CB - alternative solutions?

[CardyMow]

If cutting CB in the way that has been outlined is unfair, how else could/ should the government save money on this benefit?

I ask this because a columnist in the Daily Fail (I ^know!) said that he would rather they stopped CB for dc at the age of 16yo, regardless of whether they are still in education or not.

I always thought that the reason CB was paid to 19 was because, if, like our family, you are caught in a cycle of very low wages (£16Kfor a FT job), the only way out is more education. If you take away CB for poor people, they will also lose their TC's, and theefore have a dc in FT education that they get NO income for, and are therefore unable to feed or clothe them. It was done because otherwise, these DC would HAVE to go out to work FT, just to have money to eat, thus them also being stuck forever in a very low paid job, with no chance of bettering themselves.

Surely education is the way OUT of the benefits trap? But many more dc will be forced to leave school at 16 to work in min wage jobs if their parents cannot feed them while they gain better qualifications.

It would make any form of further education the preserve of the rich, surely that is a step too far back in time?

While I agree that the way of administering this CB cut needs to be fairer and based on household income rather than one earners tax bracket, surely if minimum wage is £5.85 p/h, then a lot of the country earn barely more than £12,000pa for a FT job, so wherever you are, whatever you are doing, £42K is a HUGE income...Why shouldn't CB be cut for anyone with a household income of £34K pa? My family certainly wouldn't need CB if we had an income of £34Kpa.

I totally understand how the system to remove CB where there is one HR tax payer is unfair however, as a part-time working mum of two toddlers i work the minimum hours i can. Neither of us are higher rate tax payers and we currently receive CB and minimum tax credits. i agree that the household limit should be taken into account but i think that this should be after childcare costs have been deducted otherwise it is just placing more and more obstacles in the way of mums returning to work. The current £44k threshold is too low imo. my view (at risk of being contraversial) is to base it on household income but raise the threshold in line with the cut-off for working tax credits. I am also in agreement with raising NI for HR tax payers.

Also spare a thought for those who are blessed with twins, triplets etc. everything you pay for comes at exactly the same time!

Even being given CB for the first year (coinciding with maternity leave) would be really helpful.

God knows what we're going to do when it comes to University time?

Can't see there being any support and I don't want to pay interest on loans, sending two at once is probably going to be impossible.

Back when I went we didn't need loans to survive, the government covered the fees and the rest (food, accomodation etc.) was covered by parents and through part-time jobs.

I think I'm paying the country back now?

It would be fairer to put up income tax on higher rate tax payers of 1% - those that earn more pay more. Also Child benefit is limited to those that have children for a limited amount of time, income tax rises would be for all higher rate earners and much cheaper to administer for HMRC. How much of the reported £1b saving on child benefit will be spent on administration?

What is the incentive for a person earning £43k to gain a promotion or take a pay rise or work full time? if that only comes with a small pay rise - are you not going to create inequalities in the workforce with those who have children not doing additional work or overtime if it takes them just over the threshold?

When these changes come into force, if you earn £45k you already pay back to the Govt on the £1,000 over the threshold:
£400 Income tax per year
£115 NI
and your employer pays £125 NI
And this extra £1,000 sees you losing a benefit of £1,700 (after tax) if you have 2 children.

Full time childcare costs for 2 kids in the midlands (after vouchers and nursery support, which have already been hit by cuts) is over £1,300 after tax which means you have to earn more than £22k before tax to just cover these costs. What is the point of working? Maybe child care relief would be a better incentive for people to work than child benefit at least childcare generates jobs and is time limited.

Hackster - I think your idea of free childcare rather than CB is clever, but what about people that can't get jobs to fit in with childcare hours? Do they not get CB regardless of income?

One of the issues with raising taxes for the "over £44k" people is that there arent enough of them to make a difference unless you make the rate punitive - only 10% of people in the PAYE system earn more than that. Less than 1% of people earn over £100k.

miffyjane, Again I say that the basic State pension pensioners get is far too low, millions of pensioners live below the poverty line on their £5,000 a year state pension, and also millions of pensioners are forced to choose between heating their homes and eating, this is an Age Concern fact that never makes the media news.

