Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

The 2 child benefit cap lift will be cancelled out by the weekly benefit cap

1000 replies

Pinkbowls · 12/11/2025 13:24

I keep seeing all this talk about families with 6+ kids “racking it in” if the two-child benefit cap is lifted, and honestly, it’s hogwash. Here’s the reality:

If the Labour government does lift the two-child cap, it will mainly help low-income working families and families who are claiming disability benefits. These households aren’t subject to the cap, so the poorest families and those who genuinely need extra support for a third or fourth child are the ones who will benefit.

For a single adult with two children outside London, the monthly benefit cap is around £1,832 (~£423 per week). In London, it’s higher, about £2,108 per month (~£486 per week).

Now let’s break it down roughly for someone renting privately:

  • Assume the standard allowance + personal allowance for the adult + child elements (for 2 kids) = around £1,200–£1,300/month.
  • Private rent in many parts of the UK, and especially in London, can easily eat £800–£1,200/month.
  • Add council tax support (which helps a bit, but only partially) and you can see that most of the cap is already taken up.

So in reality, lifting the two-child cap doesn’t suddenly create a pile of extra cash. For families on benefits but below the cap, the extra child element for a third or fourth child may only leave a modest amount after rent and council tax.

The idea that parents with 6+ children will suddenly be sitting on a fortune is completely overblown. The system is designed so that the support goes to those who genuinely need it, not to families already comfortably above the threshold.

The main winners of this policy will be:

  • Low-income working families who are earning enough to be under the cap and can actually receive the child element for additional children.
  • Families claiming disability benefits, who aren’t subject to the cap at all.

It’s important to separate myths from reality: this is about helping the most vulnerable and supporting working families, not about rewarding large families for being on benefits.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
7
Ticklyoctopus · 12/11/2025 18:37

Asctreow · 12/11/2025 18:37

I disagree. It's harder to empathise with the people who use the accrument of wealth by the few to the detriment of the many as an excuse to turn against those more vulnerable than themselves, rather than stand up for a better, more caring world. It might be human nature, but it's a vicious, dangerous, nasty side of it showing in these threads.

If we confiscated all billionaire assets in this country if would only fund our country for 6 months.

Leavesfalling · 12/11/2025 18:39

K0OLA1D · 12/11/2025 18:34

I'm blatantly taking the piss. I'm not the one saying that disabled people shouldn't be eating steak

I am sick to death of the judgement on these nasty threads. There can never be a measured discussion. There is never questions on how it would impact someone who has a disability that is only ever going to get worse.

If I want to make a joke about absurd comments, I bloody well will

(Oh and incase you missed it, I work too)

Edited

You sound a bitter person, angry at the world, taxpayers who pay to support other people and the people on this thread due to whatever situation you have found yourself in in life. But as Ive said, no one owes anyone anything no matter what disability they may have. And we are all lucky to live in a country that gives a damn. Perhaps an acknowledgement of that might help whatever argument you are trying to make on here.

Ticklyoctopus · 12/11/2025 18:39

Julen7 · 12/11/2025 18:36

Surprised they haven’t started taking our houses now really.

They will, for elderly care. There’s no benefit to working any more. The well worn refrain ‘but you’ll get a better pension and care home’ doesn’t even apply anymore as the means testing means the difference will be negligible and they want the feckless to get the lot for free anyway ‘because you would have to have a heart of stone to leave a pensioner in poverty’

LadyKenya · 12/11/2025 18:39

UserFront242 · 12/11/2025 18:25

Do it then.
Then report back here.

This. That poster would be in for a shock.

mrstjones · 12/11/2025 18:39

I take home £1842 a month, work full time and have to pay for childcare for 1 child and we cope fine. My partner works full time and earns slightly less than me. I'm shocked that people on benefits get more than this.

feellikeanalien · 12/11/2025 18:39

24kPalamino · 12/11/2025 18:27

I have a mortgage. Though I’d be willlng to sell up and rent. I really couldn’t care less. Not having to work another day would be worth it.

If you are single with no kids and no disabilities you will get £400 per month on UC. If you sold your house you would have to live off the capital until it fell to under £16000 before you could claim.

As I said in an earlier post you would be unlikely to get all your rent paid due to the LHA limit so the balance would have to be paid from your £400 per month.

Not really very appealing is it?

SL2924 · 12/11/2025 18:40

People have to take more personal responsibility. They shouldn’t be receiving 2k a month from the state for doing nothing and they shouldn’t be having 3, 4, 5 kids if they can’t afford them.

24kPalamino · 12/11/2025 18:40

Ticklyoctopus · 12/11/2025 18:39

They will, for elderly care. There’s no benefit to working any more. The well worn refrain ‘but you’ll get a better pension and care home’ doesn’t even apply anymore as the means testing means the difference will be negligible and they want the feckless to get the lot for free anyway ‘because you would have to have a heart of stone to leave a pensioner in poverty’

And also ‘equity’

SpaceRaccoon · 12/11/2025 18:40

Asctreow · 12/11/2025 18:37

I disagree. It's harder to empathise with the people who use the accrument of wealth by the few to the detriment of the many as an excuse to turn against those more vulnerable than themselves, rather than stand up for a better, more caring world. It might be human nature, but it's a vicious, dangerous, nasty side of it showing in these threads.

The "accruement of wealth", you mean peopel actually working for their money? And they pay (hefty amounts of tax) on that - it funds the many!

