Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To question this...?

318 replies

foureleven · 08/04/2010 15:43

I saw this on another thread and kind of hope the mum in question doesnt see this because I dont want to cause offense... just genuinely interested in peoples views..

(..treads carefully...)

I spotted this person say that she is a SAHM and her husband brings home £1000 a month. Plus they get child tax credits. Now I assume this is not 'working tax credits' as thats for childcare right? And they wont need it if she doesnt work.

It may be that its not a lot of money anyway and not worth getting one's knickers in a twist for but AIBU to wonder why a SAHM can claim benefits (other than initial maternity benefits of course)?

If you are a SAHM because your partner earns enough to cover everything thats one thing (and a debate for another thread, this is not ANOTHER SAHM Vs WOHM debate!)but why can women receive top up money to be able to stay at home with the children they cant really afford to?

Shouldnt we be responsible for bringing enough money in to the home for our children?

Genuinely ponders....

OP posts:
cocolepew · 08/04/2010 16:13

I agrre with Reality I wouldn't class them as benefits, the world and their dog can claim.

Original poster
foureleven · 08/04/2010 16:15

Sorry Witchywoo, didnt want to make it personal. And certainly dont want to make any mum feel crap
We all have our little opinions and ideas based on our own situations and gripes with life i guess. No hard feelings.
A lotof my friends must be in this postion too, just didnt realise.

Madugger - I guess I would be saying that, yes.

(steps back slowly, covering face!)

realityiswalking100miles - just took in your first response - POTTYMOUTH!

OP posts:
maduggar · 08/04/2010 16:15

Its called "tax credits" and are given out by the inland revenue. They are not called "benefits" and are not doled out by the jobcentre.

simples.

RealityIsWalking100K · 08/04/2010 16:16

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

teaandcakeplease · 08/04/2010 16:16

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you here but surely she gets the tax credits as she's entitled to them, as her hubby is only earning £1,000 (that's not very much to be fair) and its not a case of claiming them so she can afford to be a SAHM but simply as she's entitled to them, as anyone is with a wage below 50k or whatever it is

I certainly found childcare cost huge and found I'd barely break even on returning to work and my hubby didn't earn that much either, so the only work I could consider was evenings and Saturdays whilst he was at home at one stage to watch the kids.

I'm impressed they can pay their rent and bills on £1,000 though.

WitchyWooWoo · 08/04/2010 16:16

been on this site a whole week and now theres a topic about me.. should i feel special?

working tax credits and child tax credits are for pretty much everyone, only the very high earners... i think its 50k + can't get them.. not sure..

m'eh

WhoIsAsking · 08/04/2010 16:17

BENEFIT BASHING BY STEALTH.

Classy.

Joolyjoolyjoo · 08/04/2010 16:17

I do agree that the tax credits system is complicated and could do with an overhaul! We both work, and get CTC. I am 30 mins a week short of being able to claim the childcare element (apparently if you work 15 1/2 hours a week instead of 16, you don't need to use childcare?!) However! Because I don't claim it I can do the thing where you pay your kids nursery fees (up to a capped amount) BEFORE your wages are taxed, which saves you paying the tax on the childcare costs, which is, I think, what the tax credits were initially intended to redress???

I don't really understand why they don't just put an extra £40 onto the CHB (more for people earning under the set amount, obviously!) and scrap the tax credit system (which seems to be a huge unwieldy beast anyway, and costs a fortune to administer.

But until they do, I will take my £40/ mth!

Original poster
foureleven · 08/04/2010 16:17

WhoIsAsking - Have never had anyone complain about the way I write posts before.

Maybe "I cant 'understand' that if your husband cant support you both that you dont have to go out to work yourself."

OP posts:
ASecretLemonadeDrinker · 08/04/2010 16:18

While minimum wage is so low, I think there is no arguement. If one partner is working full time (they cannot help the fact min. wage is so low) then it should not even be in question to not to able have a child. It's sad that min. wage is so low that tax credits/top ups etc are needed. A person whould be able to go and work an average week in this country and have enough money to feed, clothe and shelter their family. IMO it's the 'norm' for a mother to stay at home with her child/ren, both parents working shouldn't be necessary. Minumum wage makes no sense because you cannot survive on it. THey need to cut the cream off the top, makes me sick companies make millions and billions in profit but yet the bulk of the workers are stuggling on the crumbs from their table.

violethill · 08/04/2010 16:19

WWW you should not feel crap. Also, tax credits are not benefits.

OP - you were perhaps a little unwise to start this thread. There is a genuine debate to be had about taxation, where it goes etc but this wasn't the best way to go about it.

Also, remember that even though it's frustrating to see a big wodge or your earnings disappear to the tax man, there are many positives to having an earned income which things like tax credits don't give. eg a pension, long term prospects and security. Tax credits are designed to top up the household income for those on incomes below a certain amount, so that there is enough to pay for food, heating etc. They don't provide all the other benefits of earned income, so it seems churlish to begrudge anyone for them.

bremusa · 08/04/2010 16:19

I can't work, I had to give up work when we realised there was something not right with ds. He's severely autistic, non-verbal, violent and very locked-in. I'd love to go back to work but it's just not possible.