And pensioners benefits are means tested, the annual winter fuel payment is per household not per pensioners

We have to remember that pensioners have already spect a working life paying into the system.

Im saying that the middle classes dont know their living compared to Britain's 12 million pensioners.

So if pensioners benefits are means tested, why cant Child Benefit be equally means tested when todays middle earners are on much more than £5,000 a year ?

ivanhoe - may i beg to differ. my ILs are now retired and they have far more money than when he was working. they are on means tested benefits - so presumably are on a fairly low income - but they actually give money away on a regular basis or their savings get too large to qualify. they have a couple of holidays a year - 1 of which is abroad a year and run a car and redecorate regularly. admittedly they live in a fairly cheap area

ivanhoe - paying the annual fuel payment per household is not means testing. It is saying you don't need twice as much heating for two people living in the same house. Means testing is saying you only receive a benefit if your income is below a certain level. Please could you tell me if there are any pensioner benefits that are means tested?

I agreed the state pension is too low but child benefit has nothing to do with this. People earning 45k are paying more than enough tax to cover their child benefit. They are not taking money away from pensioners or those on low incomes but contributing above average tax into the system. The government are trying to imply they are as a way of justifying their dodgy decision.

If the government wanted to raise the state pension they could put a percentage rise on income tax across the board to pay for it, or introduce the millionaires tax or chase a few non doms for some tax.

Loudlass, would it be possible for your two little ones to go to their after school club and for your DD to go to a childminder? There are childminders who will look after older children I think.

mify - i think you can get various top-ups if you have less than a certain level of savings and income. it means you get very cheap council tax - not sure what else - i think you get some extra money each month.

The 44k stated is wrong when the cuts come in it will actually be anyone earning over £42k in 2013 and by 2015 it will be anyone earning over £38k. That will actually effect 35% if parents. It's the thin end of the wedge to get rid of CB altogether.

@Loudlass - "I wasn't even allowed to stay on and do A-levels despite getting no GCSE's lower than a 'B'. I had to go out to work."

A bit off-topic, but I'd like to know who wouldn't allow you to do A-Levels and who made you go out to work at 16?

OK I'm going to be sightly contentious here but I'm really open to being corrected on this.

There have been a load of books like 'how the baby boomers stole their childrens future and why they should give it back' that is just one title I havn't read it (can't afford it ha ha!) there are more.
Some fiscal policy has either been directed at keeping house prices high or has had the very welcome side effect (in the eyes of politicians of keeping house prices high).
everyone recognises house prices are too high, there are views about baby boomers hoarding land and property you get my drift.

I live in an average part of London the pensioners I came accross (my job has some cross over with social services/community stuff) either live in million pound houses, tell me they are off on their 4th overseas holiday of the year yet both groups complain to me of being poor/having no money or do genuinly have no money but have pretty much everything they need provided by the state clearly a genuinly needy pensioner needs protecting even more so than someone else but I just don't see them.
Why is it considered unacceptable for someone living in a million pound house to contribute towards their social care? why do we consider them poor and use tax payers cash to subsidise their council tax/heat/travel etc.
If anyone else was in a million pound house surely they should be expected to dip in to fund their life? Why do we consider equity sacrosanct when it comes to wealth?

CB cuts may still effect you even if you are under the 44k.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1318370/CHILD-BENEFIT-CUT-Now-230-000-families-hit.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

You are all missing my point.

I believe that Child Benefit should remain a universial payment to all mothers with young children. I do not believe Child Benefit should be means tested.

But by the same token I do not believe that pensioners should be means tested either for state handouts because the State pension is to low.

My point is that the State pension link with national averagbe wages was cut 30 years ago by the Thatcher government, but nobody among the middle classes uttered a murmour, and why ?. Because it didnt effect them.

Britain's pensioners rich or poor, have been left behind by all political parties and the enture nation since the 80's.

Nobody is sticking up for our elderly people.

