Page 14 | To be pissed off about paying back child benefit

pinotnow · 2023-02-05T16:56:16+00:00

I am in a sector that was awarded a pay rise this year - though our union is fighting for a higher one. The rise was from September but our school (yes, it's teaching) didn't pay it until November when we got months at once. HR always send us a pay statement at this time of year and I have just opened mine and seen I am now on approx £52k (been teaching 18 years and am head of a core subject in a large secondary school). I understand I now have to pay back some of my child benefit. This is a pisser as things are pretty tight and I'm a lone parent who gets no CM (ex is a total waste of space - I've gone through CMS). Also, I wasn't expecting it this year (I was on £49k last year and now I'm worried I've missed some sort of deadline for paying it back as technically I've been on this for 5-6 months, but only just realised. I really haven't got the head space for this now and a quick Google has just brought confusion. As soon as you move forwards a bit in this shithole country you move backwards it seems. Any advice would be great!

AlwaysLatte · 07/02/2023 08:42

When this first came in we had a choice, to claim it and then pay it back if we wanted to - I really couldn't see the point of that so just stopped claiming it. It should have been made clearer to you.

fairypeasant · 07/02/2023 09:50

@AlwaysLatte Now, it tapers. And many of us don't know our exact salary that counts until the end of the year. So you don't know how much you get to keep until the end of the year.

And as a single parent, you don't know if you can afford the French exchange trip, or whether that money has to go back. It sucks.

AlwaysLatte · 07/02/2023 10:17

Oh I didn't realise it tapered now, that sounds much more complicated that it was, also as you say, how can people budget for this? It's a terrible system.

HistoryFanatic · 07/02/2023 10:22

If you need help from the government because you fancy being a SAHP then you obviously can't afford it. Work like many parents do. 🙄

Scottishskifun · 07/02/2023 10:30

pennylanestrawberries · 07/02/2023 08:24

I don’t disagree the system isn’t very fair but I’d be interested to know how many families there are where both partners earn £40k to £50k as I don’t know anyone in this situation.

Thinking of all the families I know with kids, it’s either both partners earning low wages, one partner (generally the man) earning more than £50k and the other partner working very little/not at all. Or in a few cases, both partners earning a lot more than £50k.

I just never see this set up everyone talks about where a family earning £99k can claim child benefit.

I have a few friends who are in this exact position and husband didn't go for promotion because it would have tipped them too far.
One set of friends she is on 43k her husband is on 48k so combined is 91k. Scotland the 40% tax bracket kicks in much earlier as well so for them to then lose a chunk of child benefit for 2 children it simply wasn't worth it.

pennylanestrawberries · 07/02/2023 11:05

Scottishskifun · 07/02/2023 10:30

I have a few friends who are in this exact position and husband didn't go for promotion because it would have tipped them too far.
One set of friends she is on 43k her husband is on 48k so combined is 91k. Scotland the 40% tax bracket kicks in much earlier as well so for them to then lose a chunk of child benefit for 2 children it simply wasn't worth it.

Show quote history

Yes I’m sure there are some but I feel like I hardly know anyone in this position. That may just be me/my friends perhaps!

GoodChat · 07/02/2023 11:08

I have a few friends who are in this exact position and husband didn't go for promotion because it would have tipped them too far.
One set of friends she is on 43k her husband is on 48k so combined is 91k. Scotland the 40% tax bracket kicks in much earlier as well so for them to then lose a chunk of child benefit for 2 children it simply wasn't worth it.

This is such a batshit way of looking at things. The children won't be children forever. It's better to take the promotion and keep increasing your income (even if you don't see any difference) because as soon as the kids turn 18 they're losing that money anyway and will be better off with the promotion money in the long run.

yoyo1234 · 07/02/2023 11:13

Agree go for promotion and could they increase money into a pension fund to come below the cap?

Newnamenewme23 · 07/02/2023 11:26

GoodChat · 07/02/2023 11:08

I have a few friends who are in this exact position and husband didn't go for promotion because it would have tipped them too far.
One set of friends she is on 43k her husband is on 48k so combined is 91k. Scotland the 40% tax bracket kicks in much earlier as well so for them to then lose a chunk of child benefit for 2 children it simply wasn't worth it.

