To think that this is a strange "loophole"?

[Pufferfishcakes]

DD is 3 years old, meaning we can apply for free childcare hours. I work fulltime, DH is studying and planning to do some self-employed work on the side. On the government website it says that to qualify for the 30 hrs free, there is no minimum income requirement for the first year of self-employment. This is great, as it means that we would still qualify (as long as DH works enough hours each week).

However, when I started thinking about it, it struck me that this is a strange loophole: under these rules, can't literally anyone just register as self-employed, essentially do f*ck all, claim a year's free childcare this way and then just say that their "business" has failed to make any money and dissolve it? Or... am I missing something here? I must be?!!

Yeah probably.

But then the cost of investigating every failed SE person over nursery hours probably isn’t worth the very few that they’d catch.

The catch is that it's fraud

You're missing the 'what would they then be living on' part of the equation. If they're working and earning they qualify anyway so wouldn't need to register self employed. If they're not working and in receipt of benefits they qualify and wouldn't need the self employment.I can't imagine there are that many in a situation that would benefit from falsely claiming.

It applies to families with two parents and one income. They would not be able to claim benefits, and wouldn't qualify for the 30 frew hours. However, if the non-working partner sets themselves up as self-employed, they can qualify.

Yes, it would technically be fraud, but it would be very difficult to catch people out, as it is quite common that a self-employed person fails to earn money and has to dissolve their business.

I don’t know how true it is but I’ve heard that some of my uni students do this. Say they’re doing nails/eyebrows and maybe actually do one or two people a month. They’re living off their husbands wage/student loan but need the free childcare.

But they can only do it for a year.
How much is that worth..? Vs the cost of catching them

In Scotland every child gets 30 hours beginning the term after they turn 3, regardless of working status of parents. I guess in England it's different?

I think it's actually a good loophole if so, as for every person who is switched on enough to take advantage of it, there will be someone trying to get back into work after having children, and the benefits for those people outweigh any 'playing' of the system others might do. A lot of the taxation system is based on self-reporting and the risk that if you do something you shouldn't, you get get investigated.

Thousands of pounds, even for just the one year! I would have thought the government would be on that!

On the other hand, I kind of hate the current government, and childcare costs are extortionate, so I don't really have a problem with people committing minor fraud like this. Particularly in cases as described by @HaveYouHeardOfARoadAtlas where they need the free hours to study/create a basis for future employment.

It applies to families with two parents and one income. They would not be able to claim benefits, and wouldn't qualify for the 30 frew hours. However, if the non-working partner sets themselves up as self-employed, they can qualify

Why would they need it though? I imagine where only one adult is working and earning a decent wage, in the absence of illness or disability (where they'd probably qualify) that the at home parent has made the choice to stay at home in order to raise their dc. Packing them off to childcare 30 hours a week in this instance doesn't make a lot of sense

But then it is there also for people who do set up their business and after 1yr of trading have not made any profit (unintended) - the % of small businesses failing in their first 18 months is very high - also to make little or no profit in the first 18 months is very high too - so these businesses I would not expect to be investigated as no fraud has been committed - so there would be no way really to differentiate between someone opening a small business and then basically closing it after 1 year or someone opening a small business , working at it (but there are no minimum hours) - making no profit of making a loss and then closing it

Can you imagine demanding a minimum income requirement to qualify for free childcare? 😂

Some parents will use this to FIND a job, start a business.. Free childcare should be available to everyone, regardless of income or situation anyway.

I agree.

Well, unless it's Elon Musk. He can afford his own bloody childcare.

There could be a cap starting at £500k yearly salary, but realistically, the very high income who don't need help won't bother with that kind of childcare, any more than they bother with state school.

Unfairness against people on more or less similar income and squabbling because one person has a little bit more distract from the real problems, the funding headaches and why so many settings are closing

@Pufferfishcakes my students are working 40 hrs a week unpaid for the nhs. I’ve always felt it was a bit harsh theyre not entitled to the free childcare. Was the same 20 years ago when I was doing my midwife training

Absolutely. We need that future workforce! Outrageous that they're not getting the childcare hours, let alone payment for clinical placements.