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

According to the thread in question we’re all “absolutely loaded”. 🙄

Yikes, someone actually said that?

And no one has kids to help the future economy.

Of course they don't, that doesn't change the fact they are needed for that hence why other countries have more incentives.

I think the best method to solve the issue in which many women claim work doesn’t pay would be to tax the choice to be a stay at home parent (with exemptions for the disabled and those with disabled children) so that it would always make financial sense for both parents to work (with the proceeds of such a tax being ring fenced for subsidising childcare for those in work). At the end of the day being a stay at home parent is a economically damaging choice for the country as a whole and significantly increases the chance of a person needing to be supported by the state later in life so should be a choice that comes with a cost.
That being said the current child benefit rules are unfair on higher earning single parents who could be earning less than 2 working parents who qualify so some changes should be made (potentially with a raise in the threshold to around £70,000 but with a minimum assumed income of £20,000 per parent in the exception of disabilities or genuine short term unemployment).

This is one of those subjects where most English are so used to the status quo that they automatically think that any change would be a lunatic imposition on personal freedom, whilst pretty much everywhere else in the G20 would think it equally mad to tax a single person earning 50K exactly the same as someone trying to support a family of four on that income.

See also testamentary freedom where most mumsnetters will fight to the death for their obvious human right to leave all their money to Battersea Dogs home and disinherit their children for no particular reason.

@gluenotsoup I don't think CB should be made universal. However the rule for single parents is very unfair they shouldn't loose out and that part needs looking at.

Agree completely

Of course it’s harder to support a family of 4 on £50,000 than it is to live on your own on the same pay but at the same time it is significantly easier to support a family on one salary of £50,000 whilst your partner chooses not to work and to look after the children and the house than it is on the same salary if you do not have a partner or on two £25,000 salaries if both partners have to work to earn the £50,000 between them.

I think the issue is there are no tax breaks for people with children so people look at a someone on 60k and imagine they are absolutely loaded which is probably true if you hadn’t got kids but if you have then often not

^This was the quote, @Shumpalumpa

And in the early 00s the higher rate was payable on incomes over £28k. So it doesn't look as if much has changed.

@Uggtrending why shouldn't it be universal? Winter fuel payments are

@grayhairdontcare I agree with you. Its a frank opinion to hold on MN because it touches a nerve for many. People will flame you all day long and start saying, circumstances can change". People don't want to take accountability many women know they are struggling with 1 DC and go on to have the 2nd and the 3rd.

@MereDintofPandiculation what was the price of housing vs salary then though? or VAT? I think 28k went a lot further then than 50k does now.

100% this. We all make choices in life. How about the child free who don't look after their health and cost the NHS more in their care? I'm sick of parents, usually always mothers, being demonised for having kids. Shall we just let the human species die out then? Our kids will be your future tax payers and those propping up society.

What does "middle" mean in "squeezed middle". It certainly doesn't mean middle income, when what has been talked about it is households on twice the median household income.

@bopbey sorry to be thick. What are winter fuel payments? Is what the elderly get?

Personally I just don't agree with it and any couple earning 70k for example between themselves I don't agree with that either. Child benefit adds up to a decent chunk of you have 3/4 kids that's why the GOV capped it at 2 DC.

If you are on UC benefits there's rules and limits to what you can earn. There's always going to be saying its unfair I suppose or I just missed out. The bigger picture to benefits and people who earn a decent wage IS you will likely have a better future rather than being at the mercy of UC each month IMO.

The change to child benefit was an absolute scandal. How they ever thought it was reasonable that 2 people on 49k each keeps everything and one person on 60k gets nothing is beyond me.

What about the child free makes you think they don’t look after their health and cost the NHS more?

Do you have any statistics to back up your assertions?

Or are you just annoyed the child free don’t want to pay more for your kids?

OP - '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.'

So you suggest that there should be an ADULT tax allowance (£12750) for each child. Really a family of 5 - 2 adults and 3 children would have a tax-free income of £60k+

That is hardly fair.

Just to give you an idea of how tax allowances worked when I was a full time working single parent in the 70s/80s.

There was an 'additional personal allowance' which meant that a single parent household got the same tax-free allowance as a couple. This was NOT double the tax allowance - just the equivalent of having a partner.

Then women demanded their own separate taxation instead of being an additional tax allowance on their husband's tax bill.

What about the women living under financial abuse? For some that £20 a week is all they have. And it’s taken away because their husband earns over the threshold.

Children still cost, plus childcare is not just about working it’s about the social development of the child and getting them ready for school. Why should a child miss out on that just because a parent is at home?

Maybe the parent that isn’t working isn’t working due to illness or was made redundant. It’s not as black and white as you’d like it to be.

but fine. My argument still stands for a couple that earn £60,000 and the other earns say £30,000 full time. They’re still worse off than the two on £49,999 each PLUS don’t get the child benefit.

@Uggtrending yes, you often hear a lot of debate that that should be means tested hence why I used it as a comparison.

Child benefit adds up to a decent chunk of you have 3/4 kids that's why the GOV capped it at 2 DC.

The vast majority of people don't have 3 or 4 dc though, why shouldn't it be universal for say 2 dc?

Over 90% of families with children claim CB

@anniegun but more claim than who are entitled to it because of the NI stamps

And 90% isn't 100% when I last checked.