Middle earners punished

[Eucalyptus321]

I am feeling so disheartened and frustrated by how middle earners are constantly suffering at the hands of ridiculous government priorities. My husband and I have a greater household income than other families we know but have less cash in hand due to increased taxes coupled with the fact we receive zero benefits like child benefit or tax free childcare etc. ZERO. If they want middle earners to fund the country thought tax then at least support us with childcare costs. It’s a joke that two parents earning £99k each get childcare funding but parents with one £101k salary and one £25k salary receive nothing. I just need to speak to people who understand the burden of raising a family amidst the current financial climate and then the potential of further tax rises!

This come up all the time here. The top 1%, that people on £100k are the high earners. No they are not. They are absolutely middle earners. Have you been to London? Have you walked around the residential areas. From the City to Chiswick, down through Barnes to Richmond, miles and miles and miles of massive houses, £2mil upwards, rows and rows of house £10mil plus. Flats that cost £2mil. Theatres full every night with tickets costing £150 each. Restaurants with menus costing £200 each. The shops, the designer goods. Who do you think is buying all this. Not people on £100k. Nope.

JUST TO CLARIFY I WAS USING THE TWO PARENTS EARNING £99k EACH AS AN EXAMPLE TO SHOW HOW RIDICULOUS THE £100K CAP ON ONE EARNER IS RATHER THAN TWO

I haven’t shared our household income to be fair. I’m a part time teacher and my husband’s salary goes over the £100k threshold for the support in childcare. The government don’t think about encouraging people to work.

Yabu, we have your earnings and we’re not strapped for cash. We have a lovely home with a mortgage - entirely our choice to buy it

👏👏👏

Trust me, OP — being at the bottom of the pecking order is absolutely horrendous too.

I work, and I’m a single mum. And I really want to emphasise what that actually means: inconsistent and limited childcare, a one-adult household, and a one-income household. I’m on my own. There’s nobody to turn to in desperation and nobody to share the load when things get overwhelming.

My wage and the small top-up of Universal Credit don’t cover my outgoings. I live a very limited life because I simply can’t afford anything extra. No holidays, no treats for myself — every penny goes on bills, my children, and trying to keep my car going. I have nothing left at the end of the month and I’m constantly in the red.

The problem with UC aswell is that it creates a poverty loop. The more you earn, the less you get. Which yes, does make sense. But it also means I have to earn SIGNIFICANTLY more to get any real benifit (once you’ve also considered extra costs to be able to work more).

The idea that people on benefits are “rolling in it” is a complete myth, and the stigma around it is really unfair and inaccurate.

I’m sorry to hear about your situation and I do understand your frustrations, but please don’t assume that those of us on benefits are any better off.

Obviously not everyone is a billionaire but when you can't recognise that you are better off than 99% you have lost sense if proportion.

We have a family income of 80k and think ourselves privileged and lucky. No we can't afford private schools or a house in Kensington... so what? We have a nice life.

I actually think the childcare situation for 100k is complete stupidity.

It’s such a lazy argument to say that people who disagree just don’t understand the topic.

I agree with you that the way childcare funding (and child benefit) entitlement is calculated makes no sense. It should be on household income.

Statistically though, if you’re a teacher and your other half earns over £100k, your household income does not put you in the “middle earning households” bracket. Your partner is not a middle earner.

But those on this thread think those on £100k must be minted because they cannot fathom how much tax those on £100k are paying. We earn well over and can’t afford £150 theatre tickets. My pensioner parents can easily however…

You’re a crap earner living in a cheap part of the country so it’s easy for you.
You also receive state benefits like free childcare and pay much less tax than OP (who funds your free childcare whilst having to pay hers and listening to your budgeting advices).

Just some edit to make your response complete.

Gosh that is not what my post was about at all. I sympathise with your situation aswell and have friends who are in the same boat. We could name many lives that are worse off than mine. That wasn’t why I was posting and I hope that is clear. I merely wanted to share my frustration with others about the recent news of tax rises being possible again and the fact that the middle earners are funding a lot of the country. Probably because the top earners are all leaving.

No, earnings in the top 5% of UK earnings cannot possibly fit a definition of “middle earners”. Unless you are counting the “middle” as anything from 2nd-98th percentile.

ETA - obviously I would not include someone on £100k as being in the top 1%. But it’s clearly nonsensical to say that the top 5% is in the middle.

This is a joke surely? We earn well over too and can easily afford £150 theatre tickets. What does your money go on? Your mortgage must be huge

He can put the excess over £100k in his pension and the tax free childcare will be available to you.

So I hate to get all factual but you are talking about two different things. The removal of childcare funding at a certain level is separate from income tax..income tax is broadly reasonably progressive. Funded childcare is a political decision/incentive..Historically the state has only supported dual earning (or let's face it women going out to work) when it has suited the socio economic situation at that time. In recent years we have wanted more people to work hence funded childcare. When the labour market was different the state was less keen to support women working and when it needed women to work (WW2) it it made that happen.
Tax take is spent on a vast range of things not just subsided childcare. Mostly pensions and health and social care for an aging sickly population.
And just to be really clear, neither of the examples you give would be a middle earning (taking a median approach to the middle) dual income household. In April 2025, the median gross annual earnings for full-time employees in the UK was £39,039. So circa 80k for two middle income earners.

I get you @Eucalyptus321 - and I’ve posted multiple times about it before , when we lived in Denmark tax was high, like very high indeed- not just for high earners- across the board but childcare was peanuts ( and good quality) and available to all at the same price, no council tax, no NI as such , so someone like yourself and your H might bring home a bit less than what you do now ( wages a little higher) but immediately save £1400 on childcare, £300 on council tax plus NI - and in these situations there were far more couples with kids working full time or as near as - this leads to higher tax take etc, etc -

A lot of things depend on where in the UK you live. Mortgage, council tax, childcare, travel…

People fail to realise that at present 4% of UK workers earn over 100k pa. In London it gets to over 15%. Yes, no majority, but it's one in 25 people, not such rarity at all.

How would a degree in economics tell you this?

You're not being "punished". Stop with the needless emotive language and victim complex.

It's just how the system is. You might think it's rubbish, you might think it's unfair, and you might be right.

But you're not being "punished" FFS.

yes because we’re young and live in a city for our jobs. 2 x nursery and after school club pretty much takes the rest.

If your husband isn’t that much over £100k then he should be putting the excess in his pension and will still qualify for the 30 hours free childcare and tax free childcare x

Same. Wait, if 90k is middle then im beyond low 😳

The general principle yeah I agree with. The meant a testing should be on household income not a sole earner, especially because of the loss of personal allowance. Wages in this country are a pittance across the board but it is a real kick in the nuts and nonsensical to be financially better off earning £90k then £100k. The funded hours childcare should definitely not be stripped away.

that being said anyone with a salary of £100k is not a middle earner. They are a high earner.

My kids are in your position too, OP. They live in London and have HUGE mortgages on little flats. Not entitled to any childcare hours.