K0OLA1D · 12/11/2025 18:41

Leavesfalling · 12/11/2025 18:39

You sound a bitter person, angry at the world, taxpayers who pay to support other people and the people on this thread due to whatever situation you have found yourself in in life. But as Ive said, no one owes anyone anything no matter what disability they may have. And we are all lucky to live in a country that gives a damn. Perhaps an acknowledgement of that might help whatever argument you are trying to make on here.

What are you talking about? I am not remotely bitter. The opposite in fact.

I just dont think someone who is disabled should ever be called 'lucky' for getting support when others dont. That should be standard

24kPalamino · 12/11/2025 18:42

LadyKenya · 12/11/2025 18:39

This. That poster would be in for a shock.

How do you know? I’ll just claim anxiety and debilitating OCD (which I do have but work with).

K0OLA1D · 12/11/2025 18:42

24kPalamino · 12/11/2025 18:42

How do you know? I’ll just claim anxiety and debilitating OCD (which I do have but work with).

Go on then!

ElderlyCat · 12/11/2025 18:43

Ticklyoctopus · 12/11/2025 18:34

But that’s not you saving the state money, that’s just saying if X happens it’ll cost them more because of Y.

It’s like me saying if they stopped funding my lifesaving meds then they would have to oh a fortune to put me on life support, so I’m saving them a fortune by taking them. It’s not logical.

But it’s a reality if disability benefits are stopped as it seems you want?

Ticklyoctopus · 12/11/2025 18:44

K0OLA1D · 12/11/2025 18:41

What are you talking about? I am not remotely bitter. The opposite in fact.

I just dont think someone who is disabled should ever be called 'lucky' for getting support when others dont. That should be standard

There’s no ‘standard’ in life. We are born with nothing. Everything eventually falls apart and ceases to exist. All we have is what is manageable here and now. And funding 5 million people to claim disability benefits isn’t.

24kPalamino · 12/11/2025 18:44

feellikeanalien · 12/11/2025 18:39

If you are single with no kids and no disabilities you will get £400 per month on UC. If you sold your house you would have to live off the capital until it fell to under £16000 before you could claim.

As I said in an earlier post you would be unlikely to get all your rent paid due to the LHA limit so the balance would have to be paid from your £400 per month.

Not really very appealing is it?

You’re telling me that there are people getting my tax pounds, who have £16,000 IN THEIR BANK ACCOUNTS!
That is absolutely taking the piss.

Ticklyoctopus · 12/11/2025 18:45

ElderlyCat · 12/11/2025 18:43

But it’s a reality if disability benefits are stopped as it seems you want?

Edited

I don’t want benefits to be stopped. Where has anyone said this? Can you repost any reply that has said there should be no benefits for anyone at all?

Leavesfalling · 12/11/2025 18:47

K0OLA1D · 12/11/2025 18:41

What are you talking about? I am not remotely bitter. The opposite in fact.

I just dont think someone who is disabled should ever be called 'lucky' for getting support when others dont. That should be standard

Well your tone makes you sound highly bitter. But I'm glad that you aren't.

I certainly dont begrudge someone who is genuinely disabled and unable to work at all a safety net. But that's all it should be. Charities used to do the job that benefits do now.

And the two child benefit cap should be retained. To go back to the subject of the thread. We can't afford it to be lifted.

UserFront242 · 12/11/2025 18:47

24kPalamino · 12/11/2025 18:44

You’re telling me that there are people getting my tax pounds, who have £16,000 IN THEIR BANK ACCOUNTS!
That is absolutely taking the piss.

Savings between £6k and £16k affect benefits. Someone with £15,999 in the bank would be getting less in benefits than someone with £10k, or £5k.

Ticklyoctopus · 12/11/2025 18:48

24kPalamino · 12/11/2025 18:44

You’re telling me that there are people getting my tax pounds, who have £16,000 IN THEIR BANK ACCOUNTS!
That is absolutely taking the piss.

I remember somebody on here saying their DLA went to their son’s ISA. Utter madness. Then the usual rush to defend it by other posters (or try to)

24kPalamino · 12/11/2025 18:48

UserFront242 · 12/11/2025 18:47

Savings between £6k and £16k affect benefits. Someone with £15,999 in the bank would be getting less in benefits than someone with £10k, or £5k.

They shouldn’t get any until they’ve spent their own money.

Leavesfalling · 12/11/2025 18:48

24kPalamino · 12/11/2025 18:44

You’re telling me that there are people getting my tax pounds, who have £16,000 IN THEIR BANK ACCOUNTS!
That is absolutely taking the piss.

That's outrageous if true!

K0OLA1D · 12/11/2025 18:49

Ticklyoctopus · 12/11/2025 18:44

There’s no ‘standard’ in life. We are born with nothing. Everything eventually falls apart and ceases to exist. All we have is what is manageable here and now. And funding 5 million people to claim disability benefits isn’t.

They dont all get the same benefits though. They dont all have the same needs. I am saying people who have a disability 'should' be supported.

UserFront242 · 12/11/2025 18:49

24kPalamino · 12/11/2025 18:48

They shouldn’t get any until they’ve spent their own money.

People on UC are allowed savings. There is even a Gov scheme for working UC claimants to be able to save. I forget the name.

Simonjt · 12/11/2025 18:49

24kPalamino · 12/11/2025 18:44

You’re telling me that there are people getting my tax pounds, who have £16,000 IN THEIR BANK ACCOUNTS!
That is absolutely taking the piss.

They’re not your tax pounds, they belong to the government, for every £250 a person has over £6,000 your universal credit is reduced by a certain amount, it isn’t just the claimants savings, if they have children their accounts are included.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.