with their comments, but you do.

I think the narrative of "It was hard for us too. You could afford to buy a house is you gave up coffee/avocados/random luxury item" has got up some noses. It has been repeated an awful lot by people who don't understand how radically the ratio of average house price to average wage has changed.

If I was unable to buy after years of trying, it might push me to the edge a bit.

I would do exactly the opposite.

Means testing removes incentive and takes choices from people. If every pound earned means a pound lost then why work more hours, and if every pound saved counts against the right to claim a pension or CB, then what's the point of saving?

It also causes resentment when people can see those who don't work or don't save get given things denied to workers/savers because they've been prudent. Far better IMO to have Maternity, Child Benefit, Sick Pay and Pensions as universal for those who either work or are unable to, and only means-test those who haven't paid enough contributions to qualify. I would scrap NI subsidies for SAHPs but increase CB to all parents so people who can't afford not to work are not forced to subsidise those who can afford to stay at home.

I think the reason pensioners don't pay NI is that it is used to fund pensions, and legally you can't both claim a pension and pay into it. You could claim a state pension and continue to work and contribute to an occupational pension, but any NI would be for the state pension, so it wouldn't work.

If you only pay 'perks' to those on mean-tested benefits you will have a two tier society, and it would almost certainly deter people from trying to be self-sufficient if that is all or nothing. Most people now in their 50s and 60s grew up expecting to get both a SP and an Occ Pension, and have paid in and planned accordingly. Removing the SP to anyone who has made other provision would just drag people down and reduce (or remove) any trust in the system. People need to be able to plan, as the WASPI women found when they had years added to their working lives. It's cruel and unfair to treat people like that.

What happens when there are no more tax credits OP?

This pension generation are the wealthiest, longest life expectancy there has ever been. And most likely ever will be.

And it's still not enough for them

Honestly what more do they want?

Oh yeah all their bills paid and top class abundant free social care. It's utterly unsustainable.

This isn’t about the wealthy pensioners, no one has an issue or is disagreeing that it should be removed from wealthy pensioners, it absolutely should. The concern is that it’s also being removed from pensioners who earn just over £218.15 per week, which is already next to nothing to live on, just because they earn pennies over the cut off for pension credit. Some pensioners are already in poverty and this policy penalises them too

This. This is what child benefit is for. For some women it is the only money they have any control over.
i got it for all my children and was very grateful.
My DH will miss out on winter fuel payment but we can manage without so that’s fine. Better this than messing about with child benefit. The way entitlement is worked out now is ridiculous and unfair to many.

Of course they don't want all their bills paid for, where have you got that from? They still pay water rates, council tax, insurance etc.

You sound almost jealous as if you are begrudging the current pension generation any help at all.

A lot of pensioners struggle to survive as it is and relied on the WFA to keep warm.

@Imtheproblemitsmeapparently thank you, very informative, I may read your post out to my dm next time she rants about "the lefties" and quotes daily mail articles at me.

My parents do not "need" WFA, they are very well off.

My mil on the other hand really does need it, she is financially vulnerable, she recently lost my fil and any money from his pensions. She never complains, she's very frugal and budgets to make her state pension last (we've offered help but she's incredibly independent and refuses, same with my sil offering to help). She already restricts

Sorry - she already restricts her heating as it is.

@ShyMaryEllen in an ideal world I would absolutely agree with you. Universal benefits are cheaper to administer and remove the trap of thresholds. However it would cost billions and I would rather the government used that money elsewhere.

£45 in interest?

How many children have you got?!

Or make the absent parent accountable. They need to be held accountable if they do not pay their share for their own kids.

You do know tax credits are almost phased out! Most working people get UC now.

Which will never happen.

They are probably hoping a good few of them will freeze to death. At least the ones who don't own their own home. Think how much they will save not having to fork out for their nursing home fees!!

That's something I hadn't considered and sounds like a fix is needed. Maybe total income rather than individual?

I'm pretty sure this change is happening, the Tories announced it in their last budget and I don't think Labour said they'd reverse it.

The threshold rose, but will change to total income so you don't have the situation where two parents each earning £49k can claim the full amount, but a single parent earning £51k can't.

I can see the anomaly with a single parent, but nobody has ever explained to me why a couple with 2 earners on £31k each, who pay for childcare, 2 lots of tax and NI, 2 lots of commuting charges and other work expenses and can't afford to have one stay at home should subsidise their neighbours, who have one earner on £62k and can afford for the other to stay at home, so pay no childcare, and get NI contributions free. If those figures are out of date the principle still applies. Dual earner families have far more expenses, but people seem to want them to subsidise better off single earner ones.

It's impossible to make CB fair, so much better to go back to making it universal. Even taxing it is likely to be difficult as parents might have different salaries and both be on PAYE.

It’s nothing about the tories,,it’s about Covid, the war in Ukraine meaning energy costs caps coming out of the national pockets. Tories are many things, but not big spenders, we all knew these things were costing us. Knew it was costing us big, thatwedneed to pay for it. What do you think they capped our fuel bills and paid for furlough out of a magic money tree.

now Labour is in and people are arguing about which vulnerable group should pay for their promises. The bar is set so low, many will struggle and here we have the op saying take the child benefit too.

I see that Starmer has been called Keir Starmer The Pension Harmer already. Can see that being on the front of the tabloids and haunting him for years to come if we have a cold winter this year.

Child benefit doesn't have a maximum of £170. We currently receive £238 every 4 weeks which will go up to £305 after our next child is born 😊

I reckon that this was already tested. It looks like a majority of voters approve of the change. I don’t think there is much opposition in practice