to think the marriage allowance is an unfair tax allowance

[chomalungma]

It's going to be a thing over the next few weeks.

The Conservatives introduced it - in the coalition. I think the Lib Dems accepted it so they could get free school meals as well.

Great if you're married. You don't need to have kids to get it. Just be married.

If you aren't married, then you don't get it. Even though the money could be handy if you are in a couple.

Or if it didn't exist, then the money could be used to go towards education, Sure Start, the NHS, relationship counselling...all things that help ALL families instead of married couples.

Angela Rayner struggled to answer that question on Marr this morning whereas Corbyn gave a clear answer - stating it was discriminatory.

I think it will come up in the election campaign.

Is it unfair?

I suspect that many people aren't even aware of that benefit until it comes to the point when their partner dies - and then they realise that it exists and they aren't eligible to claim it.*

Ignorance isn't an excuse.

When you are setting your life up, when you are saying 'marriage is only a bit of paper', when you have kids that you make decisions for it's your responsibility to ensure you have made an informed decisions.

Some people dont realise they need contents insurance when living in a rented house. Its the governments job to step in and replace your TV because someone broke in. It's your responsibility to cover yourself and find out what you need and what it means to nor cover yourself.

Ignorance isn't an excuse

You don't know what you don't know.

Especially if you aren't told.

How many couples (married and unmarried) do you think know about the bereavement allowance?

I work in an office that helps people with benefits - and I only learnt about this recently.

@zsazsajuju
It’s for married people where one doesn’t work.
WRONG! I work but I don't earn enough to pay tax so my husband claims MY allowance.

And utterly pathetic that a load of women on a women’s website jump up to defend it because they are oh so proud of being married.
Yes I am proud of being married, I love that we're a team, that all the family have the same surname and that myself, my husband AND my children get certain legal protections by us being married. It doesn't make me pathetic, or dependent on a man, we have our own bank accounts, always have done. If you don't want to get married, that's your choice but don't think you're in some way more feministically superior than me, because you're not

We get it because the cost of child care is more then I would make in a month so I have no choice but to be a SAHM. It works out to little over £20 a month. It’s not a lot and to be honest we didn’t even know about it till a few months ago. Given that I have absolutely no money and need to rely on my husband for household funds and money to buy anything. It was bought in to help families like mine. The problem is that the non earner is still left with nothing. Scrap it and find a way to give non earners in a marriage a way to have some funds of their own.

Max you can get, highest rate, for bereavement allowance is under 10k. Not to be sniffed at but not worth me personally getting married for. Still morally wrong to deny this to the children of parents who meet the NI contribution criteria though. There is a case still moving through the courts. Point is, benefits based on relationship status, whatever they are, rather than a specific need (ie child losing a parent so child may have additional needs) are outmoded and difficult for me to see as anything other than skewed moral judgement.

Oh and my experience on here is that married people are just as ignorant as unmarried cohabitees - there is a general assumption that a marriage certificate is a general cover all, no further action required. The number of people who cite benefits that haven’t been available for years as a reason to get married is untrue. Ignorance cuts both ways.

I think it's ridiculous. If people A&B do the same job for the same salary, they should pay the same amount of tax. Not B&C pay less tax than A between the pair of them because C doesn't work/ works part time.

If we had a benefits system that genuinely could be relied on for low incomes, I'd be in favour of double tax and ni for couples where only one chooses to work.

You don't know what you dont know

If you are setting your and your children's life up, you need to find out the pros and cons of the life you are choosing. It's called being an adult. You wouldnt take a job without looking at the pros and cons. Especially when alot insist they are anti marriage for lots of reasons. How can you be anti something without looking into it properly.

Oh and my experience on here is that married people are just as ignorant as unmarried cohabitees

I agree. There seems to be quite a few people who seem to forget that marriage is a legal contract not a romantic notion. Everyone should look at pros and cons of the lifestyle they choose. Wether that's sahp, wohp, married, unmarried etc.

It's called being an adult

So you know EVERYTHING about the advantages of being married or not married?

Or are there things you don't know....

No one knows what they don't know. It's incredibly patronising to say that people should find out everything because it's impossible to know if you have find out everything, isn't it.

You can do your research. But do you honestly think you know every difference it makes between being married and being not married?

Do you know all your rights that being married gives you - and that if you tell someone that you are not married, then you are denied those rights?

So you know EVERYTHING about the advantages of being married or not married?

I sought legal advice when I moved in with the man who I was marrying. I also sought legal advice when dp moved in, knowing I wouldn't marry him.

I also used google. A quick read of mn, will show you that some people dont even look at the basics. Regular threads from women being kicked of if their home. Some dont know. Some do full well know, but assumed they would get married eventually or believed he wouldnt do that.

I have seen threads where women have made decisions based on common law. In england. It doesnt exist.

Again, women getting into second marriages, when they have assets, then regret the marriage seem horrified their husband is now entitled to a large chunk of assets. Or women appalled their parents provided a large deposit for a house and put it in her and her husbands name and he has fucked off and taking half.

If you parents are giving you a large deposit. You look at the consquences.

People need to start using resources available to them, to ensure their own position and know their rights should something bad happen. Whatever their position. As adults we are responsible for ourselves and any dependents we have.

I sought legal advice when I moved in with the man who I was marrying. I also sought legal advice when dp moved in, knowing I wouldn't marry him

I'll ask again. Do you know everything about your rights if you are married vs if you are not married?

What rights don't you know about?

(and that's a hard question to answer)

I'll ask again. Do you know everything about your rights if you are married vs if you are not married?

I am confident that I am, and was, fully versed in the aspects of marriage (and the choice to be nor married) that apply to my situation.

