To think capping child tax credits at two children will plunge more families into poverty

[SoonToBeSix]

Can't link but article is in the Daily Fail. A Tory mp has proposed capping child benefit and child tax credits at two children in order to win votes.
What happens to those children whose parents circumstances change ie redundancy or there is a contraception failure?
This government is taking welfare cuts too far while continuing to let the very rich avoid paying the correct taxes.

I am still annoyed about the child benefit cuts to those on HRT. My husband earns just slightly over and I mean just slightly, and I cannot work because I have had to give up work and become a full time carer for our severely disabled teenager and a lack of extended family support and support off the LA means that is going to be a long term thing. I feel it has put me in a more vulnerable position than i was in already.

It';s okay for me though as my husband is a nice, normal human being. I am sure there are loads of people who will not have that though and will feel alot more trapped with no income at all

The thing is though, if I had received more support off the LA I would most probably have carried on working long term and my dd would have gone to day care and I would still have been a working carer when she was/is an adult. Asit is we will look at full tiem residential because we are absolutely knackered and broke, something which will cost the taxpayer more, because I save the taxpayer money. I know people don't get that, but carers save the economy and the taxpayer millions and they should get adequate help to help them carry on functioning

Sorry this post is a bit muddled, I just think we have become an oversight because we are ina minority group, when actually we are a section of society that struggles the most through no fault of their own

So, if there was no welfare at all what people do then.... probably die. Its not great but millions of people manage on it.

littlemisssarcastic I was told by Contact a Family that the disabled child tax credits wouldn't be affected for us. We get £400 a month DLA for DS, I think that might be higher rate care though. We'd really struggle without the additional tax credits - the costs of raising a disabled child are far higher than for other children.

Like OwlLady I have no hope of finding work because of caring for DS so it's not just the extra costs of his disability but also the fact that I can't earn.

I sympathize with you Owllady. I am still annoyed about the cuts to CB for higher rate tax payers too, particularly the unfairness with regards to families earning up to 100k still receiving it. It was the only money I had too and I feel more vulnerable and trapped. I don't have a disabled dc though, so I appreciate I am not in your situation and I really feel for you. That was a nasty, underhand thing for them to do and I'll never forget it.

The tories don't want there to be welfare.

They are dismantling it, bit by bit, under the guise of austerity measures. But MPs aren't facing austerity measures, neither are the bankers, CEOs of large corps, or all the individuals who are dodging their tax bill.

Now carers have been mentioned, yes there is a little help but it's £55 a week (taken out of income support if you are unlucky enough to claim that pittance as well).

Now, if you taxpayers want to moan about that, before you do, just have a quick google at what residential care would cost a week. £55 a week it aint.

The carers allowance is a fucking insult and anyone with an ounce of sense can see that. Not only do we need support physically, mentally and financially, we need a break and some help to get back into the world of working from which we've had to give up, if the carers are ever in a position to be doing so.

By not working and claiming that piddly amount we are saving the very people who would like to see us crawl over broken glass begging for every penny a fortune going into millions of pounds. Easily tens of thousands per child each and every year.

yesmatron Children who receive higher rate care wont be affected. They will continue to receive the equivalent to what they are getting now.

Children who receive middle rate care are currently, under tax credit rules, also receiving extra tax credits, but under universal credit, this will change, and they will no longer be eligible for the extra tax credits.

That is going to be a large drop in income for many many families of disabled DC.

So, if there was no welfare at all what people do then

They'd come and take your food.

Which if you think about it is another less obvious reason for a welfare state. Once every part of a country is owned by someone, people can't just go hunt, fish and pick fruit in the wild. We gave up that right when we formed civilisations.

there are lots of children at sld/pmld special schools who only get middle rate care too because of how complicated the stupid system is

I just want to add those that fall into the hrt single earner income wont qualify for tac credits either, in case anyone was wondering

I do get carers allowance, I do wonder how long for under this government tbh

and yes as someone as mentioned above, for full time care and schooling for my daughter it would cost upwards of 600k pa

Utterly unbelievable how many threads there are moaning about those struggling to get by and how few on those who make vast profits at the expense of others. Talk about misplaced priorities.

it's quite obvious what people would do without welfare. Did anyone ever watch that Neil Morrisey documentary about the Staffordshire childrens homes? His father was financially abusive to the mother so she had to work too and leave the boys alone, all (or most?) ended up in care
hardly a cheaper option and not a very functional opne either if you want to live in a progressive society where people are valued human beings

Errr.....Woo Woo DLA IS paid according to disability not income Thats howcome the Camerons got it for their late son.

I wasn't talking about DLA, I was talking about the part of child tax credits that is paid if you have a disabled child. DLA is not paid according to disability. If it was then no one would be out of pocket because of a disability, and I'm sure you will agree that there are people who are significantly financially disadvantaged because of the costs of their disability, whether or not they are able to work. Being disabled is an expensive business most of the time, and DLA does not cover that.

If you are I think its very mean of you to begrudge the parent of a disabled child a little bit extra if their income is under the threshold.

I don't begrudge them it. I think they, and every other parent of a disabled child should get more money to pay for the costs of that disability. I just disagree with that money being included in tax credits, I think it should be separated and called something different so that it isn't confused with childcare money, a full time wage top up, or money that is paid to anyone that has children they can't pay for themselves.

