AIBU to think that people earning £960 per week don't really need Child Benefit?

[OldGreyWiffleTest]

Well, am I?

I miss chips and gravy

Yabu like others have said why should a single earner earning £50k with sahm looking after children loose out on CB, whereas two role earning 49k each do not.totally unfair, it should be on total household income . It's not fairly thought out. Yes dh pays a lot of tax so we don't get all that much

issimma, not that long ago then. I had no idea rates of pay had come down so much. I did office temping about 20 years ago and was on £5-£7 an hour then. I had to wear a skirt/trousers and top, shoes not trainers etc.

It's a bit beside the point though. A household cap would be much fairer than the current situation.

Yes I agree. The household cap would be fairer.

I was just trying to get across that £50k isn't the huge salary some think it is.

Yeah totempole I did temping for Social Services in 2007 and we only got paid minimum wage. I was doing it for the director of SS so had to wear a suit. The following year I did it at a high street bank and the same was expected. Pay is very low in a lot of areas.

Hang on what is the cap?

I heard figures 42.5, 49k and now 60k

Which is the actual proposed latest cap figure?

£5.25 an hour......fooking LUXurehhh!

YABU.

How do you know the money is shared between both parents and the working parent isn't pissing it up the wall.

I bloody hate being a single working parent (9k a year) but at least I don't have anyone controlling the money / spending it on beer.

YANBU

Sorry I didn't see the question. I have applied for quite a few office jobs over the last few weeks.. Each one paid NMW or just a few pence more and for each one I'd have had to wear a suit. Not one of these jobs were offering anywhere near 20K. I know these people won't be losing CB, I was just pointing out that higher earners are not the only ones with working clothes costs.

Exactly what I'm thinking Meglet.

Not everyone is lucky enough to be in the equal relationship we all accept as "the norm".

And also, DV and financial abuse isn't restricted to lower or middle-income families.

The cap is £60,000. There is tapering relief between £49,000 and £60,000 which means you could have a household income (where a couple are earning £49,000 each) of £98,000 and still get CB but if you are a single person on £60,000 you get nothing.

That is annoying - it's this single-dual earner stinger that's really got everyone's backs up.
If I was earning the same as DP I'd gladly give up CB - or rather, give it to a decent charity.

My POV is that it's unreasonable for a single childless HRT payer to have exactly the same tax free personal allowance as someone who's supporting 3 children and a SAHP. I've always seen our CHB as a redress for that. However, apparently this is now unaffordable so we'll lose it - which I guess I can accept.

At first I thought it was unreasonable to keep child benefit with a massive household income.

But then I thought about it, and remembered threads on here from women who have husbands who earn massive amounts of money - sometimes they don't know how much - but have no money of their own and no access to money.

What happens if your husband earns loads, but you are penniless? and he won't let you have any money? It happens.

I know the easy answer is to say leave, but people don't always, do they?

And sometimes it's squirrelling away that bit of money that enables you to leave.

I worry that there are going to be some women who are going to suffer because of this.

hecubas, that's fair enough. I take it back. I had no idea there were so many office based jobs that are so low paid now. When I was temping there wasn't minimum wage but the rates were relatively higher, if you take into account inflation. Presumably they had to pay more back then because, without tax credits, people simply wouldn't have taken the job.

Sorry for the mini hijack.

There are a lot worse things public money is being spent on than the nations kids imo

Am I the only one gobsmacked that George didn't sort out the 2 incomes exception to CB?

We earn over the threshold and can afford to give it up but it's annoying that people can earn a dual income of £90k+ and receive it.

I honestly thought that he would leave it unchanged, scrap CB for all and raise tax credits by the CB amount or limit it to maybe a couple of children.

Thinking about life here in Oxford, which is not quite but nearly the same as Fancy London......eeeeeehh.....£80K household?

Of course, by saying household - this does leave vulnerable the women who have high-earning partners who are gits and give them no money.
In an ideal world, it'd just be paid as before.

I've been thinking about this, and I suppose that whilst household income would seem fairer, if the point of child benefit was ensuring that the carer of a child got a minimum amount, then actually the people suffering from this aren't the single parents (who presumably wouldn't withhold their own salary from themselves) but those people in a couple with an abusive main earner who refuses to share salary - but for those people, a household cap wouldn't help them out either.

There's time to sort the two-earner conundrum out yet.
My guess is that they'll announce several versions and gauge public response.

Why would a couple need CB more than a single person earning £55,000? Surely it is the other way round? I would happily have a SAHH as that would mean a huge reduction in my childcare costs. Unfortunately I don't so have to pay it out of one income. In fact it is worse as I also have to use my holidays to attend school events (no sharing of holiday with an other half) so I have even less days to spend with ds and therefore even higher childcare costs.