To be pissed off at the new tax free childcare

[childcarechallenge]

NC for this.

We have two DC in childcare and live in London. I'm starting a new job next month and my salary is 48K, after tax, student loan, childcare costs and tube to work plus a few other generally working expenses (clothes etc) I've worked out that I will take home less than £200 a month.

DH earns a good salary which is good because we almost completely rely on his salary for rent, bills etc. He just received a large bonus which pushes him over 100K which is the new limit for the new tax free childcare scheme from the government.

Essentially, between 100K and 120K after tax, student loan, the loss of his "tax free allowance" which is clawed back over 100K, and the fact that we will not be able to claim £4000 back on our childcare because he is no longer under 100K (This applies to BOTH of us because of his salary) means that of that £20K we are actually only £1800 better off. AIBU to think that this is complete robbery - DH works extremely hard, very long hours (sometimes 70 hour weeks) in a high stress environment and the government seem to take an obscene amount of his salary.

We have an opportunity coming up to move to a lower tax country in a year or so with his job and this just makes me really want to take it, AIBU?

I'm quite sure OP could make her lunch if it was a priority for her. It's obviously not a priority. That's not hard to understand. Though I'm sure if you keep at it you can beat her into saying 'YES! Yes! I could probably make a sandwich the night before instead of watching house of cards'.

People are fixating on sandwichgate too much.

There's nothing wrong with buying your lunch every day if you want to. But it's just not an essential cost of working, that's all.

That £15 or so on bought sandwiches adds up to £60 a month. So you can add that to your disingenuous "Iess than £200" that you'll supposedly "earn" in your new job. It's a lifestyle choice, not an essential work expense.

I'm quite sure OP could make her lunch if it was a priority for her. It's obviously not a priority. That's not hard to understand.

Well then OP shouldn't complain about the amount of 'disposable' income she has left as there are savings she could make, she choses not to.

You do understand hay carers allowance is a flat rate £63 per week fakenews and you have to be working with the cared for for at least 35 hours every week to get that?
But you know most Carers have no choice. They can't just leave their loved ones uncared for or decide they don't want to do it because they can't afford £4 for a sandwich each day because it makes it not worthwhile.

I know that carer's allowance is scandalously low, but it's never going to be the only household income is it? The person they are caring for is going to have an income, whether benefits, a wage or whatever, no-one only has £63 pw.

On the matter of sandwiches, obviously you could choose to spend all your income on various bits and pieces and claim that they are essential work expenses. Our office car park is a bit muddy, so the only way I could possibly get to work would be in a Range Rover, that sort of thing.

Buying your lunch every day might not seem like an extravagence, but the fact is that it is the expensive option, that can add up to a huge sum over time and is a luxury people on lower incomes can't always afford.

They may also have 2 toddlers to get ready for nursery every day and all the other time pressures, but they have to fit in making a sandwich, or sorting leftovers, because they don't have a grand a year or whatever to splurge on bought lunches.

To carry on being unhelpful, there are ways of organising things better - surely you won't need to be washing and ironing every night? I hope DH sorts his work suits at the cleaners or whatever - his 70 hour PW job is not a get out of jail free card for all household matters.

I'm not sure OP actually understands why she's being criticised, at all.

six no I didn't realize the amount you were quoting was for someone caring for a person requiring 35 hours a week of care. I still think that as you're caring for someone with extremely high needs, you ought to be paid a higher rate, fwiw. Of course the govt get away with it because you care about the person you're caring for.

I know that carer's allowance is scandalously low, but it's never going to be the only household income is it?

OPs wage is t her only household income either - her DH earns a lot but we are talking about her individual earnings and what expenses she has to take from it which leaves her with £200 per month.
My DH would still have his income if I was earning what I died to before I had to become a carer. My decent salary was replaced with £63 per week carers allowance.

And the person I care for is a child barbara so he only gets dla - which is spent entirely on his disability related needs and isn't enough to fully meet them all. He also gets child benefit but so do other children from households in our income bracket whether they have a disability or not.
He doesn't get any other benefits.
We were financially much better off when I was working full time and I used to waste a ridiculous amount on shop bought sandwiches, gastronomic lunches and take out
Coffee.

six i'd feel extremely bloody hard done by if I had to give up what I take home for £63/week.

The real issue is the skewed "London" living costs isn't it?

You're both young, you have young children, have fantastic careers in fields you've worked hard for and I understand the sting from the bonus tax.

I'm a bit older, have done the 2 working parents full time hours with all responsibilities falling on me, and my advice would be to step down for a few years. Use the time off to keep up with research and development in your field, perhaps even keep in touch as a locum or consultant. Just for a few years with your (very young) children, you won't realistically lose out by having a career break.