Little miss under universal credit parents will receive extra for their dc who receive middle rate care dla it will be protected at the same amount. However a change of circumstances or new claimants would receive half of what they get under tax credits .

Being disabled is an expensive business most of the time, and DLA does not cover that.

Agreed

Owllady another Carer of a severely disabled child who is looking at full time residential for my son. The policy makers in Local and National Government need to be aware that Carers cannot be shat on indefinetly.

Apart from the obvious, being cases of teen mums claiming tax credits, do you realise the number of people who have never paid tax? Its basically zero.

That is simply not true, and VAT paid out of benefits doesn't count for anything.

There are loads of people that don't earn enough to pay income tax, (which is a good thing for low earners) and plenty that have up until very recently been given council tax benefit so have never paid that either. Plenty of the people that don't earn enough to pay income tax also don't own homes or vehicles, or get an inheritance, so have no need to pay tax on those.

Until this government put the personal allowance up to £9440 anyone who earned more than something like £80 per week paid tax.

Plenty of the people that don't earn enough to pay income tax also don't own homes or vehicles, or get an inheritance, so have no need to pay tax on those.

Maybe they donpay tax directly on those things, but tax is a percentage of their bus fare, their rent goes to private landlords, who pay tax. And as for the comment on inheritance...

Do you see other people as humans, or just as a little figure of how much tax they pay?

And I would rather pay tax that gave the few thousand feckless in this country money to live, than leave them to starve and suffer the consquences of higher crime rates and higher house/car insurance.

Until this government put the personal allowance up to £9440 anyone who earned more than something like £80 per week paid tax.

They aren't all bad then!

There really are some sanctimonious nobbers on this thread.... because some people dont agree on things they get made out to be uncaring etc or seeing people as not humans.... ffs!

VAT paid out of benefits doesn't count for anything

I don't want to get lost in the arithmetic so let's pretend that claimants get £100 and 20% of that goes back to the government in VAT.

So if you're not going to count the VAT as paying tax then you have to stop saying "£100! that's a lot of money, I only get £85" because according to your way of working it out the other £20 was never theirs. They were only really getting £80.

mummymeister you said 'so mumandboys the problem here is your ex P who after 5 years has paid you and your children absolutely nothing. the issue for me after reading your post is I still fall on the side of capping benefits but really think it cannot be beyond the agencies to find this man and make him pay. it is him we are subsidising and paying the benefit to in effect and not you (if that makes sense!) a lot of posters seem to be in this position. single parent with 3+ kids and an ex P who contributes either nothing or just a fraction of what they should. capping benefits would be effective if all other things were equal. if your ex P paid up then you wouldn't be so dependent on the third child benefit. so I guess this is the heart of the problem. great in theory if everything works elsewhere as it is supposed to but a crap idea in practice'

The CSA knows where my ex is. I know where my ex is. We've always known where he is. We never lost him!

My ex owes me nothing. I am an able-bodied adult of working age and can support myself. He does, however, owe our children some kind of financial support but the Law won't make him do that because he's self employed. And no, you don't subsidise him. I do. I don't get any more money because he refuses to help out. I pay as much tax as anyone else earning what I earn. I do a decent job full time and I am bringing up my children as well as I can. You cannot ask any more of me yet somehow, I am forced to explain myself because I'm single and I have more than 1 child.

What so many people miss is the fact that the legislation, as it stands, is more than happy to allow self employed people to legitimately reduce their child maintenance liability, often to zero. You don't need to find my ex at all. Rather, the Law needs to change to enforce his responsibility towards his children. It is, frankly, state sponsored child neglect but they'll (the Government) never do anything about it because it won't do anything to encourage business growth.

It is unlikely my ex will ever be made to pay what he would if he were employed. I am not convinced our children will ever get anything. It is far, far better for all of us - me, my children, and society as a whole, that I am enabled to work full-time and use the skills I trained hard to achieve. Sadly, I suspect you would feel less threatened if every single parent fulfilled the stereotype of thousands of kids born of benefits so we can be bashed and put down and told we don't contribute anything. I contribute a great deal to society, most of it you could never put a monetary value on, and I save YOU a fortune by doing my best by my children. Yet you begrudge me that....because my marriage failed? because I have more than 2 children?

That's some crazy logic you have going on there! That's the sort of thing my ds would come out with when he's trying to get more pocket money!

It's still £20 that can be spent on anything the claimant chooses to spend it on, and they get the benefit of whatever they spent that £20 on as well.

And if benefit claimants as badly off as some people say they are, then they will be spending that £20 on things that are considered essential and aren't eligible for vat anyway. If it comes out of child tax credits, then it's should be being spent on food and clothes for the child which are vat exempt. (as an adult would need to pay their own bills regardless of whether they had a child or not)

I've just seen the woe is me comment by canyouseeme.

I reiterate what I've said..again. You have no empathy. Lucky you, looking at your wonderful children albeit one with SEN. How sanctimonious.

My children are all wonderful too, but when you've seen your dd's fingers nearly severed by her violent brother and the difficulties our family have had then yeah feel free to patronise me again.

But yeah, shit man, woe is me.

There really are some sanctimonious nobbers on this thread.... because some people dont agree on things they get made out to be uncaring etc or seeing people as not humans.... ffs

pot calling kettle....