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.

Middle earners punished

1000 replies

Eucalyptus321 · 25/11/2025 21:18

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!

OP posts:
Thread gallery
9
chipsticksmammy · 26/11/2025 10:35

Bumblebee72 · 26/11/2025 10:34

Really? Labour have proposed every type of tax going? I'd barely be surprised if there was a pay by mile walking tax in the budget.

My diamond shoes are going to have get a down grade 😂

tramtracks · 26/11/2025 10:36

BIossomtoes · 26/11/2025 09:34

A tiny percentage of the population chooses to pay school fees thus paying more tax and frankly those of us who don’t are sick of hearing about it. I personally am paying exactly the same proportion in tax as I did in December 2023.

That tiny percentage probably pay a huge percentage of taxes.

chipsticksmammy · 26/11/2025 10:36

bogstandardaf · 26/11/2025 10:33

"have less cash in hand due to increased taxes" even if taxes were 99% there is no feasible way that increased taxes could leave you with less money mathematically. If you earn more, you do pay more tax, but you also have more money at the end of it, unless tax is over 101%.

Increased taxes and inflation combined is the problem

hamstersarse · 26/11/2025 10:37

I just think fundamentally the contract between the taxpayer and the government has been broken.

The original contract was this:
Citizens agree to hand over a portion of their earnings, and in return the government promises to use that money wisely to keep the country safe, well-run and fair.
Taxpayers agree to fund the state, and the state agrees to protect them, provide essential services, use the money responsibly, and remain accountable to the people.

I don't think any taxpayer can say that the original contract between citizen and government is working anymore. There is waste, there is no say in how taxes are spent, they do not seem to care to make clear justifications as to why more tax is needed - it is just expected that we all just take it on board and deal with it.

Klipspringer · 26/11/2025 10:37

tramtracks · 26/11/2025 10:36

That tiny percentage probably pay a huge percentage of taxes.

But it’s ok because the PP has not been adversely impacted, so the rest of us can swivel.

Bumblebee72 · 26/11/2025 10:37

We all know the big issue is that welfare has increased by nearly 50bn in past 5 years. COVID has made too many people fat and lazy. Tough love is needed. It seems Reform is the only way this is going to happen.

Christmascarrotjumper · 26/11/2025 10:37

Klipspringer · 26/11/2025 10:37

But it’s ok because the PP has not been adversely impacted, so the rest of us can swivel.

PP is a well off pensioner....

Christmaspuddingsss · 26/11/2025 10:38

80smonster · 26/11/2025 10:32

Correct. The childcare hours should be offered to all working tax payers, we should be empowering and incentivising 2 tax payer household to keep hustling.

Except Labour doesn't regard anyone earning 6 figures as 'workers'.

They have never defined what a 'worker' is (although they did try lately and it was anyone on the median income or less).

All they do is disincentivise people with the drive and brains and guts to work hard and get the growth they keep saying the want.

MidnightPatrol · 26/11/2025 10:38

80smonster · 26/11/2025 10:32

Correct. The childcare hours should be offered to all working tax payers, we should be empowering and incentivising 2 tax payer household to keep hustling.

The childcare hours situation has become radically worse for higher earners since the introduction of 30 fre hours for 9 month olds in September too.

Before that, you lost out on your £2k tax free childcare (so £5k pre tax over £100k). The 15 hours over 3 is worth about £5k at my nursery.

The 30 hours is worth more like £12k now though. Plus the tax free childcare.

Apply this to two kids and suddenly a ~£7-9k annual loss might look more like a ~ £20-25k annual loss. And you’re paying tax at 60% on the gross amount you need to earn to fund this.

It is extraordinary.

Beddiem · 26/11/2025 10:39

Boohoo76 · 26/11/2025 10:26

One of my DC does go to state school. My other goes to private as the local state couldn’t meet his needs. In any event, that was a choice that we made long before this policy came into force. No reasonable parent removes their child from a school that they are happy and settled at unless they absolutely have to and it’s not reasonable for any Government to introduce a policy that forces them to do so.

As a state school parent I am still waiting for the cash bonanza that this policy is purportedly going to bring…I will be waiting a long time since (1) it’s generating very little and (2) Starmer has said it’s going to be spend on housing (i.e. not education).

Us too. Two state school kids, one SEN child in private. It was either mainstream private or me hide up work to home educate. Private was the cheaper option. We still can’t really afford it. His godfather helps out though.

tramtracks · 26/11/2025 10:39

hamstersarse · 26/11/2025 10:37

I just think fundamentally the contract between the taxpayer and the government has been broken.

The original contract was this:
Citizens agree to hand over a portion of their earnings, and in return the government promises to use that money wisely to keep the country safe, well-run and fair.
Taxpayers agree to fund the state, and the state agrees to protect them, provide essential services, use the money responsibly, and remain accountable to the people.

I don't think any taxpayer can say that the original contract between citizen and government is working anymore. There is waste, there is no say in how taxes are spent, they do not seem to care to make clear justifications as to why more tax is needed - it is just expected that we all just take it on board and deal with it.

The best post on this thread.

Borrowing levels of successive governments have destroyed this country’s economy.

MustafaFagg · 26/11/2025 10:40

What loopholes do you think the rich are using ?

