"Benefit scrounger" or not?

[SympatheticSwan]

Asking out of interest, to settle an offline debate. Would you consider the below to be ethical or not (i.e. along the lines of "benefit scrounging").
Someone who used to earn in excess of £100K and had now dramatically cut back working hours, resulting in the total salary of around £60K. Claims 30 free childcare hours and tax free childcare allowance (not available on incomes over £100K), as well as the single person council tax discount.

OP’s colleague is still not a “benefits scrounger”. But this thread has long got derailed. As it was meant to be.

Sounds like this person is one step ahead of the game and that the accuser is jealous.

this person has already paid into the tax system and is continuing to do so

Literally thousands of people who claim Tax Credit and Universal Credit - and who would be deemed 'scroungers' by many people on here - are paying into the tax system. What's the difference?

What a pointless thread this is.

OP - I imagine that you are in a similar position given that you job share, hence feeling a bit sore with the benefit scrounger comment? TBH I am afraid that I take my hat off to the employee who went part time. A single parent doing a £100k job would probably need a live in nanny. By the time they'd paid tax, including super tax, then paid the nanny and paid the nanny's tax (as nannies are paid net with the employer picking up the tax bill) they can't have been much worse off at all by cutting to 3 days and getting the childcare and losing the supertax.

I was in a similar position some years ago (before supertax came in) and worked out that I was taking home about £25,000 after paying my tax and my nanny's salary and tax.

More importantly your colleague is getting to spend time with their little one whilst still maintaining their skills in the work place which is a rare gift - good luck to them!

What is so utterly complicated about this?

I'm confused too @Thoughtlessinengland as it's surely obvious. It's to encourage women to stay in the workplace because overall the government gains in those taxes.

For example kelly earns 50k, she is debating about not going back to work until her dc are ready for school but thinks it's 2 yrs till I get 30 hours & I can get tax free childcare. So Kelly stays in work & pays 25k in taxes/NI. That's 25k the gov wouldn't collect if she gave up work. The 30 hours costs the gov a maximum of 7.2k per child a yr so it makes sense to encourage these earners to stay in the work place.

They are not claiming any benefits and paying tax on a decent salary. It’s what should be the norm rather than taking from the system.

Calling people benefit scrounges is just rude. In this day of automation, and reduced hours with a high unemployment rate, you are putting a label on people they don’t deserve.

Literally thousands of people who claim Tax Credit and Universal Credit - and who would be deemed 'scroungers' by many people on here - are paying into the tax system. What's the difference?

The difference is that someone who pays higher rate tax is likely to be a net contributor to state funds. Most of the people you are talking about don't. Someone who (making up some numbers) pays 3K in tax and NI and gets 12K in benefits is not really in the same category as someone who pays 12K in tax and NI and gets 3K in benefits. One is giving 9K and the other is getting 9K.

@summersmahoosive Anyone getting child allowance, help with childcare costs or reduction in council tax is benefitting from the contributions of others to cover their costs.

Would you like me to apologise for existing ?

I'm mystified as to why you consider someone claiming the single person discount on council tax,a scrounger! It's available to everyone who lives alone, regardless of your income.

The difference is that someone who pays higher rate tax is likely to be a net contributor to state funds. Most of the people you are talking about don't. Someone who (making up some numbers) pays 3K in tax and NI and gets 12K in benefits is not really in the same category as someone who pays 12K in tax and NI and gets 3K in benefits. One is giving 9K and the other is getting 9K

So it’s OK to call working people scrounges if their salaries are low enough to be considered to need topping up?

Totally not scrounging. They're entitled to it so that's fine.
It would be scrounging if they were self employed and fiddling the books to looks like they earn less so that could claim the free childcare hours, single person council tax benefit and pay less income tax and national insurance.

You don’t think those mega rich people who get away with paying minimum tax, or big businesses who pay no tax are not scroungers. If big business paid their share, countries would be financially able to spend that money on its citizens. Better health care, schools, housing.

Or those who pay their workers the least they can so those workers need a top up from the government to exist.

They are the scrounges in society, get your priorities right.