This is such a batshit way of looking at things. The children won't be children forever. It's better to take the promotion and keep increasing your income (even if you don't see any difference) because as soon as the kids turn 18 they're losing that money anyway and will be better off with the promotion money in the long run.

Agree.

take the promotion, shove any extra into a private pension until the kids turn 18.

benefit from extra pension, and you won’t lose out longer term when the kids are 18.

plus you also haven’t stepped off the promotion track and slowed your career down.

unless you plan to retire as soon as CB ends, why turn down extra pension and this/future promotions?

madness. And all for £130 a month (2 children). not worth damaging careers for.

CandleInTheStorm · 07/02/2023 12:57

Newnamenewme23 · 07/02/2023 11:26

Agree.

take the promotion, shove any extra into a private pension until the kids turn 18.

benefit from extra pension, and you won’t lose out longer term when the kids are 18.

plus you also haven’t stepped off the promotion track and slowed your career down.

unless you plan to retire as soon as CB ends, why turn down extra pension and this/future promotions?

madness. And all for £130 a month (2 children). not worth damaging careers for.

Show quote history

I agree too. Bonkers to stall in career for the sake of CB.

There's always going to be a cut-off somewhere where people just on the cusp are going to feel miffed, but that's where long-term thinking comes into play. I felt like that when I lost tax credits because I went for a promotion, but my long term prospects are much better!

I still earn 20k less than the op as a single parent so not quite sure she's griping about this so much. 50k even for a single parent is a good income!

fairypeasant · 07/02/2023 13:35

It's not bonkers to stall in your career, when not only do you lose CB, but you may have to pay more childcare/have less time at home. Everything comes at a cost, and losing CB, plus that extra income being in the 40% bracket, minus childcare... why would you? Extra responsibility, or extra hours, or extra stress, or all three, for a few pounds a week you actually get to keep? No thanks. The CB can be the final straw in making something just not worth it.

BashirWithTheGoodBeard · 07/02/2023 14:02

fairypeasant · 07/02/2023 13:35

It's not bonkers to stall in your career, when not only do you lose CB, but you may have to pay more childcare/have less time at home. Everything comes at a cost, and losing CB, plus that extra income being in the 40% bracket, minus childcare... why would you? Extra responsibility, or extra hours, or extra stress, or all three, for a few pounds a week you actually get to keep? No thanks. The CB can be the final straw in making something just not worth it.

Yep. The fact is that there's a bottleneck. Parents in particular can be in a position where the marginal costs just aren't worth it.

If it's a wage increase requiring nothing of you and you don't mind a bit of admin sure, take it and increase pension contributions. If it involves another shift, a different job, you might incur more work associated costs, for some people it's not going to be worth the effort in their circumstances. It all depends. People react differently, have different priorities, and one person's career advancement no brainer is another person's mugs game.

bellswithwhistles · 07/02/2023 14:12

Scottishskifun · 07/02/2023 10:30

I have a few friends who are in this exact position and husband didn't go for promotion because it would have tipped them too far.
One set of friends she is on 43k her husband is on 48k so combined is 91k. Scotland the 40% tax bracket kicks in much earlier as well so for them to then lose a chunk of child benefit for 2 children it simply wasn't worth it.

Show quote history

her husband didn't go for a promotion because they would have lost £136 a month?! Don't be ridiculous! If this is true, what a muppet.

fairypeasant · 07/02/2023 14:16

As I said, not a muppet- there are thresholds for all sorts of expenses. Tax, pension contribution thresholds, need for more childcare, more travel. And promotion isn't free money with no strings. It has to be worth it. And yeah, £140/month can be the difference between worth it, and not worth it.

fairycakes1234 · 07/02/2023 14:35

In Ireland everyone gets child benefit regardless of their income. Not sure if its fair or not but thats how its done.

fairypeasant · 07/02/2023 14:44

@fairycakes1234 It actually costs the taxpayer less in admin to give it to everyone. It was a nonsensical piece of unfair shit what they've done here.

GertrudePerkinsPaperyThing · 07/02/2023 14:47

Used to be that everyone got it. But was made means tested for optics of the govt wanting to look tough, even though costs more to administer.

Also it’s criminal that it’s done on if one person earns over the threshold and not on household income. Single parents treated worse than couples as usual.

