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!

Do you think they have £33bn or £1bn just sitting around in cash?

I'd rather have billionaires run their companies and/or invest in new ones.

I well believe these examples, I have several people in my team refuse promotions or extra hours as it impacts things like child benefit, tax codes, UC etc etc.

Well there’s your answer. You are mortgage free on a cheap four bed house. £300k wouldn’t even buy a two bed terrace where I live! Plus you have the benefit of two homes!

And moving areas is not possible for everyone due to work and family commitments. Also, if everyone moves, the houses where they moved to would become just as expensive.

No, I didn't actually need to claim UC, I found work before my £ ran out.
UC would not have been enough to allow me to pay my mortgage and support my son, so I'm thankful I have found work.
My child's father does support his child. He does not earn very much (I was always the higher earner) but the government has let him off the hook and taxes are not supporting my son any more than a child with 2 parents at home.

I am sorry that you are ‘sick of hearing about it’.

I am otherwise glad that you have not been fiscally impacted by Labour.

Many posters on MN have been adversely impacted however, and they have a voice.

They’re choosing to be adversely impacted.

£3k on childcare is a choice. I don't deny childcare in London is expansive, but that's double the maximum we've ever paid for FT childcare.

Our household income is £75k; edge zone 2 in London. We own a mortgaged 2 bed with garden, own a car, 1-2 holidays abroad and UK trips. We received child benefit and tax free childcare but no other benefits.

We are not big spenders overall and not particularly interested in "lifestyle" commodities, which are Imo what cost. We do however spend a lot compared to others we know on food, energy and other household items because we choose to use more sustainable products.

I know we are comfortably off and the blanket assertions that people on our income are either in receipt of benefits or find it impossible to live in London are inaccurate.

This is also in response to @Baconbuttymad and @BringBackCatsEyes

And here lies the problem!

A large proportion of the population base their opinions upon limited facts rather than taking the time to research and form an opinion based on all of the relevant facts / the full picture.

The 100k cliffhanger is ridiculous, removes incentive and stifles growth. Anyone who educates themselves as to how it works in practice would see that - in simple terms it's a fact not an opinion.

The comment above indicating that anyone on 100k plus is expecting to be subsidised by tax payers is laughable and is an excellent example of the above. The 100k plus salaries ARE the net contributors, it's not expecting the tax payer (them) to subsidise them, it's pointing out the FACT that without the actual problem being addressed, working is disincentivised. Instead, there is an incentive to work less to take home more - this both loses the country money in tax receipts and costs the country money in the childcare benefit.

A policy that has the consequence of a net contributor contributing less in tax and taking more in benefits in order to take home more personally each month is utter madness!

Choosing to be impacted? How do you conclude that?

I am not just referring to VAT on school fees.

Aren’t you embarrassed to post such a lame response, particularly on this budget day when the OP’s burden will be increased due to Labour’s ongoing incompetence.

I hope he’s been successful in securing a new role

Yep. There’s not many left who don’t feel as the op does.

Don’t come on here with your intelligent analysis and facts. People far prefer to imagine those who earn high wages deserve to have all of their money confiscated and given rags to wear.

Very strange logic…and

’I’m alright Jack’

And then we go ‘why have we got a productivity issue in the UK?’

There are many working enough hours to get UC and living in their own homes. As the child/children get older (more likely towards secondary school age) they will eventually increase their hours, but in the meantime they are keeping on the career ladder, paying into their occupational pension scheme and spending time with their offspring. They benefit from all of the freebies which come with being on UC from free dental care, free prescriptions, childcare, free school meals, help with energy bills and so the list goes on. All of the freebies add up and they can end up better off financially than someone working full time with a modest income. They can have savings of up to £6,000k which is allowed with UC.

I have known a number over the years, and currently, who refuse to work more hours as they would be worse off than on UC and they feel they can make things up further down the line as they have remained in their professional occupation. They appear to have not fear that they won’t be able to climb the career ladder further down the line, although not contributing as much into their occupations pension appears to cause a bit of concern when they have been working part time for over 5 years.

Whilst we do need a safety net for all sorts of circumstances, using UC as a lifestyle choice is problematic for a lot of people especially when they are working full time and are either worse off or feel worse off than someone on benefits.

Wondering whether those posting statements such as ‘grow up’ should in fact ‘grow up’

As much as some might be happy about people being pissed off Labour still need votes.

A few going on about how much more tax they want to pay, they usually mean someone else anyway, won’t do it.

When did you buy your house and how much for, because a house in zone 2 on £75k doesn’t sound very realistic.

I live in London and our local nursery go from £2.2k - £2.5k for a baby now.

Three years ago, they were £1.8k - £2k.

There will no doubt be another increase in January, as there is every year.

So you see how the cost has rocketed at the same time as childcare subsidies coming in - the excluded parent penalised twice.

Who are you talking about - where’s the line?

Well you might be suprised at how much costs have increased. I paid £1k 10 years ago. It’s now over £2k for the same nursery and that’s one of the cheapest around here 40 miles from London. The problem is that once you earn over £100k you don’t get any subsidiaries such as the tax free childcare or free hours (apart from 15 hours for over 3’s) and you end up subsidising everyone else as the nurseries have put their fees up dramatically to cover the shortfall in Government funding. With your household income, your fees would be subsidised.

and yet it's ok for the well off to reduce their tax payments to gain support with childcare? put more in their pensions to gain access to childcare support?

You are making one hell of an assumption there which is not rooted in any fact

Your husband earns over 100k. That makes him in the top 4% of earners in the uk. If you're struggling, imagine what it's like for the rest of us.

If you want to blame someone, blame the super rich who are not paying their fair share, or the corporations for not paying their tax.

Don't blame the 96% of people earning less than your husband.

Sorry but where is the father in all this?