So I say to Mumsnet, with all this moaning about Child Benefit, which isnt going to happen until 2013.

When oh when is middle England going to think of our pensioners, most of whom have paid into the system all their working lives and therefore deserve a decent and adaquate basic State pension, making no need for means testing ???????

Answer me that one ?

ivanhoe - it was because I was younger than 10 yrs old 30 years ago

I would be very glad for the state pension link with wages to be restored.

I don't agree that pensioners have all been ignored by the governments. I think the tories are well aware of their votes from the rich blue rinse brigade and would rather take money from middle income families than risk taking bus passes away from rich pensioners.

The cut in CB is the last straw for me. I have 17 month old twins and a 5 year old. I had to give up work as a teacher in the last few months as my childminder wanted £120 per day to care for my girls (that's with the eldest part time). When i looked around i found this was the going rate. It's more than i earn with nearly 20 years teaching experience so i've had to give up.
My husband earns exactly £44k so we will lose our benefit. We have already made every possible cutback we can and still have £300 per month shortfall. I have started ebaying everything we own to try to make up the difference. Loosing another £180 per month is going to finish us off. We will have to sell the house that we worked so hard to get and move to a flat.
We are by no means on a low income but due to not being eligible for any help anywhere it makes us considerably worse off than many people on much lower incomes than us. We have worked hard all our lives and this feels so totally unfair. As for those who belong to the 'if you can't afford kids..." brigade, we didn't plan to have twins!!

miffyjane, Of course all pensioners have been ignored by all governments since the 80s
from Thatcher to Major, to Blair, to Brown, they have all ignored the elderly.

Our politicians have relied on devide and conquer policies to help them win power, and ddevisery policies always work in Britain, because we are not a politically motivated nation, we are a self interested nation.

My parents did, there was no EMA or tax credits then. It was a case of go out to work FT or don't eat.

Duchesse - There is not ONE childminder in my local area wiling to take on an SN 12yo. And even if there was, the charges would be up to DOUBLE that of an average childminder, because having a dc with SN to look after would limit the number of other children he/she could look after. Which would be a prohibitive cost to someone who can only earn £5.85 an hour...

the pensioners i know are all rolling in it - my 2 neighbours own at least 2 poperties each and regularly go on holidays abroad. my mum and my IL's who have a means tested pension also seem comfortably off - despite the fact that the females have hardly ever worked. i would hate their increases to be linked to my salary - from a major UK blue chip company which has been less than inflation for the last 8 years. And lots of this generation have retired early.

sorry to sound slightly bitter - but i think they have it much better now than generations to come

I hate to complain but I feel I must. My Dh earns over 44k and we are not living the high life. We live in the south and thus although wages are good, there always seems to be something to take this money.

I have 4 small children and thus cannot afford childcare. I buy their clothes from primark, tescos, sainsburys and ocassionally (very ocassionally) NEXT. I haven't bought myself any clothes in what seems like ages. But I guess we run two cars and we own our home (mortgage of course). But I hate the perception that I some how mismanage my finances. I scrimp and save like most. However, I'm fully aware that I am blessed. I just wish the system was fairer. The cb money paid for extra curricula things that our budget couldn't afford i.e swimming on the weekend, etc I know we are all being pinched but I guess the pinch is starting to sting

dreamingofsun, You believe what you "want" to believe.

dreamingofsun, You see only what you "want" to see.

///////the pensioners i know are all rolling in it /////////

Damn right some pensioners are, and why not, they have probably been bable to be thrifty through their lives, while other pensioners have never been that fortunate and therefore they have only the basic State penbsion they have paid in for, to live on, plus means tested handouts.

Did you know that means testing pensioners is costing 15 to 20 times more of tax payers money than the restoration of the earnings link would cost.

And did you know that this coalition government are sitting on a National Insurance "surplus" that stood in 2009, at £44.340 billion. ?

Again, you see what you "want" to see.

//////Please could you tell me if there are any pensioner benefits that are means tested?//////

You mean, you dont know ?????????