UC salary threshold is £2500 pmc

[Reallyxx]

On a separate thread, I was asked to google this. So, I have.

Quite many people earn £2000-£2500 pcm that they should be able to live on. So why are there UC benefits for that group?

So more than half of the population is on UC?? I am aware gov has driven wages down over the years, but it seems the net result is of 'more' people being on benefits.

Anyway, why not just 'not tax' these groups? As it seems like people pay 'some tax from their income that is £2500 net' whilst being entitled to 'benefits'.

Yes it’s household income and we have to make a joint claim as we live together so HMRC report both of our incomes to be taken into account. I then have to report everytime I pay a childcare invoice. Then they pay us wrong every month and I spend all month asking them to correct it.

I was actually better off as a single parent and not working, and as a single parent and studying than I am now in a couple and working a band 5 professional job.

Why indeed.

As was pointed out to you on your deleted thread and this one, a lot of the money goes into the pockets of private landlords.

Nothing.

Is this research for an article? All the information you need is available online. You could try using the benefits calculator too

You’ve completely misunderstood what that £2500 is referring to. That amount is the ‘surplus earnings limit’, not the amount that you can earn up to in order to still qualify for UC support.

I, for example, take home closer to £2700pm at the moment and receive around £500pm in UC because I rent and pay over £1000pm for childcare. There are people whose take home pay and UC award will be much higher. It’s all based on individual circumstances, there is no ‘upper limit’.

If you’re going to go away and read something, at least do it properly 🙄

Yup, I believe the government pays c£20bn a year into the pockets of private landlords.

That's £384m or so per week, but remember, it's putting a roof over asylum seeker's heads at £7m per week that's crippling the country.

I wonder if £350m of that £384m per week is where the Brexit Benefit went? 🙄

Are you sure about that? Have you looked at Turn2Us or similar websites? Because when I was living with my ex, had one child at the time on middle rate DLA and he was on a similar wage, the only thing that lowered it compared to most situations was the mortgaged home rather than being entitled to LHA rates (which is not a complaint!). A good chunk of what we were entitled to in those circumstances was removed for me to claim carers allowance, but UC carers element added some back on.

I'm a lond parent earning under £2500 a month and I'm not entitled to anything apart from child benefit (which i'm grateful for). We get by.

They move to a cheaper area. The Gov shouldn't be paying £1200 a month for someone to live in a specific area when much cheaper places are available within a relatively small radius (most of the time).

If people want to live in nice areas, they need to fund it themselves IMO.

There isn’t one set income threshold. It depends on the claimant’s circumstances.

The £2500 you mention is related to what is known as surplus earnings, not the UC threshold.

You need to relook at UC. With the standard allowance, 1 child, LCWRA and carer element you are eligible for UC with a monthly income of £2k. Even if you only had LCW (and therefore no monetary value on the claim) you would still be eligible.

I seem to recall (perhaps incorrectly?) there were zero limits on housing allowance previously - decades ago.

I distinctly recall a front page story where someone in (literally) a mansion was claiming interest on their mortgage via the benefits system etc.

Obviously, mortgage payments (even interest) are now more or less excluded from benefits. I assume in order to balance that out, the average rent/local LHA rate was created to prevent people living in mansions through choice taking the piss.

But people who don't get benefits have to pay rent from their after tax income with no help from welfare. In fact, UC housing element creates a floor for private rents as landlords know the minimum they can charge. So private renters who don't get anything towards their rent have to compete with others who do (and their taxes pay for it!).

Well if they don't get benefits they are earning too much to claim anything so have more income to pay rent

(Many people on UC also pay tax!)

I am not at all surprised unfortunately.

LHA was set at the bottom third of the rental market. But with austerity and continued failure to uprate in line with price increases, it often does not even cover the cheapest properties.

Many people have a shortfall of hundreds of pounds a month even if they qualify for the maximum.

I’m not talking about me, I’m not on benefits.

If you move to a cheaper area, the LHA rate is reduced so you’d still be in the same position. I live in the North. There aren’t any significantly cheaper areas. Round here is already considered cheap.

Lots of private landlords rent to asylum seekers via Serco (paid for by the taxpayer). It all adds up to an unaffordable welfare bill.

At some point the country is going to run out of taxpayers. It's already over 50% who take out more than they pay in. Simple maths shows the situation is unsustainable.

https://news.sky.com/story/record-number-of-britons-receiving-benefits-that-amount-to-more-than-they-pay-in-tax-study-finds-12793349

@Deathbyfluffy "much cheaper places are available"

Wrong. They are rarely available and if they are cheaper it's because they're not fit to live in, let alone try to bring up children or manage health conditions in.

Yes as pp have said you have misunderstood the bit about £2500.

What you get is entirely dependent on your circumstances including how much you earn but it also includes lots of other things ie if you rent, how many children you have, if you pay childcare, if you receive any disability elements, etc etc.

I earn around £2k a month after deductions, I work 30 hours per week. 32k a year, would be 40k if I was full time but I cannot work any more hours due to childcare availability. I am a single parent with 2 primary aged children, I get around £350 a month UC and £159 child benefit. I pay around £280 for childcare per month so as you can see if I didn't have that cost I'd get less help. I have a mortgage so do not get help with housing costs. People have assumed that I get my council tax paid (I get the 25% single person discount), that I get free prescriptions, that I get more money because my ex doesn't pay regular maintenance, that my children get free school meals, or that the mortgage is paid by UC. None of these things are true. I am not complaining btw, I am grateful for the help. I was married and my children were planned, but my now ex husband turned out to be useless so here we are. I have always worked, never been out of a job since I was 16. Went to uni, went back to work after both of my maternity leaves and worked my way up in a company. Have a professional "niche" job.

If I was renting, or if one of my children were disabled, or if I paid more in childcare, I'd get more help. As it happens my exh gets more help because he gets his rent paid (he is not reliably working) and doesn't have to pay maintenance either. He still judged me on getting "handouts" though. 🙄

I think you’ve really misunderstood. It isn’t a £2.5k cap. It’s £2.5k over your earning limit which is different for everyone. For example I’m “entitled” to £1600 a month as I have dc / childcare. I can earn £600 ish without effecting my entitlement. Then every quid I take home (after tax, pension, NI) reduces that entitlement by by 55p. I get between £500-£600 UC a month. Quite often I take home over £2.5k it varies as one of my jobs pays weekly.

I do think it’s a weird system, you could fund childcare properly for working parents and it’d take lots of people out of needing UC. I do agree from a government viewpoint it makes more sense that I work. I pay more in tax and NI than I get in UC. The childcare years are finite but obviously I’ll be paying tax forevermore.

I am really don't understand the point your post OP, what are you trying to achieve with this exactly?

Ah yeah, people on low incomes should just move to cheaper areas because its so easy to save the deposit for that and just relocate. There's also loads of choice out there, LL just love renting to people on low incomes 🤦‍♀️

@Deathbyfluffy my friend is currently homeless in a hotel as she can't afford private rent. It's not a particularly posh area, it just happens to be in the south where she's live all her life

Telling people who can't afford it to move doesn't work. She has parents who help with childcare and works as a TA

Who is going to do the min wage jobs then if everyone who can't afford the extortionate rent moves? No TA, no cleaners, no retail staff