I have had someone say to me that we get 'a fair bit of extra money in benefits', DLA and extra CTC, like that sort of makes up for having a disabled child. Ignorant fucker. I'd swap any alledged benefits for my son to have a 'normal' life.

thesecondcoming · 08/04/2010 16:21

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Eglu · 08/04/2010 16:22

OMG!!!! The person claiming CTC could work and still get the same amount. You think if someone decides to be a SAHM then they should not get a penny from the government because they are choosing to be lazy and not have a job.

OP I think you have got off lightly in this thread. You are a complete bigot, and maybe you should learn to keep your stupid uninformed views to yourself in future.

maduggar · 08/04/2010 16:23

I am personally quite grateful that CTC enables my children to have a parent at home. That is important to me, and we are lucky that the government makes it possible.

Monty100 · 08/04/2010 16:24

So, OP comes on here questioning her friend's entitlement to tax credits and questions why she should entitled to them in order for her to be a SAHM, giving private information of the friend's family income.

Then the OP's friend posts on the thread, confirming what OP said.

I'm confused dotcom. .

Alibabaandthe40nappies · 08/04/2010 16:24

OP - I get what you're trying to say I think, and it is a valid question.

For example, I'm a SAHM but DH earns too much for us to get any tax credits of any kind. So us deciding that I'm at home has no cost implication for the tax-payer. (Obv. there is the arguement that I'm not paying anything into the system at the moment either, but that is another discussion!)

A household where the working partner earns a low enough amount, and the other partner is a SAHP, could be in the position where one of them staying at home brings them under the tax credit threshold, so therefore they get benefits. Their decision to have one parent at home is being subsidised by the tax-payer.

I don't know what the answer is. To say that only households where there is a comfortable income should have a SAHP would be outrageous and goes against everything I believe about the government leaving people alone to run their own lives wherever possible.
But equally it doesn't sit well with me that pople are able to claim a benefit for making what is essentially a lifestyle choice.

Monty100 · 08/04/2010 16:25

Oh, it's from another thread. Der.

OK.

violethill · 08/04/2010 16:25

Jooly - totally agree that the system needs an overhaul. It's pretty rubbish in some respects.

Also agree with Lemonade Drinker about the minimum wage. There should be a much greater differential between the minimum wage and benefits. Benefits should fulfil basic needs; but it should always pay for people to work. It's ridiculous that some people have little incentive to work because they are almost as well off on benefits.

Those in better paid and interesting jobs are more likely to have other incentives to work, such as intellectual stimulation, but in dull repetitive jobs, you're less likely to get that satisfaction, so you're relying wholly on the financial remuneration to get people to do it.

WitchyWooWoo · 08/04/2010 16:29

teaandcakeplease we're just careful with the pennies. ds still gets toys and clothes and trips to the zoo/park/happy places but no big spendings (Primark not Boden)

there are some people who do defraud the benefits system and i hate that. I've been on real benefits before and hated every bloody minute of it... DH lost his job a week before DS was born, i had to waddle down to jobcentre 5 days after a c-section to fill in more forms, and we got off them as quickly as possible.

I'm not going to question how much you earn foureleven but you must be comfortable enough not to recieve ctc or wtc, you're very lucky. i don't even like getting these... but i do and im bloody greatful for them.

fwiw we live comfortably too. all be it when ds goes to grandparents for the weekend we get a takeaway and watch crap on tv instead of going out but i don't think me or any of the mn'ers who do get the credits should feel like lesser people or scroungers in anyway.

lifesucks · 08/04/2010 16:30

tax credits are NOT benefits

WhoIsAsking · 08/04/2010 16:31

There's always a first time.

You can't understand why a mother who stays at home to look after her children is entitled to some money for the government?

Really?

I guess we really can't win then can we? If we go out to work, we're bad parents who aren't giving guidance to our children...WORKING PARENTS PRODUCE FERAL KIDS! If we stay at home and our partner works, but doesn't earn over 50K then...we get lovely little posts like yours...

Don't know why you've irritated me so much, I think it's a combination of starting a thread about another poster - bad form; and then sprinkling in a bit about where are my taxes going in a DM type way.

WitchyWooWoo · 08/04/2010 16:31

monty27 im not a friend of the op... i mentioned on another thread about how much my dh earns and that we do get ctc... i don't see it as very private information, yes its no ones business really, but i chose to say it.. my fault really.

noeyedear · 08/04/2010 16:32

I think the OP was a bit unfair too. £1000 a month is what I earn part time- We would never be able to live on that- It would be much easier for the OP's DH to sit at home on benefits, but he works. I pay £500 a month in childcare. If I have another child, it would not be worth my while going to work. I may end up on tax credits too. I don't mind paying taxes to people who are trying to bring up their children well. The cost of childcare really does make it very difficult to go out to work. I think there are major issues with the benefits system, but tax credits aren't benefits and it's all you get if you do work.

LisaD1 · 08/04/2010 16:32

Perhaps the "other mum" isn't able to get a job highly paid enough to pay for full time childcare, perhaps she doesn't want to, perhaps it's none of the OP's bloody business!!

The government, that is elected to power by the people of this country, get to decide what tax credits etc a person is entitled to. SO long as the mum in question is claiming legitimately, which it would appear she is, then it has sod all to do with anyone else if she decides to be a SAHM, a WOHM, or whatever.

I, for the record, do not claim any tax benefits or benefits of any kind. HOWEVER, I would not think twice if we were able to/entitled to and I wouldn't give a stuff about people like the OP spending their time wondering if I should be!