Work doesn't pay

[Bucketheadbucketbum]

Just that really

Got a promotion . Started new role in april. This promotion was one that I secured after a hard fought year, means taking on extra hours and much more stress . Big impact on work life balance, kids etc. Worth it I thought ....

NO IT ISN'T!!!

Seems since this I've entered a near 100% tax on my payrise, so thanks to current tax setup in uk, my take home pay is static!!!!!! yet responsibility and hours gone up

Planning to resign the promotion from my job

Ridiculous situation!

The pensions trick doesn't just work for 'high earners', incidentally. Income paid into a pension isn't counted as income when calculating UC entitlement.

UC can of course still be payable even to 40% taxpayers in some circumstances, such have we allowed property costs to spiral, and 'high earner' is a subjective term. But I presume there's general agreement that many UC recipients are very low income.

No it doesn't. Show us the numbers/comparison to previous months.

No idea as the op is refusing to give that information so it could be loss of benefits or earning over 100k...

If OP is going from 50000 to 60000 and has three kids then yup you get no more as you lose your CB. Wouldn’t sting so much if homes with double £50000 incomes didn’t keep theirs.

You've got an awful lot of kids if a £10k payrise is negated by the loss of CB 😆

@Handpickled but then a double earning household will have far more costs with childcare and two commutes. Whatever the wrongs of our current taxation system, the right for people to be taxed as individuals and not as an appendage to their husband is absolutely correct!

If a household with one adult SAHP and the other on £60,000 is going to whinge about the household down the road with two working parents earning £50000 each and paying childcare - then I'd suggest the SAHP gets a job if they feel that envious!

Wow! So, only the amount over the last tax bracket is taxed at a higher rate. I don't think it works that way on this side of the pond. That sounds so much fairer. Here, you pay according to a set scale after you take either itemized or a standard deduction.

Double earning household here, income over 60k but entitled to CB because it's between two parents. No commuting costs whatsoever, don't spend much in the way of childcare either. Plenty of CB recipients will have no childcare costs at all, given that it's available until potentially aged 19, even occasionally to 20.

And it's not like the choice is between our current CB system or the end of individual taxation. As proven by what we had for decades.

Where do you mean by “This side of the pond”? In virtually all countries with progressive income tax it works this way. Certainly in the USA and Canada at the Federal level it does.

@BashirWithTheGoodBeard wow, you're lucky if you have no additional costs involved in working. I'd love to know how parents of children below the age of about 13 (or older if they have additional needs) manage to earn decent money without paying any childcare costs

Put more into a pension

If you are PAYE, you can donate to charities from your wages & the tax is added onto the donation automatically
Give as you earn

There's no sense in using 13 as our threshold, when the age that CB stops at is so much older. You can't just say that a two income CB receiving household will have childcare costs when maybe what, a third of those DC young enough to qualify won't need childcare. And loads of people don't have commuting costs, either due to wfh or living very close to work. It's just not a good argument.

The only 'logic' in the CB system is that the 40% threshold was thought to be the most administratively easy point to start withdrawing it. Afaik we've no good evidence on whether the removal of universal CB has actually saved anything overall.

It's so wrong isn't it OP which is why gradual taxation would be a fairer system. These stupid jumps are madness. Child benefit stopping if one person earns over x but 2 parents can earn almost that much each and still get it. I list my widows benefit after 6m due to being just over the threshold for child benefit. The system is just wrong. It doesn't reward hard work/ success. but some people unknown got their calculator out and decided based on income, that is where the knife cuts.

I'm a bit shocked people still get free child care on up to £100k though, wtf!!

@BashirWithTheGoodBeard I was using 13 as a general guideline for when children might be of an age to not need before/ after school and holiday care. Obviously some parents might not want to leave their kids all day until they're even older.

Even if 2 parents can both wfh every day, thus having no commuting costs, I still don't understand how 'many people' don't have to pay any childcare costs.

If you're using 13 as a general average for when childcare costs stop, and you know CB eligibility continues for years after that, I don't see how you wouldn't get that many people will receive CB and also not pay childcare? There are going to be millions of parents with children aged 13-16, and 16-20 but meeting the education or training requirement. Most of them will earn under the threshold.

That's surely got to be obvious, even if you don't go into the more complex estimates of how many parents of under 13s get free childcare from family, work shifts around the other parent, only work during school and free nursery hours etc.

We didn't have any childcare costs after dd started school. We both worked full time but flexibly around pick ups and drop offs. We were able to share the childcare between us.

That was my initial thought...

@BashirWithTheGoodBeard yes fair enough some families with kids 13 or so upwards will have a period of time when they're not paying childcare - but there's still many years they will have been paying it!

As for families where the parents work shifts around each other to avoid childcare- yes I can see some do that but frankly the govt can't legislate for every individual situation and it's more cost effective to have the current policy. And I suspect families where both parents work and earn decent incomes very rarely have no additional costs due to working- no car (or two) no train or bus fares, no work wardrobe.

As for families earning 60k who use family for childcare and don't pay them anything - words fail me frankly! But again, the govt can't legislate for private arrangements within a family. Personally I'd feel bloody selfish using family like that.

Really? That’s not how it reads on the gov website. No wonder people get confused with taxation.

Right, so despite you having been a beneficiary of a society which provides benefits, you do not wish to personally contribute towards the pit that pays these out? You want others to subsidise you because you do not wish to pay? Grow the fuck up and pay into the system you have taken for granted!

Again, not necessarily. There'll be families with DC over 13 getting CB who never paid childcare either. You just cannot make these generalisations. It was wrong to say that a double earning CB receiving household will have far more costs, because there's no 'will' about it.

The cobbled together CB threshold system we have hasn't been designed on the basis that recipients will have higher work costs, which is why that doesn't work as a justification. If it did, it wouldn't exclude single parents on 60k who are responsible for all household costs, whilst simultaneously allowing households whose earnings are over 150% of that to retain it, without any requirement to incur work costs at all. It's a bad argument you're making.

Also, not the major point here, but as you talk about selfishness, some of us getting free childcare from family are also providing it to the same family members in return. Reciprocal arrangements are a thing!

@freyamay74 my dad provided us with some childcare (not full time). We provided him with a place to live and fed him. I think he got a pretty good deal even though we were earning over £60k. £60k doesn’t actually go very far in some parts of the country. It’s £1400 for a full time nursery place where I live, and it can be much more in London; £2000+. We don’t need childcare anymore as DH and I both work from home and do the school runs between us. You make a lot of assumptions but don’t seem to know what you are talking about.

I remember this happening with my DH’s pay, for a few years he wasn’t taking home more even though his pay went up. Then he got a pay ruse and earned over 112k and finally he started taking home more each month.
OP you need to look at the bigger picture, more money will be going towards m your pension and you may get another raise or promotion and you’ll see the difference then.

Do you work in Scotland by any chance ?

And still complain that you don’t pay enough.