feeling that tax credits are totally biased towards working mums?

[Dragonhart]

I am a SAHM and I get the min working tax credit as my DH earns just over the min for getting more help.

I was talking to my friend yesterday who works 4 days a week as a teacher (their combined salaries are just below the top of the band of getting any money) and I was saying what I got now we have two children. I get just over £40 plus about £40 baby element. When dd is 1 and I have two under 3 I will get £40.

She told me that she gets about £160 a months towards childcare in vouchers on her and her husbands paypacket (not sure if this is classed as tax credit?) and £75 permonth for her only ds in tax credits.

I am not making a coment about whether or not people choose to work as I stongly believe that everyone should have a choice to do what is right for them.

I just think that I should be supported in the same way as working mums. Surely I am my childrens 'childcare'?

NKF - but you're using the mechanism chosen by the UK government to subsidise childcare as the justification for the ideology...

I'd say that was silly because teaching is a profession and requires skills and aptitude and you're not necessarily suitable to do it just becasue you're a parent.

NKF - you can use that argument for childcare versus SAHP (Xenia does)

Actually, my whole point is that in the UK the government has selected the tax credit mechanism to subsidise dual-income families in order to pull the wool over the eyes of single-income families. There are always a million ways of giving people subsidies such that others don't see them in order to make them politically acceptable.

If I get a tax break for my childcare whilt I work, I am paying that money because the government is giveing me back a bit of what they got from me. But, if a SAHP gets a subsidy then he/she is getting money that someone else had to pay on his behalf. And thet someone else quite likelyhas to work even more hours in order to pay that to the SAHP. Therefore, the SAHP is clearly asking to get paid to stay home at the expense of the working parent. Not exactly fair.

Aloha

Say my partner earns £30,000 and I don't work. We receive no help with childcare costs and I look after children 24/7.

Say my partner continues to earn £30,000 and I also earn £30,000. So we have joint income of £60,000 but now have to pay someone else to cover the cost of childcare.

I have no problem with the government helping us in scenario 2, but if they do, they should also help us in scenario 1, since my life would be pretty tough.

eleusis - no, you don't have to make that assumption. You could make the childcare for the SAHP tax deductible from the working parent's income.

But, Anna, when you say "the government should pay me" what are really saying is "working parents should pay me" because of course the government gets their money from working parents. And when you need more money what is the gavernment going to do, raise MY taxes. Maybe if you were working too they wouldn't need to raise my taxes. The fewer peple who contribute to the pot, the higher the percentage each of the contributors has to contribute.

right girls put the handbags down!

At the end of the day, TAX credits are made up from the TAXES that working parents etc pay.

Childcare is a nescessary evil for most- up until the beginning of this year i relied on tax credits to live. My dh is disabled and i worked a full time midwifery job, so the kids were needing childcare. Without the tax credits it would have been impossible and we would have ended up on state benefits.

So the debate really is that sahm have made the choice to stay at home and look after their children whereas wohm's have decided to go back to work to try to improve the financial state of the houshold.

BOTH are equal, however there has to be some incentive for working my arse off and not spending leisurly days with my kids!- i work my arse off to pay my way, i don't get tax credits any more, but i am incredibly grateful to have been able to claim them when i worked for the NHS!

eleusis - I like talking to you, but PLEASE don't misquote me...

Well, maybe the issue is that taxation for women is too high and they deserve to pay lower tax rates overall than men to encourage them back into the workforce? Rather than receiving difficult-to-understand-and-administer subsidies?

no no no no no no... women and men should get the same pay and the same benefots. How else can we ever hope to achieve equality.

Sorry if I misquoted.

But Eleusis, a tax credit to women for childcare is actually no different to women paying a lower overall tax rate to men - it's just engineered in such a way as to hide it (and you aren't free to spend the money any old way - the government dictates how you spend YOUR OWN MONEY)... It's gross discrimination against men and against non-working women.

Gordon Brown... and I'm sure you're not a fan...

The government isn't "helping" working mothers because life is tough. It's refunding some of the tax presumably on the grounds that to get some tax out of the woman is better than getting none.

anna there are two tax credits though child tax credit which sahm's will be entitled to in the same way that wohm's are, and in fact a single income family will get more than a dual income family as the payments go down the more you earn.

then there's WORKING tax credit which is for people who work!!! clue's in the name really.

Actually, thinking about it, sahm's get a better deal because you do get paid by the inland revenue for staying at home, you get tax credits, child benefit and home responsibilities protection- so whilst i'm paying into the state pension pot, you are going to get the entitlement for free!

NKF - your point entirely supports mine that in fact the government is giving women a lower effective tax rate than men, in order to incite them back into the workforce...

nearlythere - I'm sure you are right, but I am trying to have a discussion about principles rather than mechanics - or perhaps trying to distinguish the two. People are quite confused (just as Gordon Brown wanted them to be)

They've been in the workplace for years and year. The tax credits are relatively new.

Sure, to encourage more women into the workplace. That's government policy. But what do you all think about it? Is it really right to give women a lower effective tax rate than men? Is that we want going forward?

Anna, it's not about tax breaks for working mums. It's about tax breaks for working parents, whether they are mums or dads. If you aren't going to work, you don't need childcare in order to give the government some money. And if you can't afford childcare while you play tennis, then you need more money. And when people need money, they seek employment. Pay someone to not seek employment? No!

Parents have a slightly lower tax rate than non parents. You want to hear a childfree by choice person get on that subject.

Women don't have a lower tax rate. My husband and I pay the same taxe rate.

umm- scuse me but its not just for women!! if you are a sahm and your dh gets paid tax credits (which most will!) then he is essentially getting a lower tax rate

eleusis - are you making the distinction between "tax rate" and "effective tax rate"?

I have no idea.