It's not just the hours at work that will fall to you OP, it will be EVERYTHING, and you'll burn out very quickly. And don't forget the hours you will put in at home answering emails etc. When will you actually see your children and be able to spend time with them free from work/home responsibilities? That's a big burden to bear.

I do feel hard done by fakenews but my teenage son is severely disabled - we get specialist respite care two nights a month and the council pay £38 per hour for that care. If I wanted to go to work we would have to find £38 per hour for our sons care during the hours I am working and I would have to use my annual leave to cover all of his hospital stays (alternating with DH).
It's shit but I have no choice. I used to earn quite decent money too.

I agree that does sound really low six. Out of interest do you know what the international comparisons are? I wonder if the scandinavian countries fair any better for this kind of thing.

I don't know how other countries compare. I believe that The Republic of Ireland pay carers around £200 per week. Obviously Some carers live in the south east and they only get £63 per week too snd will have hefty overheads. It's part of the reason why people are quite annoyed by your attitude. You have the choice of whether to work or not. You will have money left over of you choose to go to work. I don't think many people will argue that you should be seeing more than 9% of a bonus but some of your deductions are not taxes - they are things that will directly benefit you and your family either now or in the future or are luxuries that you have added into your calculations. If you are not a sahm you will have lower has and electric bills and lowere activities costs for the children so perhaps they need adding back onto your £200?

It's pretty difficult on an £18k income too

Yeah thats the thing, I do have a choice and i'm glad and fortunate to have this. If it was a toss up between making less than the cost of a sandwich each day but working full time or staying home with the DC then i would definitely stay at home with the DC.

Even at the calculations i've done it was still a toss up but it's about investment. Really, I think my plan if we were to stay in the UK, is to establish myself in the new role and then cut down my hours to 4 days which is definitely doable - the cost of childcare and the reduction in my tax rate would cancel out to mean my takehome after childcare is the same. A lot of people do this as thats the way the system incentivises (particularly mothers - i don't know any dads that do this) to behave.

My main problem is what I perceive as unfair taxation that all kicks in at the same threshold. I believe there have been people who have argued that i shouldn't complain about only seeing the 9% because £1800 is more bonus than they got... Quite a few people in fact.

These threads never go well. However the bottom line is if we stop making those of us who work full time and earn a lot and are net givers into the system believing in the system and contributing then there are problems. So it is in the interset of the less well off that those who earn a fair bit also feel the system is treating them fairly. Years ago you used to get in the `1950s I think it was a child tax allowance (before child benefit) which recognised that everyone rich and poor had extra expenses when they had a child. That we are all in it together welfare state is disappearing. Universal benefits like child benefit have gone and that is to the detriment of everyone.

yes six it's a horrible situation you're in, not being able to work as you face £38 per hour childcare bills and being given £63 per week is a shit situation that must grind you down.

This thread seems to be descending into a version of the Four Yorkshiremen.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=Xe1a1wHxTyo

There will always be a sting moving from the top end of one tax bracket to the bottom end of the next. I see that there are two options: keep working hard to get back to the top in your new bracket, or stop progressing and remain happy at the top of the next one.

You're not the first person I've heard get annoyed about it, a lot of my friends had to make the decision regarding overtime at the £40k mark. I think they ultimately decided that they had to bite the bullet if they wanted their career to progress.

I think the Bahamas have 0 income tax. That's where I'd be going!! 🏝

There should always be an incentive to work and 9% isn't an incentive. It doesn't matter if your base is £100/ week or £1000/ week. 9% take home is demotivational.

It's a loss to society for it not to be worth peoples while working.

There will be workarounds for sitting just over the £100k threshold and there will be a point at which you can blast through the bracket and the 9% pain and are actually seeing a better return.

Regarding longer term, your enthusiasm for your own career, managing the DC and domestic stuff I really think it might be worth writing down all the tasks to be done and considering a bit of outsourcing. Cleaning, washing, ironing, food deliveries etc.

It's not just about assessing everything in life in short term monetary effects.

The DC wont be little for very long and if you can afford, between you and your DH, for your hour between collection and bed to be snuggles, stories and a lovely snack together rather than stress, trying to juggle all the domestic tasks like being snowed under with washing and ironing then family life will be just that bit nicer all round and hopefully there will be less room for resentments to build with your DH's jobs lack of flexibility and the pressures of your own. This high pressure time really doesn't last that long - except it feels like it when you're in the thick of it!

Enormous I agree with your comments about high earners needing to believe in the system. It's one of the reasons why I disagree strongly with raising the personal allowance as it means that low earners are labelled as unworthy. I know it sounds extreme but I honestly wouldn't be surprised if the likes of UKIP eventually propose that voting rights are no longer automatic, that only income tax payers should be allowed to vote. I don't think it would get through parliament but I think that the sentiment definitely lurks in the background of current UK society.