To be seriously worried the new govt are looking at cutting child benefit...

[cherrymama]

to 'middle class' families?What does that mean?We both work but have four kids and losing that income will seriously affect us...so please tell me IABU and that it won't happen!

'Food and children's clothes are exempt from VAT (or zero-rated). So are books.

Raising income tax is a blunt tool: you can't avoid paying it but you can avoid paying VAT by cutting non-essential spending.'

Many teens, including young ones, wear adult clothes and shoes.

These are not exempt.

Nor is a major essential that is an increasing cause of fuel poverty: electricity and natural gas.

haven't caught up, but saw something upthread that caught my eye

I do not believe for one moment that child benefit payments represent nearly 2% of the governments entire expenditure every year

Sorry but that is cobblers

Here is a bit of nonsense for you:

When I was divorced but my ex was paying me spousal/child maintenance (so I could afford the mortgage), I also got generous CTC (much to my surprise) as a single mum, because maintenance is not counted as earnings.

Then I moved in with DP, so spousal maintenance stopped, obviously. The amount DP pays into the joint account per month makes up for that, but XH has also reduced child maintenance because I am no longer on my own (so he feels it's another man's job to pay for his children).

As a result, I am quite a bit worse off since I have no claim on my partner's income (we are not married) beyond what goes into the joint account to pay for bills (he has his own personal financial commitments). I pay for everything to do with the elder children, because they are not his, so I rely on my earnings, CB, CTCs (now drastically reduced, obviously, because I live with someone who earns) and maintenance from my XH.

I became worse off to the tune of several hundred pounds a month the day our "household" earnings effectively doubled. And that's what the system fails to take account of.

can i ask, for those that do earn 50k plus and still say they would struggle without help with childcare, cb etc.

what are your main outgoings? i know people have mortgages etc, but i was wondering is it partly because with a bigger income you have been able to buy a larger house or one in an area where it costs more and you could have saved money by downsizing or living elsewhere?

same with cars, could you have bought cheaper cars?

bills etc we all have to pay, gas, electric is always scarily expensive, we have done things like get cavity wall and loft insulation and a new boiler to help bring our heating costs down.

like i say i just cant imagine having a 50k income and feeling like money is tight?

i dont mean that in a judgmental arsey way, ,just that you get used to living by your means, so if you have more you spend more and if you have less you spend less ifyswim?

and i am NOT saying that you should downsize or get a diff car or have to make huge cut backs etc, i am just wondering about where money goes not that you have to tell me!

Expat, I certainly agree that some other elements of spending: heating fuel, for instance, should be zero-rated or exempt. And 'basic' clothing, perhaps, like shoes that would fit teenagers. I'd also include underwear.

I'd increase the list of exempt/zero rated and put a very high rate on things like silly handbags costing thousands of pounds. Or very large cars. Or expensive house-fittings.

Or, sob, foreign holidays. I love them but perhaps we should pay more in tax for the privilege of some sun.

Ya listening, Georgy boy?

"If a person can't afford to have more kids than they can support it doesn't seem like a penalty. Reality, but well, two choices: either make more money to afford more kids or don't have them."

Good post Expat. So many people have children without the slightest thought as to how they will support them and then simply expect the state to pick up the tab.

Also agree with your comments re people making excuses as to why they cant work. Its not just on here but other forums and in life. There are those that wont take certain jobs, those that want to work 10-2 term time only and then those that pull the "i wont put my child into childcare" card. If the Tories can correct some of that then it can only be good for the country. Yes unemployment is high but there are jobs available for those that want to work and will work at any job.

I'd love to see all child related benefits stopped and instead have more universal ones like higher personal tax allowances and less VAT increase. That way everybody benefits the same and there is not the incentive to have more children to gain more in benefits.

expatinscotland:
"I don't get how it's punishment. If a person can't afford to have more kids than they can support it doesn't seem like a penalty. Reality, but well, two choices: either make more money to afford more kids or don't have them."

exactly.
i dont understand the people on the forums who immediately say to this: oh well, better sterilise the poor then
it makes sense: if you cant afford it, dont spend on it.
i cant afford the cost and upkeep of a helicopter, so i havnt bought one.
we all know that this doesnt apply to people who are unexpectedly single/jobless etc etc.

and this has been a very balanced and rational thread, my DS will be off to uni next year so i will stop receiving anything, but then i will be losing the expenses that he occurs by living in this house.

