Tax childless adults

[Acidburn]

Hi all

Just saw the below article on LBC news:

www.lbc.co.uk/news/childless-tax-birthrate-uk-cost-of-living-paul-morland/

AIBU to think that this insane?

As a single person, I get a poxy 25% discount on my council tax. A couple who have had three children in order to get their telegram (ha!) will be paying just 25% more than me for four extra people to use local authority services.

My taxes already pay for schools, nurseries, child benefit, paediatric care in hospitals… yet I’m apparently not supporting the next generation because I haven’t reproduced myself?

So?

You know who else will be financially better off than childless women, men, even those with children. Until you fix the gender pay gap I don't care whether I have children or not I still earn less than men.

I bet this nob from Oxford doesn't suggest taxing men more

Crikey, how hard of thinking the author must be.

How about:

• high quality subsidised childcare


• employer support for parental leave costs for small businesses


• making sure absent parents of whatever sex pay the appropriate maintenance

And selfishly, how about a tax break for adopters, since they disproportionately have to reduce paid work in order to meet additional needs of children who experienced trauma?

Not seeing the problem with that. The fact that the UK population is inverse and falling doesn’t change the fact that on a macro level, the world is more than amply populated with the human species. Immigration seems a more logical solution than strong arming people into having children they don’t want.

Perhaps with inflation increasing, savings will be worth less in real terms, so older healthy economically inactive people will come back into the workforce.

It's a disgusting proposal.

This idea is ridiculous and also, frankly, quite chilling.

The fact is that when given a choice, most women don't want more than two or three children eve if they can afford to, and there will always be some people who don't want any and some people who can't have any. We've also (thankfully) reached a point in society where having children is less of an expectation and therefore people who, had they been born in the 50's/60's, would have had children as it was just what you did, now won't have any. Yes we're going to have a demographic hump but then those people will die and it will even out. Trying to keep the birth rate above two is like trying to hold back the tide.

Of course the elephant in the room is almost inevitable ill health in old age and the fact we're not only living longer, we're also dying for much longer and dying is very expensive.

@ClaudineClare

My experience is totally anecdotal as a nurse in a deprived area but yes, many many of the younger people I see are requiring long term care for T2Diabetes (yes, I know not always lifestyle but usually is), Heart failure, which usually takes years to kill a patient and needs lots of medical intervention, caused (at least in part, a lot of the time) by obesity, alcohol, mismanaged diabetes etc… COPD caused by smoking, strokes caused by diet and inactivity.

I am not talking about conditions which are not lifestyle related but many many are and we need to do something to address this or quite frankly, we are screwed.

Why not a small tax for everyone that funds childcare and /or maternity services to make having kids more affordable for parents? My husband would like a second kid but it would financially ruin us, even though we both have full time jobs. That’s what is putting me off.

@OperaStation if your procreations end up with your level of critical thinking then they won’t be much use to the ageing population anyway…

While I appreciate and support many of the arguments against the idea of a tax on childlessness which have been put forward, what I was basically saying was that, for someone like me, it would add insult to injury!

It's a stupid idea but something will have to be done as there's enough working people in many west countries to fund the older population.

There's an awful lot of misinformation too. The western population boom has been caused by immigration & people living longer not too many children.

In the UK in the 1960s there were 5 working age people to every retired person, that will soon be 2 to 1. Over 65s now outnumber under 15s & whilst life expectancy has increased healthy life expectancy is a different matter. We are all going to have to pay a lot more tax.

As a childfree-by-choice, higher-rate taxpayer who lives in Scotland, I am a net contributor to the population.

But - and I want to make this very, VERY clear - I DO NOT MIND THIS IN THE SLIGHTEST, as a healthy, well-educated population benefits me, too. In fact, I would happily pay more tax to ensure this. It's part of living in society.

If, however, I was to be taxed AGAIN for my choice, then I'd want receipts.

The world is overpopulated. You can increase immigration to increase the number of young people.

