DH and I going part time to deliberately reduce wages

Good for you. Why shouldn't you benefit from this new free childcare scheme when you have paid so much in taxes all these years? I am glad you have found a way to make it work for your family. People on here get so jealous it is insane.

Yes, it's really self indulgent for people to focus so much on whether they morally object to others acting in their own self interest. Nobody cares.

Depends what other factors were at play. As a country we generally put in a lot of unpaid hours across the board. People are receiving financial reward so clearly other things are motivating them. I certainly don’t agree with working for nothing but I also don’t think monetary gain is the only valuable component of working.

@ScruffyGiraffes

People don't "take a job with those salary levels". They work their arses off to get qualified and skilled enough to earn that money

A choice all the same though, there’s no compulsion to train and work without any kind of compensation and clearly anyone who has made that choice thinks or thought at one point it was worth it. If it stops being worth it I would suggest stop doing it.

I think it's a bit of shame, if it's really so easy and consequence-free for you both to go part-time, that you're only considering this now because you think otherwise you might miss out on free money. We both work a four day week and I'd absolutely recommend it to anyone and especially both parents doing it, which I think is absolutely transformative compared to the more standard set-up of FT man, very PT woman.

But it’s not free free money… OP and her husband get fleeced pay at least £50-60k income tax annually. If they qualify for the 30hrs they will cost the taxpayer £4,387.50 annually. It’s just a tiny tax break.

👏. Well done you for doing that! I tip my hat to you x

But if you're at home you don't need child care!why take up a much needed place?what about your pensions and savings?
Think long term before you do this.

Do it. I don't think you will regret it.

Pensions tapering starts at £240k - that was increased in 2020. It tops out at £312k. So I can’t see how anyone earning that much is better off going part time and reducing their salary to £99k just to get free childcare.

Take home, assuming a 10% pensions contribution, is around £11k on £240k It’s less than half that on £100k with a 10% pension contribution. Is free childcare really worth £5,500 a month? And actually the OP was talking about both partners doing the same - so reducing net income by £11k to gain free childcare… and a much reduced pension.

Not withstanding that, the tax system is a labyrinth of pitfalls, and New Labours enmeshing of benefits at every level of society, such that those on £100k are still entitled to benefits, has meant no party has the will to reform. Which is what they wanted…they really screwed the country over for multiple generations.

This is why universal benefits work. No bottlenecks, and also they continue to get buy in from the people funding them for everyone else. Childcare, healthcare, pensions, education etc etc all survive on the principal of public buy-in. And that means that they need to be available to the people who pay for them as well as those who are being funded by others to have them. They are a public good, for us all. Of course largely paid for by higher earners but if everyone can access them that's fine. If they are paid for by one group and that group is excluded from accessing them, then they start to be resented, become a target and are gradually watered down or disappear. This is why means-testing state pension would be the death of it: the very people paying in far more than they get out would instead get nothing back? Before long the threshold for receiving it and the amount provided would lower so far it would be meaningless anyway. It's amazing how so many people are so consumed by envy that they will bite the hand that feeds them and refuse to support policies that will result in a healthy and functioning economy where everyone is provided for. If you just take and take from one group until over 100% of any payrises they get are taken off them, then obviously their support for funding these things will be lost and they will also start acting only in their own best interests.

@Lostinalibrary

practical economics should be taught, yes & maths in a practical way.

you'd think you'd need a better understanding of it all to be eligible to be given the role as Chancelor, but seemingly not 🤦🏻‍♀️

A choice all the same though, there’s no compulsion to train and work without any kind of compensation and clearly anyone who has made that choice thinks or thought at one point it was worth it. If it stops being worth it I would suggest stop doing it.

You're not getting it. Of course it's a choice. And yes, they are stopping doing it: they are cutting down their hours in these stressful and skilled jobs that pay the majority of the country's tax revenue. Because it isn't worth them working full time for absolutely no benefit to their own families.

You are definitely not unreasonable to drop some hours and spend more time as a family. There are thresholds to lots of benefits - you are doing nothing worse than anyone who works and pumps cash in to their pension.

you are vvvvv u reasonable though to think you are ‘squeezed middle’ though on a household income of +200k or even with your drop to 198000 or thereabouts! You are probably in the top 3-5%!

I wouldn't do anything yet. The government might change and these new plans might be completely changed or not actually come into effect at all.

I always find it amazing that in western countries we view children and parents as tax burdens rather than viewing the children as future tax payers. This is why we have a retirement crisis happening world wide.

Great idea! Why should you work regular hours when you can relax at home and let other tax payers foot the bill. Go through life with no social responsibility - great lesson to teach your kids.

OP, will your child still use the full 30 hours when you and your DH are part time?

Also, don't forget that the 30 hours only cover 38 weeks of the year so you will still have to pay for 14 weeks a year full cost.

I would have thought the best reason to p/t, if you can afford it, is to be more present for your children. Not so they can spend more time in childcare. But each to their own.

I’d love to know the sort of job you do that allows this ‘sessional dropping’!

id probably do the same for more family time OP!

you'd think you'd need a better understanding of it all to be eligible to be given the role as Chancelor, but seemingly not 🤦🏻‍♀️

It's mind boggling he actually had to commission research on why this is happening. And even more mind boggling that when he was told why, he did nothing to fix it in his budget, despite all of the droning on about wanting growth and productivity. In fact, his new policies actually make it worse. Led by donkeys.

Then you have Rachel Reeves who in her recent interview with Mumsnet scoffed when asked what she'd do about the bottleneck at £50k, and the fact that obviously all of these thresholds (child benefit, higher rate tax, childcare funding, withdrawal of personal allowance) should be applied on a household basis to remove these huge distortions and disincentives to work. She stated that she has no intention to fix it either.

It's very obvious to anybody with any basic grip of economics what needs to be done. And these changes to the tax code - unlike the other problems in the UK economy - are entirely within the power of the Chancellor to fix immediately, with almost instant effect on increasing productivity and revenue.

Nothing will improve significantly for anybody until they do.

The irony of saying this to the people who have been propping up everyone else for the last decade or more and stitched up further every year is clearly lost on you.

@chocolatemademefat id see your point * · Today 15:46
Great idea! Why should you work regular hours when you can relax at home and let other tax payers foot the bill. Go through life with no social responsibility - great lesson to teach your kids.* IF the PP were defrauding the nation but they will STILL be paying a lot of tax… how is this worse or different to a stay at home parent who could presumably also be working some sort of job to pay tax on but is opting not to? Or even a SAHP not working at all and taking the current free hours? My personal choice, if I was on that sort of money, would have been to reduce my hours anyway - no one works primarily to pay tax. You work to provide for your family and family’s need more than just cash.

Totally agree @Mariposa26 . @Nolimittomylove has made a ridiculous comment.

OP and partner have been paying huge amounts of tax on their high salaries and will continue to contribute to the tax system despite reducing their hours. Why should they not benefit from a tax break / additional free hours. The childcare system is flawed. Who do these posters think they are telling people that they should work harder and earn more?

I feel like it's pretty obvious they're doctors?

That's because they aren't contributing anything in the first place.

OP and her husband are contributing huge amounts of tax (and both working full time and therefore adding to the stress of life / poorer family time). Why should she work more to find others when she can have a better quality of life and similar take home by working a bit less!