To say the £35k winter fuel threshold is way too high!

[chocolateismyweakness4]

The threshold needed to be raised, but £35k?! I wish I earned that and I have a mortgage and commuting costs. It also doesn’t take into account savings (so they could have millions in the bank) or household income.

We all know it’s a bribe, but they still won’t get pensioners to vote for them.

Simon Reeve in Scandinavia is worth a watch on bbc2.

Across the countries the benefits system is one of the best in the world
The standard of living is fantastic

Like all countries there are problems but there is an enormous amount of trust. It’s a key difference and root to its success. Trust builds friendships and There isn’t generational envy

But the tax rate in Sweden averages 58% according to Google. That would NEVER wash in he UK. Everyone just wants to pay less tax.

Point me to where in the below exact quote you said that a greater proportion of 25-34 year olds owned their own home in 1991 because houses were more affordable in relation to salaries?

“That might have something to with the fact that less than 12% of people in that cohort had degrees in 1991. They started work and began saving sooner”

You try reading it.

I agree, the media blew the scrapping of the WFA way out of proportion and that’s one of the reasons for this u-turn.

Yes, I saw that and good for this couple but I would love to know how they managed to get those jobs with those salaries at that age. It’s clearly not the norm. Also doesn’t change the fact that if either of them did choose to go to university it certainly wouldn’t be free.

But somehow strangers making donations of food to food banks isn’t charity?

I saw that… Extraordinarily unusual for a 19 year old couple to be in that position… Probably way less than 1 in a 1,000 I’d have thought.

I actually felt quite sorry for them, being fully domesticated whilst still teenagers.

Completely disagree… removing WFA from a pensioner on the state pension of just less than £12k a year is absolutely newsworthy!

There are lots of rich pensioners and lots of poor pensioners. It’s not hard to simultaneously believe that the very poor ones should be supported, whilst also believing the many richer ones shouldn’t be.

This mess is all on Labour. Had they set a threshold at sat £20k in the first place, none of this would have happened, and they’d have saved money.

Did you watch the whole programme? Not the Utopia it used to be.

Agree with this. £20k would have been a good threshold and then all this bad feeling would have been avoided, £35k is much too high when young families are struggling on that amount.

It's the U-turn that will see Reeves off - much better to have cancelled it last winter (if they really couldn't justify/afford it) but said they would revisit the decision for this year and then reintroduced it at £20k. Oh dear, all very cack-handed.

That’s for a specific claim to transfer a small part of unused personal allowance from one spouse to another. Irrelevant for the vast majority so no need to complete it.

There is no question asking whether you’re married or not.

Yes, feel free to look at my posting history, I’ve often referred to Rishi, George and Gordon and “spreadsheet Phil”. Weird that you’ve picked up on such a minor point! This is a forum, no need for formalities, just like I’ve never referred to “Sir” Keir in formal tones, and if you look further back I referred to Thatcher as Maggie! I’ve also referred to the current Tory leader as Kemi! So whatever cheap point you were trying to make isn’t valid!

How would they work out the following post on CB without knowing if you are married or in civil partnership?

If your income (or your partner's income if you're married or in a civil partnership) exceeds £60,000 per year, you'll still receive the full Child Benefit but will have to pay a portion of it back through the High Income Child Benefit Tax Charge.

Here @Badbadbunny they’d need this info

No. They are not at all typical. Good for them, but you can’t extrapolate to the rest of their generation

I have literally NEVER heard of an apprenticeship scheme paying anywhere near that much! I earn 32k on a full time job in the charity sector in central London (Westminster to be precise) I actually think maybe that's a reporting error

It was a genuine question - in the same post you referred to Starmer (rather than Kier) and Rachel, so it seemed intended to convey some meaning.

Presumably they’ll have to change next years tax return to include such a question? Or check electoral rolls to identify multiple adults libving at the same address?

It took them a few years to work it out when the child benefit claw back came in - ie to identify people who weren’t paying it back via tax returns who should have been. They cross checked payroll/income records at an address against child benefit claims at the same address.

But the point is that current tax returns for the majority don’t ask whether you’re married or not so current tax records as they stand don’t have that information. HMRC and DWP will have to work it on from other records to target those who aren’t self declaring that they have to repay WFA.

It’s all a cock up! And why Rachel used pension credit as the determinant in the first place!

But as I say, there’s no specific married or not question for all.

This is really interesting. I didn’t realise that the child benefit threshold was predicated on marriage or civil partnership.

It’s not!

I didn’t say it wasn’t newsworthy, I said the media blew it out of proportion. I also didn’t say that pensioners living below the poverty line don’t deserve it, of course they do. But I don’t think they’re any more deserving than anyone else living below the poverty line. I also agree that this is Labour’s mess. They’re the ones making the choices about who does and doesn’t get what and where the money comes from. I’ll be looking out for their explanation at to how this will be paid for during the Autumn budget and will have something to say about it if it turns out it’s coming from the pockets of low and middle income workers rather than say a windfall tax on the profits of energy companies.

I agree with this. It’s crazy, I am a single parent earning minimum wage wage, around £24k minus NI and tax, and do not get this.

Some pensioners still have housing costs - rent or mortgage. Many, unless the poorest, have to pay their full rent. 🤷‍♀️

Childcare costs are temporary.

Do you not get child benefit?