Just like, when I get a job contract, I make sure I am fully versed in it. Or when I bought my house, I knew the ins and outs of the contract, the searches, TPOs in my garden, boundaries etc.

Just like, when I get a job contract, I make sure I am fully versed in it. Or when I bought my house, I knew the ins and outs of the contract, the searches, TPOs in my garden, boundaries etc

I bet you're a joy to live with

I bet you also read all the terms and conditions when downloading software on your computer or when you sign up to a website

Yes of course, I must be no fun because I take responsibility for knowing my work contract and house purchase contracts.

Have you ever thought that trying to put people down for understanding their position, doesnt make you argument any more valid?

It's also that attitude that makes people, feel embarrassed or like they are making a fuss, for wanting to know their rights and details about things that impact them.

Well done you! Thata great for womens rights

Have you ever thought that trying to put people down for understanding their position, doesnt make you argument any more valid

Don't get me wrong - I am very informed of my rights as well.

However, I am more than aware that there are things that I don't know about, even thought I have done extensive research,

I am not arrogant enough to assume that I know everything, and I know that there are things about my rights or lack of rights that I don't know.

I know that there are things I don't know. Despite doing research.

Also, things change. Rights and entitlements change.

You do lots if research, but also take the piss our of people who read their house purchase contracts and job contracts?

Yeah, ok

You do lots if research, but also take the piss our of people who read their house purchase contracts and job contract

Have you read all your employment rights?
The leglisation behind them
The amendments
The Explanatory Notes

If not, then you aren't fully informed and there are things you don't know.

Now go and be an adult and do your research.

You are the condescending one who told people that they weren't being an adult if they didn't do their research.

You are the one who took the piss out of people who aren't aware of all their rights because unlike you, they haven't done all their research prior to getting married / not getting married / having kids / getting a job / buying a house

Do you think you've done all your research into all this?
Do you think you know everything?

If not, then you are the same as everyone else. Maybe better informed but not perfectly informed.

Do you know your rights if the police stop you?

If not, then don't come crying to Mumsnet if they do something you don't like.

You should have done your research like an adult. Ignorance is no excuse.

In any event, you need to take time off when you have a baby and it’s desirable to do so. Why is it desire able not to work because you are married?

Of course you need time off for giving birth, but legally, you can return to work after two weeks if you want to, and let the father take the rest of your maternity leave (or hire a nanny if you can afford that and you both want to be at work) . Most women don't want to do that - because they'd rather be at home with their baby. They feel it works best for their family.

How is that different from someone (either male or female) choosing not to work, or to work fewer hours, simply because they don't want to - they feel it works best for their family?

It's almost exclusively women who take their full maternity entitlement, which is not the case for simply being the lower/non-earner, yet you are not calling that out as sexist. Why is one 'desirable' when the other is 'sexist'? There's no logic to your argument at all.

Have you read all your employment rights?
The leglisation behind them
The amendments. The Explanatory Notes

I worked as a HT BP until 3 months ago.

You are the one who took the piss out of people who aren't aware of all their rights because unlike you, they haven't done all their research prior to getting married / not getting married / having kids / getting a job / buying a house

Nope. Pointing out people have responsibilities to themseleves, is taking the piss. I didnt joke at their expense.

You took the piss.

Researching and reading your job contract is a basic. Ensuring you read the legal paperwork before you buy a house is basic.

Looking at your relationshop and plan, what happens if you live into someone elses home and you split. That basic. It's like saying you didnt realise, when you are renting, the landlord still owns the property and can ask you to leave.

When entering into a legal agreement, ie marriage, looking at the potential impacts, is basic.

When giving up your job, looking at the pros and cons is basic.

It's a shame you dont believe that people should be responsible for themseleves. That they shouldnt plan for what happens when things go wrong.

Do you know your rights if the police stop you?

Actually, yes I do.

If not, then don't come crying to Mumsnet if they do something you don't like. You should have done your research

Exactly who are you, to say what u can or cant post.

And you believe police only do things wrong, to people who dont know their rights? That police can act how they want and you cant complain if you dont know your rights?

So in cases where woman are assaulted by police men, they cant complain, because they didnt know some rights? Are you working on the assumptions that a police officers always act within the law?

Yeah, ok.

Researching and reading your job contract is a basic. Ensuring you read the legal paperwork before you buy a house is basic.

I agree with this. It's something any sensible person would do.

As regards getting married, I think there is a similarly basic level of research you might be expected to do, and 'how will this affect my finances' is something you would look at.

As with anything, there will be layers of more complex knowledge which people wouldn't research unless they had a specific need to. But in the age of the internet, any well-known financial advice website, e.g. Money Saving Expert, would tell you about the married tax allowance.

People quickly turn to the internet to research trivial things - what holiday to go on, what products to buy, when the next season of their favourite TV show will start - so I do agree that that it's reasonable to expect a basic level of research on something as important as marriage.

@chomalungma you are being ridiculous now. Making fun of someone who cares to research stuff. What is this? 5th grade? We should stop glorifying stupid and start telling people it's ok to know things and want to know things.
@MsRomanoff is right.

People spend more time reading food labels than finding out what life path will work for them and what are their rights and responsibilities...

not sure why this is even a discussion or even discriminatory - people our society is made of many, many different types and parts. Politicians make policies for specific parts for whatever reason. For example, you can't moan if politicians help out pensioners and scream it's discriminatory. This allowance was only put in place to help out (i.e. get votes from) the middle income and is worth a relatively small amount. I have been in all three situations - low income, middle income and high income. All it does is shift a tiny part of tax free allowance to a partner - still worth having. I am pretty sure the take up of marriage allowance is/has been low (not exactly advertised). Now if the tax rates were cut that would really something to talk about