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?

A lot of the tax system is profoundly immoral. It's common sense to plan around it, surely?

We were aware of the cliff edge for tax free allowance but until he got taken into a meeting room by his boss a couple of weeks ago he didn't know what his bonus would be, it got paid the following week.

I only read about the cut off for the childcare in the news before starting the thread. Then I sat down and did the maths... Cherry on top basically. DH salary has risen fairly fast and it's this is the first time he's been over 100k. It's not like we have the tshirt.

I'm not defending the system. I'll be honest I haven't campaigned in any meaningful way on the tax system, it's not something I write letters to my MP about. But it is still part of the world we live in. You can't just say 'oh it's immoral so I refuse to consider it'

DH earns over £100k so every year from when he was approaching the threshold we've monitored his earnings. One year he delayed his bonus for example.

Tax is part of life. Everyone moans about it. It's quite childish to say 'oh it's unfair, I should be able to earn what I like and have children whenever I like and not have to plan it'. Realistically, if you don't budget and don't forward plan you are going to face greater peaks and troughs in your income/disposable cash than people who do.

No it's not common sense to be compliant with immorality. And childcare costs are not something that families should have to save for in advance: they are a basic outgoing and should be met from current income.

The UK is a lawless society with zero family policies. Immoral.

The only realistic alternative choice the OP has is to be a SAHM. The tax regime is certainly encouraging her in that direction.

Her salary covers her daycare, travel costs and allows her to pay into a pension/progress with career if she stays in the UK. She should consider herself lucky to have a realistic alternative of working with 2 young children. I have lived in countries where a salary significantly higher than hers simply wouldn't have covered the daycare at all. Having children requires saving in advance or accepting that one income will be eaten up by daycare for some years.

And the only possible houses are a million pounds? Move 1 hour around or out of London, you can find areas with outstanding schools, and family houses at half that price. I genuinely don't get why people should feel sympathetic for a family on >150k per year.

What is childish is not to analyse the system and point out its moral and philosophical failings. Being a compliant sheep who diligently plans around its most outrageous failings is nothing to be proud of

The OP and her DH aren't getting help from the government - they will be net contributors to the system. Very different to low earners.

But he must have been aware, going into the meeting room, of what his base salary is. So that plus bonus equals over the threshold. Fairly basic arithmetic. He missed a chance to ask if they provide tax planning advice as a benefit to earners over that threshold (many many employers do, and where they don't, most bosses will respond with a knee jerk 'increase your pension contribution').

DH earns money as a sole trader (own name no business), as a shareholder, and as an employee of two different businesses. His tax affairs are a fucking nightmare. The tax system just cannot cope with multiple income sources. I volunteered with pensioners prior to becoming a parent and it's a complaint I heard many many times there - but these are pensioners scraping by on minimal income being penalised for having both a private and state pension, for example, and ending up having both overtaxed and thus no money for things like food. So I am aware that the issues DH has with his tax affairs are very much at the privileged end of the scale. Much like OP.

The fact that the OP is at the more privileged end of the spectrum is not a get-out clause for the immoral system. However, the OP should probably feel grateful that she had her D.C. Before Brexit as taxation and the whole economic equilibrium of the U.K. Is jusy about to get an awful lot worse.

Net financial contributors - people in society contribute in many ways, not just in pure monetary terms.

Bobo is 'compliant sheep' meant to be an insult? Not sure how when the alternative is 'law breaker'. Tax isn't a decision each individual makes according to their own morality. Thankfully.

Well then you and the OP had better get letter writing about the immorality of this particular aspect of the immoral system. It's sensible to plan, immorality notwithstanding. And yes, it may very well get a lot worse. But I'm sure it's poor people who will suffer most, as ever.

The OP and her DH aren't getting help from the government

Don't they use the NHS then? See a GP?

The OP and her DH aren't getting help from the government - they will be net contributors to the system. Very different to low earners.

Should that buy them a higher tier of public services, then? An extra vote or two?