Klipspringer · 26/11/2025 10:42

It’s going to take at least 14 years for the next government to fix the mess left from this shower of shit government…

tramtracks · 26/11/2025 10:43

newbluesofa · 26/11/2025 10:32

What wealth tax are you talking about? I haven't heard Labour propose a wealth tax, I wasn't talking about Labour

Where to start.

Christmaspuddingsss · 26/11/2025 10:44

A tiny percentage of the population chooses to pay school fees thus paying more tax and frankly those of us who don’t are sick of hearing about it. I personally am paying exactly the same proportion in tax as I did in December 2023.

Your tax situation is not relevant.

It's the politics of envy plain and simple.

Many children in private schools are in small schools where they get help if they are SEND. Their parents are / were struggling to afford it in the first place. Many parents are on modest incomes but made huge sacrifices to send their child to a school where their needs would be helped.

Those who are very wealthy won't notice much difference with VAT if they can afford £60K pa for Eton etc. and they will already be paying a lot of tax.

However, it's the parents lower down the earnings scale who suffer. And don't forget that those parents are paying TWICE for education- they don't get a tax break if they take their child out of the state system. They're paying for it whether they use it or not.

RR has accrued very little from this VAT on school fees. In addition, many parents have taken their children out of those schools and some have found it very hard to find a school with places available.

dottiehens · 26/11/2025 10:45

80smonster · 26/11/2025 09:14

One set of people paying the tax is punitive and short sighted. If everyone wants better services, everyone should pay. That’s how Scandi countries manage it, by charging low earners more for the services they use, after all, they are more likely to need them.

Well the Scandi countries are not wasting money and at least Denmark has sorted out the immigration surplus.

PeonyPatch · 26/11/2025 10:46

Labour are further running this country into the ground. I’m extremely angry at them getting rid of the two child benefit cap.

Elsvieta · 26/11/2025 10:47

tramtracks · 26/11/2025 09:55

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

I know. I mean, I know MN skews richer than the population at large, but all you have to do is Google, or remember the figures which are regularly in the papers. You would think people with the intelligence to become high earners would be bright enough to know that "the average among people I know and people in my area" is not necessarily the same thing as the actual average. Some people do work very hard at convincing themselves that they don't have any privilege.

IsawwhatIsaw · 26/11/2025 10:49

PeonyPatch · 26/11/2025 10:46

Labour are further running this country into the ground. I’m extremely angry at them getting rid of the two child benefit cap.

I agree about keeping the 2 child cap.
And surveys consistently show support for keeping it in place.

PodMom · 26/11/2025 10:49

PeonyPatch · 26/11/2025 10:46

Labour are further running this country into the ground. I’m extremely angry at them getting rid of the two child benefit cap.

Totally agree. They should be looking at ways of reducing benefits, not chucking more benefits at people. It's insane.

I couldn't afford to have 2 kids never mind more than 2 so I stopped at 1. I couldn't have afforded a bigger house for a start. Maybe if I'd been on benefits I could have had more kids.

Croakymccroakyvoice · 26/11/2025 10:50

ErhManGah · 26/11/2025 09:41

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.

To put this into perspective, £33k (not far off median wage) is 9 hours and 10 minutes while £33 billion is 10.5 centuries but oh won't anyone think of the poor billionaire's struggle to get their hands on the cash!

If you are defending people hoarding that kind of extreme wealth you must be a billionaire or being paid to defend them or just not able to understand how obscene that amount of wealth is.

LostInTheDream · 26/11/2025 10:51

MidnightPatrol · 26/11/2025 10:38

The childcare hours situation has become radically worse for higher earners since the introduction of 30 fre hours for 9 month olds in September too.

Before that, you lost out on your £2k tax free childcare (so £5k pre tax over £100k). The 15 hours over 3 is worth about £5k at my nursery.

The 30 hours is worth more like £12k now though. Plus the tax free childcare.

Apply this to two kids and suddenly a ~£7-9k annual loss might look more like a ~ £20-25k annual loss. And you’re paying tax at 60% on the gross amount you need to earn to fund this.

It is extraordinary.

Added to which, the day rates have gone up because the subsidy isn't enough to actually cover costs in the private businesses that are offering the childcare, and 30 hours term time offer isn't enough for most people anyway

I will caveat that it doesn't impact me as my kids are older, but it is a ridiculous system.

Beddiem · 26/11/2025 10:52

Another person thinking the lifting of the 2 child benefit cap is madness. The ONLY people this policy appeals to is their own rebel MPs. Thats about 5 votes guys, compared to 65% of the UK voters against this policy.

newbluesofa · 26/11/2025 10:54

tramtracks · 26/11/2025 10:43

Where to start.

I don't know? Have Labour proposed a wealth tax on billionaires? I wasn't aware they had?

You said 'the wealth tax' - what tax are you referring to?

PeonyPatch · 26/11/2025 10:55

PodMom · 26/11/2025 10:49

Totally agree. They should be looking at ways of reducing benefits, not chucking more benefits at people. It's insane.

I couldn't afford to have 2 kids never mind more than 2 so I stopped at 1. I couldn't have afforded a bigger house for a start. Maybe if I'd been on benefits I could have had more kids.

Edited

Can barely afford 1 kid! Why we chucking money at people who cannot afford kids. It’s nuts. Why can’t they put that money to improving our NHS instead!!!

Yes, I want more cut backs not more spending. Extremely pissed off millennial here. Constantly shafted.

Please create an account

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

This thread is not accepting new messages.