Rather then cut certain benefits why not means test them?

[cadooyahoo]

I know someone who imo does not get enough support for their disability (they are blind) & am aware many disabled people live in poverty so I don't think we should cut benefits. Wouldn't it make more sense to means test PIP, DLA & AA?

It’s too expensive to means test benefits. More so than the benefits themselves sometimes.

But we means text child benefit, wfa now. Could they not align it with another benchmark? Clearly we need an overhaul of the tax system. It seems silly to not means test because it's hard to do & instead cut them.

How would that work? A person who uses their PIP to enable them to work and earn a decent salary, is then thrown into poverty and unemployment because their salary is deemed too high to receive the very benefit that enables them to work?

It would take an army of competent administrators and would take an enormous amount of time and effort.

Means testing costs more

Because to means test them you have to hire medical people to assess the health condition of the claimants, then accountants to go through their finances. Additional inspectors for where fraud is suspected. Another layer for an appeals process. More admin people to keep track of all the paperwork that that generates. And so on. It would create a lot of additional expenses that would outweigh any potential savings

How would that work? A person who uses their PIP to enable them to work and earn a decent salary, is then thrown into poverty and unemployment because their salary is deemed too high to receive the very benefit that enables them to work?

The threshold could be fairly high but cutting PIP may also reduce someone's ability to work?

Basically the only option is to cut them then, seems nonsensical.

Why is the only option to cut PIP? There are many other ways the government could save money, they don’t need to go after disabled people.

I'm not arguing otherwise but I thought the gov had proposed that option?

I wonder about this too. I am on UC due to being a single mum only able to work part-time due to caring responsibilities. My income is assessed monthly, and this includes some of the disability related payments for my child (carers element and child disability element). It doesn't make sense that the DLA payments coming in are entirely outside this system.

My child gets mid rate care and low rate mobility which is really needed to support his disabilities. A friends family gets the same, but they don't need it at all due to two high incomes.

I'm not sure what the point is of having some disability related payments means tested and some not.

I understand that one of the aims of pip is to help someone work and that makes sense with low or average incomes, especially with thd higher rate awards and I am pro that.

But it is stretch to believd someone on £80k plus would really be forced out of work but for £28 a week mobility payments at the lower end of the payment awards.

It just might not save any money doing that.

I'm not just talking about PIP though

I agree with you OP. Whilst it would be costly at first it would be beneficial. The tax system and the benefits system in the uk is completely useless and broken. An overhaul is way overdue.

@sunshine244 I agree with you, I have a friend in a similar position to you & another friend who gets DLA with a household income. I don't get the difference tbh. In an ideal world we wouldn't have to means test but the country is in dire straits & I don't think blanket cuts make sense.

Cutting them is cheaper, which is the whole point of cutting the huge benefits bill

And if you’re on 80k but have spina bifida, require an adapted car, a specialist motorised wheelchair and a carer? 80k wouldn’t go far.

Could they align them with the child benefit charge eg if your income is over 80k then you don't get DLA or PIP

Cutting them is cheaper, which is the whole point of cutting the huge benefits bill

But some are going to be disproportionately impacted.

Nope. Just do it like they do child benefit and free childcare/loss of personal allowance. Set the limit high enough so that the majority of people aren't affected by it. Say £100,000 income as a starting point. HMRC already know who has an income over £100,000 due to tax records. I'd means test ALL state benefits at that kind of income level, including state pension. Someone with an income of £115,000 doesn't "need" £12k of state pension, nor do they need a motability car. The trouble and cost with means testing is when it's set at too low a level or a random level where there are no official records already in use that can be tapped into.

It would put many people in a precarious situation.
I know a few women who are unable to work, but claim PIP. They can't claim ESA/UC because of the earnings/savings of their spouse, so their PIP is the only money they have. The PIP is for them and their disability. It is not for the general household. To take PIP away from them, the financial burden of their disability would be down to their spouse... and I think that is a dangerous position to be in if you are a vulnerable and disabled person.

@taxguru yes I think the threshold should be high

It would put many people in a precarious situation.

But won't cuts do this too?

Yes, that too.
My point was that PIP is for the individual person with the disability. Means testing it would mean that the household income is taken into account.

How many people do you think claim benefits but earn over £100k?