.. to think it's about time we taxed *household* income

[sussexman]

Reading today about the Labour proposal to tax the top 5% more heavily in order to pay for public services. It just strikes me as very old fashioned thinking to not take account of the fact that most households have 2 earners and that it might be better to tax the household income, not the individuals.

Using Labour's top 5% - take a couple each earning £45k - they'll pay 22k this year in tax and NI. If one of them was a SAHP and the other on 90k they'd pay 30k in tax and NI. It seems to me that we could fund better services, both more fairly and without clobering everyone so hard if the household income were taxed rather than the individuals.

None of this is intended as a plea for the rich - or indeed a suggestion as to what the rate should be - just a suggestion on a fairer tax system. AIBU?

[springflowers11]

Well the Tories financial recovery plan hasn't worked too well has it. Despite all the austerity measures we have gone deeper In debt

[Valentine2]

It amazes me how there is no or very little discussion on how the taxes are spent and where is all the money going! Before Labour orvanyone goes off to increase taxes, it must be made clear where all the tax money is going and why we need more. If my GP is refusing to refer for my healthcare which is my right, I would like to know what the fuck am I paying for before I am made to pay more.

[DJBaggySmalls]

Personal income tax is the only fair tax.
Anything that makes women less independent is a bad idea for women and children.

[Emboo19]

No absolutely not. I have a right to work, a right to earn, a right to pay my own taxes, a right to financial independence and i will be absolutely fucked if I will go back to the good old days of losing that right if I chose to live with a man or get married. I don't want it for me, I don't want it for my daughter and I would bloody fight it every inch of the way.

Completely agree with Bluntness

Plus surely in the Op's scenario, the sahp could just get a job to make up the difference, no?

Comparing benefits worked out per household instead of individually is just silly! How on earth could you justify a sahp with a partner earning 90k being able to claim the same as a single parent not working. Benefits are to help those who NEED them, a family with one earning 90k do not NEED them.

[Valentine2]

I don't think austerity is truth. I think there is a need of massive investigation as to where this money is spent. I want to understand that before someone else comes along to ask more money off of me for even more crappy NHS and infrastructure or council services.

[Kursk]

We file our taxes as a married household (US) it works well for us. I don't feel inferior, I see DH and I as a team and will use what ever system benefits us as a whole.

In a perfect world income tax would be phased out. A government taxing its people is wrong, the government should be able to support its self

[CormorantDevouringTime]

The UK is pretty much alone in the developed world in not building allowances for dependents into the tax system. That's why I never had any qualms about collecting my child benefit before it was taken away from us on grounds of income. And yes, married couples could opt for independent taxation before 1988. Each year the Which? Tax Savings Guide published a graph showing whsuch couples would and wouldn't be better off opting for independent taxation.

But the people asking for independent benefit calculations are living in cloud cuckoo land. How much money would it take to pay every SAHM, up to and including Coleen Rooney and Kate Middleton as if they were a single mum with no income?

[SomethingBorrowed]

Yes cormorant which is why it should be household based.

[Cantseethewoods]

Im not opppsed to household assessment but I'm not sure I agree with paying less tax for more children ( I.e. Shares like in France). Ultimately that's a lifestyle choice.

[Goldfishjane]

Terrible idea
Harks back to days where women were not seen as individuals

Also suppose one person, or indeed both, does contracts etc

Also as a pp said, some households who could pay more would pay less

And if you are 20 and living with your parents, your earnings would be taxed as part of theirs? Crazy.

[PervyMuskrat]

Too bloody right Bluntness

[Kursk]

This thread is interesting, I had never even thought about this in a feminist way.

It has also surprised me the number of people on MN who want to pay more tax

[Kokusai]

No. Just no.

I just don't understand women who are so anti equality.

[SnapJack68]

Ah Thabk you for those of you that have replied to my post how marriage allowance works. . I think you can claim.it evev if not married? Know that sounds a bit odd but think it's the case.

