To feel annoyed about child benefit threshold?

[Mirenda]

I earn not far over the threshold to claim child benefit so am not going to put in any claim.

Maybe it seems completely unreasonable to many but given the large amount I pay in tax and NI every year, I feel annoyed that we get nothing back for this, especially with costs of absolutely everything going up.

If we could claim it, we would use it to fund baby related groceries or the heating bill in winter, both of which can be quite expensive.

I don't understand why the threshold can't be more towards 100k mark like the childcare costs threshold as once you're into six figure salaries that's a different ball game (although those people also pay hefty amounts of tax so why shouldn't they see something for it too?)

I expect to be slated for daring to question any of this as someone who earns a comfortable amount but when you've put into the system over the years, it would be nice to get more back when it's for your child.

I have a very wealthy elderly relative who still received the government's pensioner cost of living payment last year regardless of her massive income. They didn't means test that but they will set limits and thresholds for benefits for children rather than make it more universal.

YANBU OP. I think the threshold should change to match the rising cost of living. It must be at least 7 or 8 years that they set the cut off at £60k, it should now be £75k or more.

They should also do it on total household income - very unfair that a couple earning £49k each can claim child benefit but a single person earning £60k cannot.

Take home pay on £60k is about £3,600.

This is not a lot for a single parent.

Full time nursery can be up to £90 a day, even at £70 a day that's around £1,200 a month. Two kids and you are looking at over £2k on childcare. Then there is the rising cost of food. Nappies, clothes etc.

Mortgage rates have gone up, rent is extortionate, energy prices are through the roof.

The benefit is for the children, not DH and I. I am only a SAHM because putting 2 under 3s in nursery would cost more than I could bring in (my wage before I had children was £22k). DH's wage also means we don't get tax free childcare.

I'm not saying we should get tax free childcare or that we are the worst off. We're not. We are very lucky. But the system fucks over the squeezed middle and as the price if everything rises and salaries don't and the benefit cap doesn't, then you take away all taxes and student loans and visa fees and pension contributions, we are far worse off than the £60k suggests.

90 every 4 weeks (13 payments per year) is a good amount though, we use it for savings for our DC, so she gets an extra £1000 per year in savings from it 90 every 4 weeks (13 payments per year) is a good amount though, we use it for savings for our DC, so she gets an extra £1000 per year in savings from it

this pisses me off, it's not to top up your savings

Yea agreed, this drives me mad. I know plenty of couples hitting close to the 80-100k mark when combining their income who get full child benefit.

Yeah why not put larger families in even more poverty , great vote winner actually. Take a look at yourself.

FFS. Why do even bother with a childish reply like this?

Isn’t it already limited to two children…? Why would larger families be in even more poverty?

It's a benefit that we as a family aren't entitled to. There are many, I'm not bitter about it because there's so little support for those who do need it. I can't begrudge child benefit as it's not a position I'd want my children to be in.

What pisses me off is that a family with one parent earning 60k and the other parent earning nothing gets zero child benefit. But a family with two parents earning a total of 96k gets full child benefit.

To all the people calling selfish to people upset about this.

A huge % of the country get benefits.
36 million people in the UK - more than half the population - live in households receiving more in benefits than they pay in tax
27 million receive an average of £23k per year in benefits in cash and in kind (housing, childcare, PIP, vouchers etc)

Many of these households are really struggling to cope and could do with more. However many of those households will also have as much or more disposable income as a single mum of 2 on £55k in London, with far, far more time for leisure or training.

It's also annoying to hear that it's too hard to means test winter fuel payments for older people living in fully-owned houses on generous pensions, but not too hard to do a tax clawback on our child benefit. If a single mum ever does make it to the heights of £100k, she'll end up £14k a year worse off than a dual income family on £50k with kids the same age, due to tax thresholds, and child and childcare support means testing. How is that right for her or for her kids?

All these caps and cutoffs are illogical and not helpful.

https://www.civitas.org.uk/content/files/State-dependency-FINAL.pdf

Civitas is pretty right of centre, but the data is ONS

(and that's £50k each not total!)