I'd advise caution against feeling too smug about being a net contributor. My father was a high earner all his working life and barely troubled the NHS, having private health insurance as part of his benefits package. Then he had a massive medical crisis and received tens of thousands of pounds worth of life-saving care from the NHS within a few days. We're all only a heartbeat away from being knocked over by a bus and ending up in ICU or delivering a prem baby who needs expensive neonatal care.

Working long hours with young children and being young can be very very costly and vulnerable. The need of staying competitive in the field so building up experience, net work, saving, to be more secured with the job(the higher you earn the more risk you are on the next cut round) adds with the childcare and housing cost overwhelmed us too. Its very hard for other people to understand why the disposable income is so little compare to many other people who earn less. To spare any moment simple thing like making a packed lunch could be "impossible". I once told my friend that I could never have breakfast at home and never walk, I eat my lunch at my desk, hardly take any break, I do online shopping during my commute. The cost of saving every precious of free time for the kids is much more expensive too, I have to buy pre-washed/chopped if I'd like to cook fresh meal for the kids, cleaners, laundry etc.

It will get better and I am glad that I didnt leave my job. (For us we both earn similar and I am slightly higher than him). We bought a small house 9 yrs ago and moved to bigger one 3 yrs latter. You only started the journey, it takes time with the savings. It took us 2 yrs to save up for the first house deposit however we didnt have any kid and we lived in a flat shared to save at first.

Thank you Flouncing, I think that point was worth making. As we seem to be drifting back into "high earning people are the only people who have value" territory.

Actually I tell a lie. I don't letter-write or campaign (for pensioners with multiple income sources not to be taxed to the point of being below the poverty line) anymore. But I do give money to an organisation that does. So I do campaign about the tax system I suppose, in a very limited way. Not on my own (or DH's) privileged behalf though. Because I'd feel like a right entitled prick to do that tbh.

Piglet the op will cover their NHS and GP costs as net contributors. Although will probably not use them and go private.

We have full dental/health/travel private cover as a benefit, but the way private works in the uk you still need to see a gp for most things. DH sees a private gp near his office (it has a direct contract with his employer) but the DC and i see our local NHS one. If we need anything we get a referral to private. So yes, it's incorrect to say we don't use any services because we do, although we are lower users I guess.

I've had the occasional antibiotics prescription for DC1, and DC2 had a cream once. They also get weighed at an NHS health visitor clinic thing and have their standard vaccinations on NHS. Both DC were also born in an NHS birth centre which is probably our biggest cost to the NHS.

wish none of us know whats round the corner. I was in a very privalleged position and higher rate tax payer, then my DS was born severeley disabled. I had private medical etc through work. At first it was just no suckle reflex so difficult to feed. XH was going to stay home, he couldn't cope, childcare just isn't an option for many disabled children. Without diagnosis we were entitled to no benefits, we decided XH would work and conceived DS2. We downsized to ease are finances and for XH to access work, DS2 was born XH decided to up and leave. I've always been financially pretty savvy and I had equivalent about a years salary in savings plus bits in shares etc. We ran through this about when XH left and he took the last dregs of it. Suddenly I was remote from family and friends with a three year old with complex needs and a one year old.

It took years to actually get a consistent diagnosis for DS1, autism is the catch all but comorbid with physical issues. Now we can get benefits but with diagnosis and stability I'm back on my feet (remarried and this DH works!). With stability I have set up a business which means we're above the threshold for carers from next year.

Life isn't a static thing and paying into the system means that safety net exists. I wouldn't wish the need to use it on anyone but will never resent paying in because there are times when it is everything.

There needs to be insentive to contribute to society across our diverse range of citizens. That incentive I feel needs to be tax/ benefit withdrawl/ net cash deductions of less than 50% for each pound earnt. The cliff edges and historical complexity in the system is bizzarre.

Piss off to the low tax country then. Don't let the door smack your hard arse on the way out.

Taxes, in case you'd forgotten, are to provide basic living for the most vulnerable.

Any decent human being never, ever complains about taxes.

Any decent human being never, ever complains about taxes.

The most ridiculous thing I've read on MN in several months.

Whining about taxes is pathetic.