I earn just over personal allowance anyway working part time but wondered if it may be something that could be claimed for maternity years .. especially the unpaid months if taking full year?

I need to look into it but it's all so confusing

And the childcare vouchers Whixh some companies keep paying for you throughout maternity without eating into your statutory maternity but others dont. I think they use to have to keep paying them but it changed recently.

But they could calculate your full pay based on the amount after salary sacrifice rather than gross.. but was still better for this way and to be paid childcare vouchers .

Am not sure how I am going to pay for my 2 year old s nursery during maternity without the help of the voucher scheme as my husband doesn't get them at his work and I don't want to pull him.out of nursery altogether as he loves it and will have to go back and don't want to unsettle him

I should maybe do my own post!

[Kursk]

Kokusai

I am not anti equality I just see DH and I as a team. If filing taxes as a married couple benefits your family why wouldn't you do it?

I honestly didn't even consider that there was a equality aspect to this.

I am sure there are pleanty of households where the woman would be the high earner in the family

[SecretNetter]

In a perfect world income tax would be phased out. A government taxing its people is wrong, the government should be able to support its self

Maybe I'm dim but how? Where would the money come from?

[CormorantDevouringTime]

You definitely can't claim the marriage tax allowance transfer unless you're married or in a civil partnership. The government has a huge incentive to make sure that SAHPs are married. If a woman has stayed at home looking after children for ten years and her boyfriend then kicks her out then her lack of assets or earning potential are the Treasury's problem. If her husband kicks her out then her financial situation is, at least in theory, his problem to solve.

Hence Phillip Hammond wants SAHPs to marry and is prepared to give small bribes to incentivise this.

[Kursk]

SecretNetter

Scrap income tax, Road tax, and VAT.

Government services such as parks, roads, etc become pay as you use. So for example toll roads, the money from the toll pays for the road.

The government sets up a central bank, re nationalized BAE, and exports fighter aircraft tank etc with all profits funding government services. Other government owned businesses do the same (North Sea oil)

Therefore the government works to fund its self through enterprise, and is literally a government working for the people.

The pay as you use fees on services mean that they are self supporting, and get pared down to those which actually get used.

[SnapJack68]

That makes sense cormorant

I only thought you might not need to be as my friend who cohabits says they thought they may still be able to get it as common law partners or something but I never heard more about it.

So is the marriage allowance a huge incentive to get married? ? As posters above say it's negligible !

[Stripyhoglets]

What grasspigeons said. 2 working parents probably have childcare costs so it wouldnt be fair to taxtjem tne same as someo e witb a SAHP

[SnapJack68]

www.gov.uk/marriage-allowance/how-it-works

[Seav]

Just realised I read the OP wrong - I think?

So are you proposing that ALL of my part-time teaching job effectively gets taxed at 45% because DH earns into the additional tax threshold? I would look at it that way anyway. I wouldn't bother teaching then - which would be a shame as I teach a shortage subject and think I do a good job. I really cannot imagine doing all those hours, in what can be a stressful job, for so little extra net pay.

Even though we have 100% shared family money I would much rather that the higher earner was taxed more than this.

Anyway, a no from me looking at it both ways!

[BenadrylCucumberpatch]

Child Maintenance is worked out on the NRP's wage.
I'll work with the usual premise that the Father is NRP.
In a joint taxed household, if the father earns Nat Minimum Wage, and his DW earns 100k a year, that means a significant portion of her earnings from her work would be automatically taken to give to her DH's XW for their child, who is, for all intents and purposes, not her responsibility to finance.

I'm sure women with no DCs would be delighted to give 20% of their income away

[CormorantDevouringTime]

The government itself has a huge incentive to push families with SAHPs into marriage but they only choose to give a small bribe.

[GloriaV]

Someone posted that this works well in Germany - but it appears more mothers stay home or do low paid work
www.german-business-etiquette.com/34-women-in-the-german-workplace.htm