To think no child benefit/tax credits are unfair on apprenticeships?

[16notanAdult]

Thanks to a post on here I've found out that as my DD is going to do an apprenticeship I will no longer get child benefit or tax credits for her (I'm currently still on TC due to be UC from November ish but she still won't count as a dependent)

She will be earning £5.28 an hour and I will now have to ask her to make up the difference despite the fact she is 16 and on such a small wage. Her wage will need to cover all her transport and work clothes etc.

We have a very tight budget and no ability to get better jobs or more hours due to disability in the household.

It just seems unfair that if she isn't classed as a dependant anymore she isn't entitled to minimum wage.

Can she claim UC in her own right while on a very low income?

It appears not until 18 unless very specific circumstances (pip/carers/being a parentetc)

If she’s only 16 then that is really unfair - kids can’t work before 18 so it’s either school, college or an apprenticeship - 2 out of 3 of those options are still eligible for child benefit so why not apprenticeships too? Especially as the vast majority only pay nmw.

That's what I feel @Funnyfive she would get a free bus (on distance everyone does) if she went to school to do A levels but has to pay for transport (as an adult) to work which is going to be £24 a week

What's her weekly income? surely it's a lot more than a school pupil and enough to cover her clothes and transport.

Buses to our various A level / vocational colleges cost £800+ per year.

I wondered about CB when DD1 did an apprenticeship, but decided it was fair enough.

£147 a week, of that £24 a week travel. That's 7 hours 4 days a week and then a day in college (this will also have travel cost haven't worked out how much yet)
Travel to college and work will be approx two hours a day so not much time for another weekday job. She will keep her weekend job but wanted to save.
She will still have disposable income I get that but they expect her to support herself but at the same time not pay the real NMW.

It's a stupid rule.

She will still have disposable income I get that but they expect her to support herself but at the same time not pay the real NMW.

Well no, the expectation is that you continue to support her (ie provide board and lodging), the same as you would if she was at school. She then pays you the equivalent to what you've lost in CB, which as she'll have about £400 a month spare she should be able to afford.

Sorry, I think that's plenty and understand why the benefits are stopped

Are you claiming PIP and as much as you can for the disabilities / carers allowances etc?

If she's earning as much as the childbenefit then yeah I don't see why it should continue to be paid. She doesn't get paid so she can piss it all up the wall does she.

I was in this situation OP.
It's bizarre imo
If they have to attend college then they are still in education- they may even still be studying for a maths and /or English qualification.
When it was my son apprenticeship minimum wage was less than £5 per hour too.
Young people are pushed to do these courses but this isn't explained fully. It doesn't make it easy for them.

The expectation is not that she will support herself it’s that a 16 year old should still be supported by their parents.

What are you expecting her to pay for? I think the bus and things like that would be normal but I wouldn’t expect an apprentice to chip in for the food shop.

But how should OP afford to if a chunk of her income has vanished?

OP what was your plan for her when she became 18 and was no longer eligible for CB and WTC? she wouldn't be immediately moving out, or walking into a high paying job, so if the money is that tight, it would have been just as tight in two years time right?

So she'll have like £400 left after transport and board equivalent to child benefit? That's plenty. What other expenses are there that she wouldn't have at school/college?
Apprecentices are paid, college/a-level students aren't. That's why the child benefit rules are different.

DS was going to do a post 16 apprenticeship. When we looked at the finances it worked out that roughly the same amount of money would be coming into the household, just in a different way. The child element of UC is about £290 and CB is roughly £100 a month. This will no longer be paid to the parent but to the child.

That she would contribute to the household, that whilst I know many never ask their kids to pay it would at least feel as if I'm asking an adult.
It's not just CB, it is tax credits as well.

But this money goes into the household, I will now have to ask her to pay rent, which seems shit at 16.

But that should be hers. I will have to ask for her to pay rent at 16, because I still have all the expenses that I would if she was at school or college.

But if she stayed at school/college which is the only other option at 16 she wouldn't be earning anything.
I don't see it as paying rent, and DS didn't either. Have you spoken to her?

But other 16 year olds doing a-levels are spending those hours in school so can't earn at all during that time.

Regard the apprenticeship as continuing her education & equivalent to her attending school each day. If she wants extra money for spends, can she get a weekend/evening job in a shop or cafe like sixth formers do?

I think it’s reasonable that child benefits stop when a child is no longer in full time education. The apprenticeship wage is enough to pay for her transport and own clothes. One 16 year old won’t be making a massive difference to household bills which would all still need paid anyway. Getting used to a household income without child element top ups is something that will have to happen at some point.

Your main issue here is that you are thinking of the apprenticeship as her working & earning money. Really it is not, its a different form of education.

Between you, you should not be worse off as a household with a sixth former studying.