Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

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
suburburban · 12/11/2025 19:11

I don’t want the government to change the cap tbh as people need to plan their families and take responsibility

especially when it feels like RR is busy trying to find money to plug the black hole of debt

MyrtleLion · 12/11/2025 19:11

Leavesfalling · 12/11/2025 19:08

Doesn't that all indicate we can't afford the current benefits bill as we are a poor country living beyond its means?

When private companies are making £250 million over three years for providing care?

No. The money that should be going on caring for the population is going to private equity companies. These providers should be non-profits.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/nov/12/private-care-providers-in-three-english-regions-make-250m-in-three-years

Private care providers in three English regions make £250m in three years

More than third of profits analysed went to firms owned by private equity or based in tax havens, research finds

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/nov/12/private-care-providers-in-three-english-regions-make-250m-in-three-years

MyLimeGuide · 12/11/2025 19:12

NotEnoughKnittingTime · 12/11/2025 14:59

I don't understand this morally superior attitude of benefit bashing when you are likely entitled to it as well. Does it make you a better person if you don't claim? It is a pittance compared to tax evasion.

Yes. It does make her a better person.

WendyErica · 12/11/2025 19:13

Screwyousimon · 12/11/2025 14:21

Quite. I used to work a 50 hour week between 2 jobs when my DC were little it was really really hard but it did not even occur to me to claim benefits. The country is a shit show, no wonder people are pissed off with their taxes going up.

I'm disabled and childless but do work - in a high paying job, actually, so I'm significantly taxed. Good. That's how it works. Furthermore, I'm aware my illness means that's likely finite. Irrespective, I don't resent paying for your children to be educated or for you to have received child benefit. Why can't you give me and other disabled people the same courtesy?

Ticklyoctopus · 12/11/2025 19:14

MyrtleLion · 12/11/2025 19:11

When private companies are making £250 million over three years for providing care?

No. The money that should be going on caring for the population is going to private equity companies. These providers should be non-profits.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/nov/12/private-care-providers-in-three-english-regions-make-250m-in-three-years

You do realise PIP costs the country £20 billion a year? That’s 240m would be pissing in the wind.

Leavesfalling · 12/11/2025 19:14

MyrtleLion · 12/11/2025 19:11

When private companies are making £250 million over three years for providing care?

No. The money that should be going on caring for the population is going to private equity companies. These providers should be non-profits.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/nov/12/private-care-providers-in-three-english-regions-make-250m-in-three-years

Those companies are providing a service that is needed by older people. They aren't charities. Care will be paid for by either the people themselves (which should be most people) or taxpayers (either state run or private..either way taxpayers pay).

Meadowfinch · 12/11/2025 19:14

OP, I have one child because I couldn't afford two.

I work my arse off to pay my mortgage and provide for my child. I could have chosen to go on benefits and set that example for my son, but I chose not to.

I don't appreciate slogging away and paying my taxes so other people can not work AND have two children.

24kPalamino · 12/11/2025 19:14

NotEnoughKnittingTime · 12/11/2025 19:10

So are many on benefits.

But work SHOULD pay. People who work, should be able to reap the reward of that, because most people don’t want to work. It’s a slog! It’s horrible getting up at 6am, leaving for work at 7am, leaving work at 6pm tomorrow for me, and getting home at 7pm. All you have time for is a shower, a sandwich and half an hour watching some TV before you’re crashing. It’s completely unfair that equity is the goal here.

I actually don’t mind about people with real disabilities. Not anxiety. But MND, Parkinson’s etc. No problem supporting this type of person at all. But other groups I have a massive issue with frankly.

AlexisP90 · 12/11/2025 19:15

Also DP lost his job last year. He claimed job seekers for the first time.

While on it he got a free prescription.

He got a letter in the post saying as he was on contribution based JSA he didnt qualify for free prescriptions... I mean its a fucking a joke!! He has £0 in savings was out of work through no fault of his own and was denied ONE free medical prescription.

You cannot make this shit up honestly.in what world is that fair. He has worked his whole life paid into the system and during the 3 months he was out of work wasnt even allowed some anti biotics for free.

I really do understand people who cant work needing help. Totally get it. Fully happy to help support.

But someone wanting 3 children and not being able to afford them when I would LOVE 3 children but can't afford them so havent had 3...no. Sorry.

LadyKenya · 12/11/2025 19:16

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).

Ok, let us know how you get on with it all, if you think it is so easy to claim.

MyrtleLion · 12/11/2025 19:17

Leavesfalling · 12/11/2025 19:14

Those companies are providing a service that is needed by older people. They aren't charities. Care will be paid for by either the people themselves (which should be most people) or taxpayers (either state run or private..either way taxpayers pay).

If you can't see that our taxes going to companies to make £250m profit over three years is daylight robbery, then there is something very wrong with your thinking. And this is the tip of the iceberg.

Just think how much we could improve public services if that money wasn't going to already rich people, often offshore.

24kPalamino · 12/11/2025 19:18

LadyKenya · 12/11/2025 19:16

Ok, let us know how you get on with it all, if you think it is so easy to claim.

Well, millions of people have had success haven’t they?

babyproblems · 12/11/2025 19:18

TwoTuesday · 12/11/2025 14:10

I think it's bizarre that benefits need to be capped, surely it's a sign they are too high to start with, or why would a cap be needed?
It is so complicated. It's wrong that employers pay poverty wages and taxpayers have to subsidise that via benefits. Someone who is in work and not on benefits doesn't get paid more for having more kids. Their taxes will go up to pay for the no cap policy so their own kids will have less.

IMO the most important statement on this whole thread is “it’s wrong that employers can pay poverty wages”
this x10000.