CB should be cut for famillies who earn more than £60,000 after tax jointly. Its ridiculous that quite wealthy famillies get CB.

There is going to be a big shake up and at least Cameron has cut his wages and the wages of the cabinet and this should be done accross the board for ALL civil servants if they want to keep their pension pots.

VAT is going to go up to 20%, but unless they add it to everyday items (kids clothes) then it will only affect you if you buy something or have services.

The good times are gone around the world and we must ride out the bad times to get to the other side.

Labour supporters should be HAPPY that the Libs and Cons are in power as in the next 5yrs they wil be the most HATED parties ever and then Labour can get themselves a better leader.

That's if the world has not blown itself up in 2012

My neighbour, a nursery manager, and her husband, a builder, would have loved more kids. They have two because two was what they could afford.

They have watched a succession of feckless families fill a house down the road. We have had two families in row live in the (council) house. There are multiple fathers and boyfriends. They produce lots of children, who all need social services support.

My neighbour essentially pays for these children through her taxes while she can't afford to have another child herself.

That's unjust and has to stop.

we will really notice the increase in fuel, its a big part of our monthly outgoings already, but dp has to drive to get to work, so we cant afford paying it!

and what expat said about childrens and shoes, my eldest ds who is ten is in adult sizes and no doubt soon ds2 will be as well, i can still buy kids shoes i am a size 3 or 4 but my children all take after their 6ft size 11 father

I'm just amazed that the original maintenance wasn't counted as income. No wonder some couples have been pretending to live apart.

It should be possible to agree on a range of basic clothing items: black shoes, white shirts, grey trousers, underwear, etc, that are zero-rated (or exempt) in all sizes. This would be fair.

Stick more tax on ridiculously over-priced items.

I was looking more for research quoting the £4 /£3 figure that is so widely quoted by Tories. I have a feeling it is totally misleading and totally spun. I thought you said there were specific journal articles that quote it?

I have searched myself and am starting to think it is an urban myth figure

Maybe we should go back to making our own clothes and going barefoot?
Oh I am in a mood this morning.

4MADBOYS, (have namechanged), in answer to your question about outgoings matching income, yes, in ourcase dh earned £180k last year and I earned £18k (pt) however our net after tax, ni & pensions was £105k of which £82k went on mortgage payments.

The mortgage payts are only supposed to be £30k but we're massively overpaying as dh's job not v secure and we're aiming to get it paid off by the end of this year.

Raising income tax targets everyone proportionatly though doesn't it so is far than indirect taxation such as VAT. Therefore fairer.

ah right, well that makes sense! good luck with the overpayments and i hope you get it all paid off, that will make life much easier.

sorry to hear your dh's job isnt very secure thats one thing about dp's job, it may be a crap wage but it is secure! just a shame about the bite marks, bruises, blood blisters from pinching etc and spit covered clothes that he comes home in

On the points about all these "feckless people" having children they cannot afford.........and stopping them have children etc etc

DOn't you see what the Labour way of dealing with this was? They were trying (and I know not totally successfully) to attack this from the angle that this type of person generally doesn't stop having children because there are no benefits, they actually continue and children simply live in abject poverty.......so Labour tried to change the mindset by getting these children into child carre settings earlier, and with Surestart, and overall, try and make it so these children do not have to live in such poverty

If you think that people with chaotic lives keep having children simply for benefits, then you are very naive. So, cutting benefits will not stop people having children.

minthumbug was that to me?

That nearly 2% of the entire government expenditure every year is on child benefit?

I just don't believe it. How are we managing to pay for all these wars and stuff then?

Good grief, 4 mad boys, is your dh a lion tamer?

frogbollock - you spent 82,000 on mortgage replayments last year so that you can pay your mortgage off this year

wow

Well here's a radical idea - whatever the MPs decide is the 'cut off' (ie a 'well off' salary - whether that is 50k, 60k whatever), they should cut their household salaries to that point. After all, they would by their own definition be 'well off'.

callmedave can you tell me where you got you stat from?

"The total amount paid in Child benefit is £11.21 billion.

I think that it is 1.8% of total spending."

I just can't believe that.