To think paying tax on jobseekers allowance is just crap

[20thcenturygirlwithherhandsonthewheel]

I was made redundant a few months ago. I have worked just under 30 years and never claimed any benefits before. DH and I have always saved to make sure that we have money aside just in case of emergencies (especially as housing benefits don’t pay the mortgage), so we have over £16k in savings and can’t claim anything means tested.

fair enough.

the only benefit I could claim when unemployed was contribution based jobseekers allowance: a massive £93 a week that I could only claim for 6 months.

thankfully I was only unemployed for 8 weeks. But to my surprise I’ve just recieved a letter from HMRC telling me that the paltry £93 a week was taxable. So really; probably will end up about £70 a week.

really pissed off: being putting money in the kitty for 30 years but getting so little when we needed it

JSA is too low, I agree. But one of the reasons it is too low is that it is spread too thinly across people that need it and people that don't but claim it anyway. If people with thousands of pounds worth of savings didn't claim it, we could afford to give the people who are genuinely struggling a proper amount.

My bf was unemployed last year/early this year. He normally gets a new contract quickly but this time nobody was hiring so he had to apply for job seekers allowance. And i was actually quite suprised how little it was cause I had kinda always thought that benefits were relatively generous. Or that he wasn't allowed to leave the country (for a few days). Well he has a job now and has almost paid ofd his credit card debt that was acquired from that time.

Moaning about your benefits whilst complaining that other people are getting benefits is the most hypocritical attitude I have seen for a long time on these threads

Well, I'm one of those people who have spent everything I've earned, I mean I likely don't earn anywhere near as much as you (your £16k savings are over half my annual salary.so unless I'm not paying something pretty important, it's highly unlikely I'd be able to) and I don't have a mortgage because couldn't afford one of those either.

I've paid in too, and I've always worked (money doesn't land in my bank account magically either!), and rather than not bothering to save, the wage I'm paid is taken up with basic living expenses. Surely you must know that people don't always earn enough to buy a house and save £16k? That it's not a level playing field in that respect, so I likely spend less than you do anyway but still don't have the means to have the cushion you do? It's not as simple as well everyone who doesn't have a mortgage or savings fritters away what you've saved or invested, some don't have that to save or invest to start with.

I'd be eligible because I don't have what you do, despite always working ft. If I lost my job and needed benefits, yes I'd get housing support because I rent and benefits because my savings are lower than yours, if you lost your house (and I'm not in any way minimising that, it would be awful) you've got the option to rent, and get housing support, you have the £16k to supplement the paltry benefits.
I don't have another option to use if I can't pay my rent except the streets. And I don't have savings to supplement that paltry amount and get the bills paid, so I'm likely to have a worse outcome than you even if I get benefits and housing support but you don't.

OP: You feel aggrieved as a net contributor (you assume) but maybe track where your income comes from.
Somewhere down the line your money comes from customers or clients with less money than you, from whom you or middle chain, make a profit. Those on NMW, those on standard tax codes. etc etc. If you make money from those richer than you - where does their money come from?

Well done for finding a replacement job, keep paying your N.I so that there IS a NHS and pension for you.

It is a welfare system and provides for those who, for whatever reason, cannot earn enough to live on (amount determined by the government obviously and not necessarily accurate).
My son has a lifelong disability, cannot live independently and will always rely on benefits to live. He cannot do anything to improve his 'lot', but even though he qualifies for the highest level of disability benefits (severe disability), he is expected to pay hundreds of pounds a month, out of the amount he is assessed to need to live on, towards his care costs.
No he hasn't contributed anything to the system, though we and our family obviously have, but forgive me for not feeling sorry for people with higher earning potential not being 'rewarded' with higher benefits.

I don’t know, I think I’m just expected to contribute but never take anything

Oh well that makes a massive difference then.

Your salary must be quite low because you pay tax on redundancy over £30k. It's certainly not all tax free, so I hope you don't get a nasty shock.

Remember that the maximum statutory redundancy is only around £21k. So no guarantee that even if I had been in the same company 30 years, that I would get a months salary for each full year worked.

and I agree that your son should have those benefits.

but there are plenty, plenty of people gaming the system, claiming to have (or their kids have) disability. and plenty claiming that they don’t work; or they don’t live with their partner etc etc

Yes, that's correct, (unless you need it, which you don't). It's called society. Thankfully there are greater numbers of people in society that understand this better than you and who are, well frankly, just nicer and less greedy than you. Although sadly, I think this level of selfish entitlement is on the rise. You are not alone.

And you did get money.

on top of your savings you got a bonus amount .

But over the tax year it is subject to tax so if your total earnings in tax year over your personal allowance yes you get taxed.

If you were renting and got rent paid you would have no capital asset to sell in future.

Oh absolutely agree, there are so many people who claim not to be able to do any work at all, when they could, but just don’t want to. The reality is that for a lot of those people their earning potential isn’t vastly different, so why bother, whereas if you are in a profession paying six figures, you’re unlikely to give up work to live on benefits.

It’s not a bonus amount; it’s what I was entitled to for paying NI and tax for 30 years.

I’m not greedy for wanting benefits when unemployed, when I have paid into the system for 30 years: do you think pensioners are greedy when they take their state pension?

You did get benefits.
The amount etc you can complain to your mp.

You seem to with your “boomer” comments.

If you would prefer to be in that situation just sell your house and rent and spend everything you earn. 👍

You've got a personal allowance like everyone else. So you arent receiving treatment different to anyone else.

And you had £16k of savings, and even taxed as you say its £70 a week you got for not working.

But, is that fair on everyone else then working and paying tax while they get so much for free.

but surely, when you do your next tax return, your tax amount gets adjusted to how much you actually had in income (from whatever source) over the year?

You do realise you don't actually pay in to a pot - it's not unemployment insurance. That NI you paid 30 years ago is long gone - used to pay the unemployment benefits of someone unemployed 30 years ago.

I don’t actually. If I was a pensioner just now; damn right I’d be taking my pension.
But I am bitter that I will need to work a hell of a long time longer for it (and frankly, I think it will be means tested when I get there.

my response is about getting called greedy for wanting the other benefits that NI was supposed to bring.

National Insurance was introduced in 1911 to provide a source of non-means-tested basic income during interruptions in earning capacity caused by sickness and (to a lesser extent) unemployment.

so, I don’t think there is anything wrong with wanting some benefit to something I contributed to