To ask why child benefits is means tested in England?Do you agree?

[ddshocker]

Just that really? Why is it means tested in the U.K.? Do you think this is fair considering the financial abuse some women can be suffer even if their dh is a high learner!
In Ireland it's not means tested at all and it is double the U.K. amount...why is the U.K. so adamant in making it unfair!?

I do think it is unfair. High earners pay the majority of taxes and so fund the majority of CB. I agree with progressive taxation, but I think they should be entitled to the same as everyone else once they have paid their higher taxes.

@Aroundtheworldin80moves

The current system is unfair. We have a total household income currently of £57,000 and don't get the full amount, but households can earn £99,999 and get the full amount.

Genuinely high earners don't need it. But its middle income families missing out.

Yes similar situation, the way it is worked out like that is really unfair!

YABU.

Means testing is right, the current version is not - it should be household income (like all other benefits) rather than individual income. It's nuts that two people on £49,000 a year can claim the full amount but a single income family on £51,000 starts to lose child benefit.

Frankly, given Ireland's attitude towards women being able to choose if they continue a pregnancy it's absolutely right that the government should provide financial support above and beyond what the UK offers.

@ddshocker

High earners may not need it I agree but it's just a bit of tax back essentially isn't it...

The government needs taxes to pay for things like school and hospitals. You can argue about the way it’s been done and the thresholds however I don’t think high earners should get CB - it’s not needed

It should be means-based, but the threshold needs to rise with inflation and it should be on household income.

@Simonjt

I thought it was just means tested in England?

We can’t claim it, we don’t need it, if someone on a household income of £50k struggles to lose such a small amount of money they will be mismanaging their finances.

Although I am curious as to how much money the new system actually saves the government.

Or perhaps live in the South East and have twins.

You can claims so CB if you earn between 50 and 60k and if you are a SAHM but your partner earns over 60K you can claim the NI part of CB.

I do think it should be means tested but I think it should be on household income and not individual as is the current way. We don't claim it as DH earns over £50k but I only earn £16k, wheras some families could have a combined income greater than ours but still be able to claim it.

It'd be interesting to hear what parents think about the idea of an increase in the tax code for Parents for each child as an alternative.

So you'd pay less tax rather than getting a benefit.

Obvious flaw is parents would only see a benefit if they have an income.

I agree that it should be based on household income. I also think the money saved could be far better spent on childcare loans - we do student loans so why can't we offer those to help people (predominantly women) maintain their careers with young kids?

It undermines the universal nature of the state, and removes more people from thinking thatnthey are part of the state.

But the combined salary means both parents are working, so more likely to need childcare etc. the other household could earn more if the other person went out to work too. You don’t benefit from being able to afford to only have one parent out at work

So…single parent families? Is it fair that I earn £60k as a single parent and can’t claim it but a household with two parents on £30k each can? Don’t I need childcare too?

You really need a bit of a rethink.

YABU

Why does the family bringing in £400k a year need an extra £20 a week?

Every other benefits is means tested as a couple / household unfair that CB is done differently.

@HopefulProcrastinator you can now avail of other options in pregnancy in Ireland now...it has changed.

@Dishwashersaurous

It undermines the universal nature of the state, and removes more people from thinking thatnthey are part of the state.

I’m quite happy to pay for the state. I use education and healthcare for example. I know I’m part of the state.

But I don’t need the state to give me £33 a week for my children.

Changing the methods of means testing is fair. But again I think it one person is staying at home and not working, then you shouldn’t be entitled to it. A household with 2 parents working and earning 60k, should be entitled.

The problem arises though, that it becomes a very convoluted process to means test once you start introducing more aspects. So then it’s more expensive to implement too.

And I agree that there should be consistency in the system. Either household assessment or individual assessment for everything not a mix and match approach

@ddshocker yes it is means tested in all of the UK however your title says England.
I believe that it should be means tested, though I think that instead of going on a single wage ie if I parent earns over £50000 it should be on the entire family income as currently you can have 1 parent working for £50000+ and supporting the whole family on that wage who gets reduced or no child benefit yet you can have both parents earning £49999.99 so a combined income of £99999.98 and they will still be entitled to full child benefit which is both morally wrong and clearly unfair

The other one that really frustrates me is the cap for the tax free childcare. For a person earning £99k going to £101k you lose money as you lose £2k a year per child and that £2k extra is taxed at 40% already. Means there's no point earning £100-£110 k as we'd actually be worse off. I know it's not as much of a problem as the similar effect seen at the lower end of the scale but for me it just shows the slightly bonkers tax system we have to endure in this country. Why does it have to be so complicated?!

Of course it should be means tested. I don’t understand the argument that it’s for the child, not the parents. By that logic a child’s entire childhood should be funded by the state, not the parents. Which is obviously ludicrous.

As a sole parent who earns over the threshold I think it is unfair.
A couple who both earn a little less than me can claim.
Another punishment for being a single parent through no fault of my own...
Also no CMS as ex went self-employed to avoid it

By the way, for households where one parent is a low earner and the other a high earner, it is best that the low earner does claim it. Claiming it for a child under 12 gives you NI credits for that year - valuable if your earnings might not give full NI credits. The higher earner has to do a tax return and what you are not entitled to is clawed back that way.
Note also that it's a sliding scale, so earning over £50k means only that you don't get all of it.
Lastly, where there is financial abuse, it can move some money to the lower earner's control.

I don’t object to the means testing but the way it is worked out is unfair as previous posters have said. I’m a low earner but my OH isn’t so we stopped claiming. If it was based on household income we’d probably still get it.

It was much simpler when it was a universal entitlement

I think that instead of the (frankly shitty and unfair) way they chose to limit it by tax bracket rather than household income, they should have kept it universal, but allow value to dwindle. And put resource into the other family benefits

That wouid also have the benefit of reducing the likelihood of gaps in NI record.

And the soft benefit of people feeling that every now and again they get something back.

I also think that independent taxation of adults was a worthwhile and hard-win thing. and was disappointed to see the first steps to re-merge

And please keep claiming it if one partner is not working because of the national insurance credit for your state pension.