To think the government can't force women to declare what their dp earns?

[ThreeLittlePandas]

I'm a SAHM and claim child benefit for my 3 children. What my dh earns is his business and the government can go whistle for it if they think that I'm going to declare his earning.

I claim CB not dh

In fact they can fuck the fuck off....

Because they have chosen not to marry and not to share their finances and therefore do not constitute a "household" but are two independent individuals?

But if you are living together as a couple, there are expenses you share. You don't have two separate rental/mortgage contracts, two separate sets of utility bills. If you have children you share the expense and the care. You don't pay your council tax as a single person if you are a couple - unless you're fiddling the system for the 25% discount.

It doesn't matter whether you're married or not, if you live as a couple you are no longer independent, you are inter-dependent. That constitutes a "benefit unit" for the purpose of claiming means-tested benefits.

destroyed, what you're saying is you want all the benefits of living together as a couple, as well as being able to claim means tested benefits as though you are on your own. That's not just illogical, it's unreasonable. Put it into practice, it's fraud.

Your status when claiming benefits can only be:

1. A single person, living on their own (whether in a relationship or not) claiming benefits as a single person.
2. Unmarried but living with a partner as a couple, in which case you claim benefits as a couple.
3. Married and living together as a couple, in which case you claim benefits as a couple.
4. Married and not living together, in which case you would claim benefits as a single person.

If you are married but separated, you have to be able to show that the non-resident spouse is living at a different address for the purpose of claiming single parent benefits.

Same applies to couples who are living together who separate.

So in respect of means-tested benefits, married and non-married couples are treated exactly the same. Which is exactly how it should be.

Means-tested Benefits...the clue is in the name.

married couples are taxed together, which is usually an advantage when there's a big disparity in income, as tax after the combined total tends to work out less than if the same total would be taxed twice as two separate lots of income.

Rubbish. Married couples are taxed as individuals on their individual earnings.

Then there are tax breaks if you have dependant children.

More rubbish! There are no "tax breaks" for having children, other than child benefit (not means-tested until next year) and child tax credits (which are means-tested).

destroyed, what you're saying is you want all the benefits of living together as a couple, as well as being able to claim means tested benefits as though you are on your own.

No, that's not what I'm saying, read it again.

Do you not know any couples that live together but don't share their finances? Heck, I know MARRIED couples like that! More importantly, your live-in partner has no legal obligation to support you the same way your married husband would. It is therefore wrong of the government to ASSUME they'll step in and deny you support on that basis. What is so difficult in this to understand?

My beef isn't with the "means tested" bit, it's whose means they test that's the problem.

I'm talking about France, olgaga, not the UK, when I'm talking about the tax system. It would help if you read my posts before dismissing them as rubbish.

Regarding the poster who declared that she will state they are "flatmates who just happen to have had a baby", I am under no illusion that this will be accepted by HMRC or whoever polices CB. A while ago myself and DH were going through a really rough time and wanted to split up, however to be able to work in my area of work I needed to have childcare that covered round the clock shifts and on call. We had no space for a live in nanny and because two of my children have a hearing loss, one has speech delay and another is autistic I really made sense that DH lived with us to provide care but we lived as two seperate people, not as a couple. Even with completely seperate financial accounts HMRC would not accept this set up for tax credit purposes. So a flatmates who have a baby really wont wash!

destroyed

In the UK anyone can claim unemployment benefit as individuals if they are available for and actively seeking work. It is not means tested. If they are not available for work and have a family they can claim means-tested income support

The French system of unemployment benefit is also not means-tested. The amount you get is not dependent on your means, it is dependent on the length of time you have contributed to the Unemployment Insurance Scheme and the total contributions paid.

Neither benefit is means-tested and both are individual benefits.

In both countries, you are able to apply for means-tested family support if you have a family or you have not met the qualifying Unemployment Insurance payments.

So what's the difference?

In the UK anyone can claim unemployment benefit as individuals if they are available for and actively seeking work. It is not means tested.

That's not entirely true. If you've not paid enough stamps in the last two years e.g. have been in full-time employment, you will not be eligible for contribution-based JSA. Contribution-based JSA is only paid out for 26 weeks. Income-based JSA is means tested.

Yes that's right, same as in France where there are qualifying periods of Unemployment Insurance.

The issue, however, was whether you can claim it as individuals if you are a couple - which you can. It is not means-tested. Destroyed is confused about means-tested benefits which are paid to a "benefit unit" as opposed to individuals.