would it be illegal to get CB paid to my ex?

[MsIngaFewmarbles]

just a thought.

I have 2 DC from my previous marriage and one from my current one. Could I ask my ex to have CB paid to him so DH doesn't get clobbered on tax because I receive CB for MY 2 DC?

I'm really wondering what kind of professional circles you move in if you think that a man's reputation would be at risk because the father of his stepchildren claims CB.

I mean, really... WTF?

"Why should the government pay for those for your kids?"

The government isn't paying for anything in particular for anybody's kids.

CB is a cash benefit, meant to help with the extra costs of raising children.

The argument that the government shouldn't "pay for" extra-curricular activities is ultimately one that says that no family that can afford those activities should receive any government assistance.

Is that really the society we want to live in?

I think it is good for children to do extra-curricular activities, and I'd rather live in a country that attempted to provide targeted benefits for children from families that couldn't afford it, than one that got furious at the government "paying" for frivolities by giving universal benefits to families that can afford them.

Looking at what other families do and deciding that things they prioritise are "luxuries" that should not be subsidised by the state leads nowhere good unless you are a libertarian.

By that logic nobody who can afford karate lessons needs access to free healthcare.

If the father claims it LEGITIMATELY, there is no problem, but if it's at all dodgy, then nobody who wants to maintain a professional reputation is going to want to touch it with a bargepole. Why is this difficult to understand?

Lets get some things straight.
No it is not illegal to get the CB paid to the Ex, and if the Ex wants to increase his maintainance payments or pay for things for the children himself, that is not illegal either.

Hell, even giving the money back to her in cash is not illegal, although morally questionable as the whole reason for transferring it is that she is no longer entitled to it.

I think what people are trying to get at is that technically this will get around the CB cap which makes the changes to CB partially useless.

On the wider issue of CB, I think we can all agree that taking CB from HRT earners and not Means Testing it is wrong, if they are going to do it, they need to do it fairly. 2 Parents earning 35K each can still receive CB whilst one earning £45 can't? that must be wrong.

As for the fact of removing a "universal Benefit" well hate to tell you people, but the UK is in £1 trillion of debt, sorry, but cuts have to be made before the whole thing goes down the plughole.

Putting some perspective on this:

CB for 1 child is currently £80 per month (£960 a year), to a houshold earning £60k that's an increase of 1.6% of thier income.

The same household earning 16k, that same £960 is a 6% increase in total income.

If the country needs to make cuts, who can afford to lose that £960 more?

What could be illegitimate about a father claiming CB for his children?

This is what people are being advised to do on Moneybox and by their accountants. It is entirely in keeping with the rules on claiming CB.

The stated aim of the cut was to remove CB from households with a HR taxpayer. For children who live across two households, obviously thus means that if either household has no HRT, that household can claim CB.

It's not that hard to work out.

It's pretty odd to be ranting about fraud and reputational damage when you haven't done even the most rudimentary research into whether it would be fraudulent.

OP - skipped to last page so apologies if someone's already pointed this out BUT:

If you transfer CB to your ex he can ask the CSA to do an assessment against YOU. Go ahead with this and you'll end up living up to your moniker.

"As for the fact of removing a "universal Benefit" well hate to tell you people, but the UK is in £1 trillion of debt, sorry, but cuts have to be made before the whole thing goes down the plughole."

Yeah, things are so bad we had to cut income tax for the actual top 1% of earners by 5%.

Child Benefit has never been an expensive benefit.

Debt is historically cheap and growth is pathetic, putting further pressure on the deficit.

Taking money out of the pockets of the moderately well-off is not going to help that.

This cut was an ideological choice. Not a necessity. It isn't going to save that much money.

Wait...what?

There are roughly 11 million children under 16 in the UK, all eligable for thier parent to claim Child Benefit, which totals £10.56Bn a year (based on a single child claim, £960*11 million)

Roughly the top 10% of earners pay high rate tax, so splitting the kids evenly this would mean that 1.056Bn pounds could be saved a year.

I guess £1Bn is only 1/1000th of the defecit. Why even bother??

Hell, and if it was actually means tested instead of just HRT, that figure would climb substantially.

collaborate I've answered this further upthread. Ex wouldnr do that as it would hurt the dc.

Can isomeone explain what would happen to the OP NI contribution? If she keeps claiming it, she will get the contribution, but not if the ex is claiming it. Have I understood this correctly?

I guess £1Bn is only 1/1000th of the defecit. Why even bother??

Thin end of the wedge I should think.
Gov has made this small change to CB and also a small change to initial tax level paid by pensioners. A small change to countrywide public service pay rates and general cuts across local councils.

We still have huge gov debts. Suspect this is just the beginning.

Wamster - you really are totally wrong on this one. There is nothing even slightly dodgy about the OP having a civilised discussion with her ex re how they can jointly best support their children. The system has always allowed a choice of who can claim it.

dprince - if the OP is working she likely doesn't need the NI contributions to be made. It's important for women who aren't working whilst raising dcs, to protect their pension entitlement but if you are working you're doing that yourself already through the NI deducted from your wage.

The OP doesn't work. That's why I asked, her contribution will not be made - I assume.

it won't be made for the next 3 years. I have worked and paid into the NI system for years before and will again after this 3 year gap.

But you will loose those 3 years. Is that right? And if for some reason you don't find a job (hope you will) it is possible you won't have paid enough. A slim possibility, but its there.

very slim as I'm taking a healthcare related course, but yes there is that possibility