GoodChat · 07/02/2023 14:56

fairypeasant · 07/02/2023 13:35

It's not bonkers to stall in your career, when not only do you lose CB, but you may have to pay more childcare/have less time at home. Everything comes at a cost, and losing CB, plus that extra income being in the 40% bracket, minus childcare... why would you? Extra responsibility, or extra hours, or extra stress, or all three, for a few pounds a week you actually get to keep? No thanks. The CB can be the final straw in making something just not worth it.

Yeah if you're making other sacrifices too you have to weigh up pros and cons but we're talking about someone turning down a promotion on the basis of solely losing their child benefit.

GoodChat · 07/02/2023 15:01

GertrudePerkinsPaperyThing · 07/02/2023 14:47

Used to be that everyone got it. But was made means tested for optics of the govt wanting to look tough, even though costs more to administer.

Also it’s criminal that it’s done on if one person earns over the threshold and not on household income. Single parents treated worse than couples as usual.

It's the same with Tax Free Childcare allowance. You can claim if you have two parents on £99,999 but not if you have one parent on £100,000

Scottishskifun · 07/02/2023 15:14

Newnamenewme23 · 07/02/2023 11:26

Agree.

take the promotion, shove any extra into a private pension until the kids turn 18.

benefit from extra pension, and you won’t lose out longer term when the kids are 18.

plus you also haven’t stepped off the promotion track and slowed your career down.

unless you plan to retire as soon as CB ends, why turn down extra pension and this/future promotions?

madness. And all for £130 a month (2 children). not worth damaging careers for.

Show quote history

Because they have 2 children in nursery which is expensive and £130 a month is more then they would receive from the promotion so wasn't worth the extra stress for what they would lose. It doesn't seem to have damaged his career as it was a application process anyway he just didn't apply.

It's more common then people realise because the threshold hasn't changed for so long and often people have to be short sighted because their finances are finely balanced.

Hellybelly84 · 07/02/2023 15:23

HistoryFanatic · 07/02/2023 10:22

If you need help from the government because you fancy being a SAHP then you obviously can't afford it. Work like many parents do. 🙄

Do you have family help?
Does your Husband work away and work extremely long hours?
Do you have a nursery nearby?

There’s lot’s of reasons people have to stay at home in the early years (other than just wanting to). I loved being able to work when it became possible when mine went to pre-school/school.

I also hear from friends how exhausted they are when the grandparents are away and they have to ‘do it all’ and have to laugh. Plenty of people out there get given alot of free extra help (that would cost thousands if they were paying for it) that others dont have, so a blanket statement of ‘just work’ is rubbish.

fitzwilliamdarcy · 07/02/2023 16:22

@Hellybelly84 None of that is the responsibility of the government to sort out, though, which was the point.

fairypeasant · 07/02/2023 16:44

GoodChat · 07/02/2023 15:01

It's the same with Tax Free Childcare allowance. You can claim if you have two parents on £99,999 but not if you have one parent on £100,000

Show quote history

I'm not convinced the balance of the budget is quite so precarious at 100k as it is at 50k, even in areas like the South East/London. No one is struggling on 100k, even as a single parent. Tax free childcare is a totally separate issue.

Hellybelly84 · 07/02/2023 16:52

fitzwilliamdarcy · 07/02/2023 16:22

@Hellybelly84 None of that is the responsibility of the government to sort out, though, which was the point.

Hence why we get on with our life, both work, have no help, pay for childcare all through the holidays, dont ask for anything etc.

I am allowed to think its incredibly unfair/ridiculous to give it to households where both earn upto £49k and households on half of that (the OP) as a single Mum (getting nothing from the Dad) doesn’t get it. Or where there is a situation when one parent doesn’t have the option/not financially viable to work - we do actually need to have kids to fund us in old age! It is the responsibility of the government to not make ridiculous rules.

As child benefit was introduced specifically to be spent on the kids, there really isnt any argument against looking at total household income and deciding who gets it based on that. If they changed it tomorrow and said only households earning under say 40k got it, that would be a fairer system than we have now.

Zax · 07/02/2023 16:53

Child benefit is archaic and in desperate need of overhaul or better still scrapping all together. A drain on the country's finances to fund people who choose to have kids but haven't budgeted properly. Divert the money to our pensioners who have given a lifetime of contributions in return for a pittance that they call a state pension. I know that I'll get slated for this but it's my view and I don't care about the impending responses l.