Should families get a tax allowance for dependant children

[Clariee45]

Just a thought from another thread about there being no help for the squeezed middle who feel they are hardly better off than those on universal credit. Wouldn’t it just be fairer if those families not entitled to universal credit were given an extra tax allowance equivalent to the adult personal allowance for each child.
Why are adults given a tax allowance that acknowledges the basic costs of needing to eat and have a roof over there head etc and yet parents are expected to provide all this (plus 80% childcare costs) for their children completely out of their taxed income

I'm not really in favour of a tax system that negatively impacts single parents even if it does put them in a better position than a childfree couple

I think single parents are continously under considered and undersupported and I don't think it's a coincidence that this is the case in two countries where women are disproportionately impacted by this.

Works ok for the Germans!

Loads of countries allow joint taxation on an optional basis, including the UK up until 1990. They're not all lunatic.

England gives you the choice to transfer tax allowance between married couples, to collect or not child benefit, to allocate capital gains between years. A certain element of choice is a normal part of most tax systems.

Or perhaps the child-free could pay less tax as they use fewer public-funded services?

Don't be an idiot.

Adults get the allowance against their tax because they work and contribute kids don't. They will get it once they are adults.

Children have the same personal allowance as adults. It’s just not transferable. The loss to the Treasury would be huge if it was and tax rates would have to be raised to compensate.

Of course you can, many other countries do. You can choose to be taxed individually, or together with your spouse as a household.

Single parents are going to have it harder in many ways, but I don't think you have a good reason to say the US tax system in particular is unfair. For one, they offer a head of household filing status for unmarried people with dependents (doesn't have to be your kids, could be an ailing mother or a nephew you've taken in, for example). Of course that won't make up for having another parent on the ground but with respect to taxes, specifically, they're not getting a bum deal.

You could give everyone the £10kish tax free amount and let them transfer it to anyone else in their household.

I didn't say the US tax system in particular is unfair. I didn't even bring up the US tax system as a comparative factor I just asked a question about it.

And any tax system that gives a better deal to couples than single people means single people are getting a bum deal, regardless of whether they are getting benefits that couple are also getting (and getting better ones) I'm not talking about the US in particular. I am talking about in general.

ZeldaWillTellYourFortune · Yesterday 18:43

Society won't collapse without children.

There are 8 billion people on the planet, most of whom are very young. Immigration shifts can make up any birth rate shortfalls”

Not if this Government has anything to do with it. Don’t you know? Immigrant = bad lot.

What society are we talking about?

If "we" means British / UK then if "we" didnt have children and simply imported children / young adults from other countries or allowed them to come unchecked to replace us then yes, British society would dilute then cease to be or collapse to use a different word.

Oh wait, hang on a minite......... 🙄

If you meant human civilization, thats a much more dynamic and bigger question.

Wasn’t my suggestion. Was commenting on someone else.

I don't think society would be in great shape if we denied pensions to anyone without kids either.

This precisely! I don't support adjustments that end up most (or indeed only) benefiting the most well off in society already. Measures like these should be weighted toward those who need the help most, if they aren't going to be universally consistent.

I just want my childcare to be a tax deductible expense. It is after all a cost of employment.

That would make a huge difference to the squeezed middle.

So is travel to work. You already get 30 tax payer funded hours.

Once your child is 3. Not before then (currently).