Maternity services are at breaking point. If we “incentivise” births without decent medical care we will just increase maternal and infant mortality rates, which would defeat the purpose of trying to raise birth rates. Pay a tax or pay a lottery with your life and the life of your baby, great choice.

This approach is a slippery slope to “incentivising” people who haven’t had the right number of children. If you want to raise birth rates, address the barriers for those who want children or more children (maternity services, childcare, maternity leave, paternity leave). Address the barriers for those who want children but can’t (funding for investigations, shorter waiting lists, support when they lose a pregnancy or child). Don’t force people who don’t want children to pay a tax or have children they don’t want. This is just going to create a bigger divide between parents and those who are childfree (both by choice and not by choice).

I never understand the points about not paying for schools, nurseries etc if you don't have children. We benefited from them when we were children, so we pay for new generations to benefit now we can afford to pay. And in retirement, these new generations will be paying for your pension.

In a similar way, those of us of working age pay for hospitals we're less likely to be using now but may have as babies/children and will most likely use in the future.

PS this suggestion is mad and will never happen.

The fact is that when given a choice, most women don't want more than two or three children eve if they can afford to, and there will always be some people who don't want any and some people who can't have any.

Exactly. It's been shown pretty much universally that when women have access to contraception, education and life options other than being a mother, they will mostly choose to have only a few children, or perhaps none at all. No amount of extra taxes is going to change that.

Its really easy for higher earning single adults to move to another country who doesn't tax them more.

This makes me so cross. It’s another way of saying those without children (for whatever reason) are not as important as those with. We already see that, the pitying looks, the being expected to work in the School holidays, at Christmas etc. The fact childless people (especially men) have little (if any) chance of getting social housing.

Meant childless not single

I haven't seen anyone suggest we don't pay the tax. But the reality is that I am paying tax for things that I will never see the benefit from personally. I don't begrudge that, I think that is right and appropriate because I believe in a society that supports parents and children.

What I fundamentally disagree with is the person who wrote this article and several people on this thread agreeing that because I haven't provided a replacement body to act as a carer when I am older I am somehow a second class citizen who should be taxed more for my selfishness.

An alternative theory could be:

I didnt choose to be born. The only people with the choice to create the burden of care for me in my old age were my parents. Therefore parents should be taxed more.

Its just as stupid and illogical.

Also:

And in retirement, these new generations will be paying for your pension. I will just stop my pension contributions now shall I. And tell my employer to stop theirs.

It’s sad that the solution to a failing system pyramid scheme always seems to be the removal of rights and/or bullying ‘incentives’ designed to prop said system up, thus delaying the inevitable.

I’m childfree and honestly you couldn’t pay me enough to have children. I’m a net contributor to the economy, and I’m lucky in that if this absurdity was introduced I could vote with my feet out of the country. I can’t imagine I would be the only one either.

someone earlier mentioned Ceaușescu. He actually started with a ‘softer’ natalist policy to encourage births. It didn't work, so the policies became increasingly totalitarian. Even then, illegal abortion rates were incredibly high, as was child abandonment. The resultant social catastrophe is still being dealt with today. Tactics like these are not going to produce a good outcome.

You can increase immigration to increase the number of young people.

Yes but then we have to be attractive to immigrants & I'm not sure we are so much.

That article is extreme and I don't agree with the concept but there needs to be an acknowledgement of the importance of having children and a next generation.

I don't agree that there's any need to do anything about the birth rate. Before this guy starts proposing solutions to the "problem", he needs to come up with some convincing arguments that there is a problem. What we expect, a birth-rate slightly below replacement rate, is not a problem, even if it results in a long-term gradual fall in population in the UK, which it probably won't, due to immigration.

This enrages me so much! Tax me for my ten miscarriages or my failed rounds of IVF?! For my suicidal feelings? For my sad and desperate void of a future without children? Hell no! I would leave any country that brought this law in and never look back. Thankfully it is unlawful.

There are too many humans as it is let alone selfish, angry, abusive, disordered ones causing havoc in the world. Like this chump.