Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think that people who complain about not getting child benefit because they earn above the threshold can fuck right off?

254 replies

CosetteFauchlavent · 12/03/2015 08:45

Firstly I should say that I am applying this to people who are coupled up - it's very different for single parents.

I have an acquaintance, friend of a friend, who I'm not particularly keen on but my friend insists on inviting to group outings etc. She describes herself as "the girl who has everything" and has said several times that she's going back to work after maternity leave even though her DH earns enough for her to be a SAHM.

Anyway, the other day she came out with "It's so unfair that people on benefits get child benefit for doing nothing, we earn too much to qualify WAAAH." The "WAAH" is not my addition, she actually said it.

AIBU to think SBU?

OP posts:
BasinHaircut · 12/03/2015 08:46
TiggieBoo · 12/03/2015 08:46

You sound like a real charmer.

WilliamShatnersPants · 12/03/2015 08:49

It depends. I was her once - a SAHM with tri kids, and DH earned over the threshold for any payments. We took our mortgage out based on our dual income, so for those years it was tough having just the single income.

Of course I was very grateful for his above average income, but we had very little spare cash at all and things were tight thanks to our big mortgage outgoings. It's also pretty frustrating paying huge amounts of tax, but then not being allowed to take any back at a time when you might actually need it.

Awaits flaming....

WilliamShatnersPants · 12/03/2015 08:50

Tri kids? Two kids.

FeijoaSundae · 12/03/2015 08:51

^ and has said several times that she's going back to work after maternity leave even though her DH earns enough for her to be a SAHM.
^

The bare-faced cheek of the woman. Grin

notnaice · 12/03/2015 08:51

It's the unfairness that bothers me. Fair enough if it goes, but it's not fair that we don't have it but my sister does even though their family income is nearly double ours.

notnaice · 12/03/2015 08:53

Because both earn just under the threshold, I mean.

catabouttown · 12/03/2015 08:54

Uhhhh well she sounds like a bit of a knob and not so stealth boaster, however, I do think the child benefit cut off is ridiculous. My DH earns nearly £50k and I earn virtually nothing, we live in an expensive area and pay a fortune for him to commute to london etc etc so we are not well off. When he eventually gets a payrise to £50k we will lose child benefit but couples who earn £49k each keep theirs with a total income of £98k, it's nonsensical

Joyfulldeathsquad · 12/03/2015 08:54

william no flaming here, I'm in the same situation now

Thisishowyoudisappear · 12/03/2015 08:55

YANBU to be annoyed with her, she does indeed sound annoying. 'The girl who has everything'? Everything except child benefit, ha ha ha. YAB a bit U to generalise though. Personally I think the new rule is stupid but hey ho.

Gobbolinothewitchscat · 12/03/2015 08:55

I do t agree with the inherent unfairness of how it is calculated

Also why are single parents exempt from your ire? Following your logic, you would have no problem with a single parent on 150k getting child benefit?

And, finally, I find your comments about returning to wirk or not to be really unnecessary and, frankly, judgey

Gileswithachainsaw · 12/03/2015 08:56

Well there are aspects of these things which can certainly be unfair.

I don't know if it's changed but wasn't it the case that a single woman earning above the cut off couldn't get it but people in a relationship can both earn just below cut off and get it. so basically bring back double what the single person earns yet still receiving?

If people are tied into Contracts and rental or mortgage agreements taken out whilst bringing in two wages and a baby comes along meaning one no longer works then of course it's going to be alot harder for them even though they are earning a certain amount doesn't mean a drop in income and no help won't be felt.

TarkaTheOtter · 12/03/2015 08:57

I'm pissed off that the new system means people (I would include myself but now live abroad) lose income for no cost saving to the govt. I also don't like the fact that it seems to discriminate against SAHP with wealthy partners who may not have any other financial independence. But I see your point and think it's pretty crass to complain about it to someone who might actually need the money.