There are so many businesses in the UK that are basically subsidised by the state it’s ridiculous. The hidden truth here is that many businesses are not actually creating value at all, so cannot pay people ‘enough’- previous governments have helped them keep everyone’s pay low - apart from the directors, the CEO and the shareholders that is, whose pay has increased wildly and I mean wildly beyond most people’s comprehension.

If business paid proper wages - and not wages subsidised by the government where people have to claim benefits on the side, or the government reward businesses for creating ‘fake’ jobs (has a job really been created by growth, if it can’t afford to pay a ‘true’ salary to the worker??) then many people wouldn’t need to claim benefits.

Why aren’t we angry at the 1% who are hoarding wealth like you wouldn’t believe, deliberately not paying tax, keeping as much profit as they possibly can whilst not paying staff the wage they deserve / have actually earnt.

Oh and this group of people are also convincing the public to vote for the increasingly extreme right wing. Again purely to bolster their own interests, keep their wealth ring fenced from the societies they parasite off of, and to corrode employment law so their source of income is even more sure thing for the future.

@Pinkbowls lovely thread and great explanation of the reality in your op. We need more balance and actual understanding on here!!! Xox

dogsandbudgey · 12/11/2025 19:19

It shouldn’t be lifted, I’m sorry but I’m honestly knackered. I’m fed up of working hard, very hard with the last few years working two jobs. There’s no need for people to have more than two children if they are unable to keep them fed and warm. Quit the vapes, and alcohol if you need extra money! Maybe I’m a miserable sod but I just think there is frig all incentives for people that work hard. I think vouchers for food that can be redeemed against food and hygiene products. This would make a better substitute in this instance. Money doesn’t always get spent the way the government intends it to be used and I’m sick to death of people on benefits getting an easy ride on the back of others, HOWEVER . I DONT INCLUDE PARENTS OF DISABLED CHILDREN IN THIS, they should be given all the help and support they need and deserve!!!!

sorry for the rant but ive just had enough

Leavesfalling · 12/11/2025 19:19

MyrtleLion · 12/11/2025 19:17

If you can't see that our taxes going to companies to make £250m profit over three years is daylight robbery, then there is something very wrong with your thinking. And this is the tip of the iceberg.

Just think how much we could improve public services if that money wasn't going to already rich people, often offshore.

I think you're trying to distract from the far larger impact of paying people to not work and the cost of lifting the 2 child benefit cap.

Sure..sort out the care home system. I have no views on that and £250million is a drop in tbe ocean. Its not hugely relevant here. And a lot of the private sector finances our pensions btw.

MyLimeGuide · 12/11/2025 19:19

24kPalamino · 12/11/2025 19:00

That says they’re getting too much money to me.

Agree. Being able to 'save benefits' is an outrage.

MyrtleLion · 12/11/2025 19:20

AlexisP90 · 12/11/2025 19:15

Also DP lost his job last year. He claimed job seekers for the first time.

While on it he got a free prescription.

He got a letter in the post saying as he was on contribution based JSA he didnt qualify for free prescriptions... I mean its a fucking a joke!! He has £0 in savings was out of work through no fault of his own and was denied ONE free medical prescription.

You cannot make this shit up honestly.in what world is that fair. He has worked his whole life paid into the system and during the 3 months he was out of work wasnt even allowed some anti biotics for free.

I really do understand people who cant work needing help. Totally get it. Fully happy to help support.

But someone wanting 3 children and not being able to afford them when I would LOVE 3 children but can't afford them so havent had 3...no. Sorry.

Edited

And what if they could afford it then lost their job, or the breadwinner died? Should they be penalised for already having children when they need benefits like your partner did?

LoopyLeela · 12/11/2025 19:21

Private rent 800-1200? Where do.you live? In most cities outside London, 800 is the going rate for a room in a househare. Hardly a family home. Welcome to modern day Britain, where workers have nothing and landlords have everything.

Crazybigtoe · 12/11/2025 19:21

3 children. GGB. G and B are twins.
Renting in london. Rent £2625
No savings
Twins 13. Oldest G 16.
16 hrs working NMW £852 (absolute min number of hours and wage)

Total benefits : £3969
Total £4821

Reverse £4821 back into www.thesalarycalculator.co.uk and I would need to be earning £82k to bring in that amount.

Why on earth would you bother to work in a more stressful role.

AlexisP90 · 12/11/2025 19:21

MyrtleLion · 12/11/2025 19:20

And what if they could afford it then lost their job, or the breadwinner died? Should they be penalised for already having children when they need benefits like your partner did?

My partner barely got anything. Not even a free prescription. He was also out of work for 3 months and took a much lower paying lower level job to get back into work.

UserFront242 · 12/11/2025 19:21

24kPalamino · 12/11/2025 19:18

Well, millions of people have had success haven’t they?

Success because they met the criteria. It is nothing to do with how easy it is.

Go on and try anyway.

LadyKenya · 12/11/2025 19:22

24kPalamino · 12/11/2025 19:18

Well, millions of people have had success haven’t they?

I don't know the numbers, but regardless, please do let us know how it works out for you, and how much you will be raking in!

SpaceRaccoon · 12/11/2025 19:22

Simonjt · 12/11/2025 18:49

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.

The government doesn't actually have any money. It is our taxes.

Janie143 · 12/11/2025 19:22

MossAndLeaves · 12/11/2025 13:54

Could you comfortably live off that?..

I do and it's my take home pay after tax 🙄

MyLimeGuide · 12/11/2025 19:23

MyrtleLion · 12/11/2025 19:20

And what if they could afford it then lost their job, or the breadwinner died? Should they be penalised for already having children when they need benefits like your partner did?

Its quite rare that the 'breadwinner' just dies, and there is something called health insurance.

Please create an account

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

This thread is not accepting new messages.