Do you think the government should raise the threshold for child benefit?

[nancydroo]

My understanding is if one person in the household earns £60k the household are not entitled to claim child benefit. If they earn £50k or more they get taxed on it but still get to claim it. However, if the combined household income is higher than this threshold but shared over a couple they can still claim child benefit. Do you think the government should raise this threshold? Are you nearing the threshold but going to miss the child benefit as income?

That was to sjxoxo

But it’s not a childcare grant (those exist and do require both parents to work). And if it was it would be fairly useless - isnt it about £86 a month and full time childcare would be over £1000!

I've always thought this penalises single parents, who tend to be female. I am a single parent, just over the threshold, with two DC to support. No support from the DC dad so have to manage childcare on my own.

I have friends who are two parent household earning way more than me, but still get CB. They manage with less childcare too as they can split drop offs and pick ups between them, but I have to do both.

It's always seemed discriminatory towards single parents to me, but too scared to talk about it openly as can be seen as a whinging high earner. But in London with 2 DC in a single parent household (no help with childcare from a partner), why do I get less support than a 2 person household who either have a much higher household income, or if on the same income as me, have a part time or stay at home parent who can do the childcare?

Surely a couple with a combined income of £120k can afford to pay for childcare rather than have it part state-funded?

Why should their lifestyle be subsidised when a couple earning £50k less wouldn't be?

Yes I don't understand why this is how it is?

I’m old enough to remember when independent taxation for married women began in the UK. 1990. Before that, a married woman’s income was treated as part of her husband’s income for tax purposes.

To bring back taxation based on household income is regressive.

A couple both working and earning £49k are both paying tax at 40%. They are likely to have higher childcare costs than a worker earning £65k with a stay at home partner. The child benefit cut off recognises this

It wouldn't be. 120k wouldn't be entitled to CB.
A couple earning 80k would and would need it.
A couple earning 60k with no need for childcare will be better off than a couple earning 80k needing childcare.

As a widow I think it’s deeply unfair. But then all benefits are deeply unfair to widows. There is not, and never can be, any spousal income. And yet one is treated as though there is.

Iamnotthe1

the working couple need childcare for their ‘lifestyle choice’ and childcare is extortionate

one could also say that the luxury of being a SAHM is a lifestyle choice

It absolutely should take into account household income not individual income. Due to personal circumstances I know quite a lot of families in this situation, in all of them mothers don’t work or work very limited amount part time because at least one child has additional needs. Those who cited childcare is a difference obviously never tried to find childcare for a child with additional needs.
By the way if we are protesting I’m in.

@BurscoughBooths what about parents on their own, either widowed like @Eeksteek or single parenting like me?

It seems regressive that mostly female single parents are not able to claim CB.

120k wouldn't be but anything below that would be. £100k could still qualify for the full amount.

Again, a couple earning £80k can afford their own childcare. Why is public money going to support those earning so much higher than the household average when others don't even have the money to feed their families?

As an aside, two people earning £80k (with equal split) will also be paying slightly less tax than one person earning £60k. That change in net take home pay is more than the average childcare cost for a child, even more once the child starts school.

Agree not fair for many reasons. A colleague lives with his partner who has a son from a previous marriage. She claims child benefit but colleague need to pay it back via HIS tax return because HE earns over £60k. It is not his son and they are not married!

@Arenanewbie good point about households where childcare would be too difficult to find.

Would love to protest but fear people see £60k and think we're complaining our diamond shoes are too tight, not seeing the utter unfairness.

But one is being partially funded by the state using public money and the other is not.

The couple are already benefitting from two lots of individual tax allowances plus paying likely an overall lower level of tax than the one worker family. Do they honestly need more support when others are struggling?

I think the threshold for personal allowance should be raised from £12.5k to nearer £15k which would be a 20% increase and reduce tax for lower earners the highest percentage

If they were struggling, they'd both be working.

Should definitely be on both parents' income.

Ideally raise the threshold a bit too, but I'm much more bothered about the unfairness how the threshold works, and felt that way long before I thought I'd ever marry and have children.

It’s like that purely from an administrative point of view. Since independent taxation government has no way of knowing what the income of a household is only individuals.

By struggling, I was referring more generally low income families who would benefit from a redirection of support away from higher household earners and towards lower household earners.

But, even if I hadn't been referring to those, your comment doesn't address single parent families or those where there is a specific and genuine need for one parent to be at home.

Would not support a family with a SAHP getting this money

I think the theory is that two people working are more economically useful to the government, they are more likely to be paying for childcare, more commuting costs, work clothes, coffees out etc. It is a carrot to encourage both parents to work and cheaper to administer than trying to calculate household income. It is also of course grossly unfair for single households but they may not be the demographic the government is aiming policies at.

I earn just over. Single parent. I’ve just cancelled rather than be charged for the amount I need to pay back as it’s a tad confusing and I’m shit at saving.
Friend got stung with a £3000 pound bill as didn’t realise they were just over for a few years and hadn’t done a tax return.

The very first thing I wrote was:
no, except single parents.

And they are not a low income family if 1 parent earns over 60k and the other chooses to be a sahp.

I know of a couple who won in excess of £4 million on the lottery. Neither work so they receive CHB. Bonkers.