Meirasa · 12/03/2015 08:57

I think it should be based on joint income not on the higher earners income. This would be far fairer. I don't see why a couple on 97K are more entitled because one earns 48K and the other 47K to it than a couple where one is a SAHP and the other earns 60K.

muminhants · 12/03/2015 08:58

Yes it's unfair where two people earn close to the threshold so still get it but where you have a low earner and a high earner you don't. My husband and I are somewhat in the latter position although I don't earn enough to lose it altogether. It's a pain being forced into self-assessment again for it though.

I feel it's unfair because I only have one child so am not using the services etc that someone with 3 children would. But then you can argue that I need it less precisely because I only have one child (and earn decently too). These things are never fair. A future government might do away with it altogether, who knows.

Rosieliveson · 12/03/2015 08:59

I'm a SAHM and our income puts us above the threshold. We don't need CB to survive but we don't have much spare cash after mortgage, bills, groceries etc either.
The 'glitch' that I find unfair is that if my husband's salary were split between a couple, that couple would have a higher take home pay and also receive CB.
In my opinion, the new rules are flawed and CB should be reserved for those who really do need that boost to be able to feed and clothe their family.
Your friend certainly doesn't sound like she needs it!

Quitelikely · 12/03/2015 09:00

Well I am one of those people who complained privately to my dh when our CB was stopped. He works I don't.

It's an absolute disgrace that some people get it who earn more than us.

What your problem is with this woman is : jealousy. Plain and simple.

If your problem is t with her but with the CB set up why not tell us why you think it's great the two earners can still get it when only one can't?

Theoretician · 12/03/2015 09:00

I think the child benefit means test is stupid. Child benefit should either be given to everyone, or to no-one (abolished), or only to those who already depend on benefits (including tax credits) as a result of passing the means test for that.

One of the consequences of its stupidity is that is unfair, with some households not getting it when other households with much higher earnings do.

Eminybob · 12/03/2015 09:02

I also think it's ridiculous that a joint household earning £49k each get it but not a single person on £50k

That said, obviously having an extra adult in the household does increase living expenses, but not proportionally, so the joint threshold should be, say, £75k, not £50k.

HamishBamish · 12/03/2015 09:04

The way the changes were implemented was unfair. It should be based on household income, not the earnings of one person.

Feckeggblue · 12/03/2015 09:06

What is waahhahha?
You can get it can't you? You just need to pay the tax on it.

Tbh I don't really care about families where there is one higher earner and one sahm not getting it whilst 2 workers earning £48k do. People who work should be better off, that's what the government incentivise. Sahm is a v important role but will very often be worse off financially that someone salaried. I don't see how that's unfair, just common sense?

Anyway we don't get it as I earn over alone and DH usually does anyway. Undecided on whether to claim it and do a self assesment though. Maybe it's more worthwhile if you have a few children, I'm just about to have our first.

Joolsy · 12/03/2015 09:07

I think you'd do better putting your energy into moaning about couples who earn £98k and still get the child benefit, which I think is unfair. My OH earns just over £50k and I earn £7,000 (p/t) and we don't get it. I certainly don't need to work, but I choose to 'cos I enjoy it and I like having a bit extra cash. Do you want me to fuck off too?

KentExpecting · 12/03/2015 09:07

It should definitely be based on household income - 'higher earner income' makes no sense to me at all.

I'm in the same position as cat about town - on paper we look like we are high earners, but between us we spend almost £14k a year on commuting to London for work, our mortgage is based on two incomes, childcare costs will be higher than average due to us having long days thanks to the commute... CB would help a little, but we don't qualify :(

Moreisnnogedag · 12/03/2015 09:07

i think its the discrepancy between household and individual income that's irritating. Dh is a sahd so we are one of the families adversely affected by this. Combining it with the changes in childcare vouchers and it shows that the government don't like sahps.

Fwiw the £50k threshold is minus pension contributions which is keeping me from losing cb.

PeaceOfWildThings · 12/03/2015 09:07

Yes, we were in the same situation as william (although I had depression and undiagnosed chronic illnesses which meant I couldnt work full time. No benefit for people like me. DH was not on a particularly good salary, and we had high interest rate. We just managed, but it was a lot harder for us than it is for people now. I didnt complain about benefits then.) Agree with cat that actually it is unfair that 2 earners with medium earnings can claim now. I don't think they should be getting child benefit, benefits should be based on joint salary.