Genuinely, I believe these rules are made by the out of touch and thoroughly incompetent. It's not a political party bash. All parties are equally ridiculous. Don't hear any proper plan for the future from any of them. The current system breeds resentment and at all levels appears to incentivise the minimisation of work to reduce tax. I am part time precisely because I do not want to earn more and get pushed into the next tax threshold.

I find threads like these a greta example of how out of touch people truly are.

A household income of > £85k and OP would like CB to use it to fund baby related groceries or the heating bill in winter, both of which can be quite expensive.

I mean surely with such a high income you just fund it yourself? There are people out there waiting for their CB to drop so they can get another £10 on their electric meter every week

I realise the criteria for CB makes no sense but I struggle to sympathise with someone who wants to claim it because when you've put into the system over the years, it would be nice to get more back when it's for your child.

Why not ? My child doesn’t need it now. But he might need it when he’s 16. He might need some cash then for something I can’t afford. It’s not like we’re not feeding and paying what a child needs in the mean time. Who says it has to be exclusively used on food?

Not the child benefit. Only the child tax

OutDamnedSpot · Today 07:00

“This is the bit that drives me bonkers. As a single parent, I am just over the threshold and don’t get it. Friends with significantly higher household income (and less pressure in other areas of childcare) do get it. Madness.”

It is. If I were cynical, I might believe the Govt. was trying to disadvantage single parents. Surely not?

It's unfair that that one person on £60k gets nothing but two on £99k get full amount.

However earning £60k you are doing ok. It's not about "getting something back" it's helping those that need it.

Can't feel sympathy when we earn less than you, combined.

As a principal, I agree it's nonsense. Let's take an example of two groups of friends, both with a joint household income of £85,000:

Couple One - one person earning £55,000 so pay the Child Benefit charge to pay some back.

Second couple are both earning £42,500 each, so get full Child Benefit.

Looking at each, excluding any pension contributions, take home pay is:

Couple one - £3,413 + £2,035 = £5,448
Couple two - £2,743 + £2,743 = £5,486

So couple two earn £38 a month more due to the tax rates and allowances, but still get Child Benefit.

For two children, couple one gets £2,075 in Child Benefit but has a tax charge of £1,037 to pay, so a net £1,038. Couple two gets the same £2,075, but with no charge.

Overall, over a year, couple one are worse off than couple two by just under £1,500 or £124 per month.

Admittedly, joint income of almost £5,500 a month is a lot of money, but £124 is a weekly shop.

It's a bonkers system that there must be a better way of managing.

But, OP, do, if you can, put more money in to your pension fund. It doesn't help in terms of the total amount of money going in to your bank account, but at least it's money for your future, not just reducing your income for the government!

@SapphosRock Take home pay on £60k is about £3,600.
Realistically it is even less than that. The vast, vast majority of those earning 60k will be paying back a student loan which is largely a tax now and not likely to be paid off for decades.
Take home with a student loan and a 5% pension contribution is £3,240. Then you factor in that the average childcare bill is about £1,200 and all of a sudden it really doesn't stretch.

I'm well in the CB earning threshold and FWIW I think every child should receive that money. It's incredibly helpful for essentials.

Then if people feel they don't need it they can opt out.

DP earns £24k before tax. I earn £8k a year. The only benefit we get is CB. Would the people moaning about not getting CB like to swap their income for ours?

There is a fallacy that if you are on a low income you get soooo many benefits that it magically adds up to the same as high earning household. This can be the case in some circumstances (living social housing (particularly in London), having children with disabilities the main two) but it is certainly not the case across the board.

I'm sure I will get replies of how these high earners work so much harder and I don't doubt that some do but it is not true that low wage equals easy work or short hours. As an example DP worked from 8am to 9pm yesterday and then was on call all night to cover any issues. All for £12 an hour.

Oh and because we did £5k of overtime last year (taking our wages from £25k to a staggering £30k) we now owe tax credits £1500.

It's ridiculous isn't it. I'm on maternity leave so am claiming this year. The extra £160ish per month for two kids is fabulous.

The system is ridiculous. It either needs to be universal again, or completely overhauled/scrapped and applied in a fairer way. Having a cliff edge disincentives parents from taking a promotion or increasing their work hours, when they’re just going to be in the same financial position but with more stress and less time. (And therefore less tax being paid)

100%. People are also having less children so capping CB in this way seems counterproductive to society overall.