Needing to reduce income to get free childcare

[Katie1186]

Hi all,

I earn over the £100k threshold and actually would be better off if I contributed £10k into my pension to qualify for the 30 hours of child care.

Has anyone done this where you have manually contributed after being paid or do I need my employer to do this in order to reduce my income??

I know people who have had their employers do it but I don't know anyone who has had to manually do this themselves.

Thank you so much in advance!!

I do agree with this. The government need to overhaul the legislation, and remove loopholes, so the correct benefits go to people who need them.

Wow you are getting a lot of abuse. You are not a scrounger, on 100k you are already paying a fair whack of taxes. If you contribute 10k to a pension you are also investing for your future which the government is encouraging though tax breaks. You can set up a private pension and pay into that if you aren't able to up your employee contributions. I would check with your employer first though

Shocked at people judging the OP tbh, we pay huge amounts of tax which contributes to benefits for all, we would be equally canny to avail of some benefits such as free childcare if I wasn’t at home with the children. When you earn over £100k you get no child benefit or free nursery hours or anything at all despite contributing a huge amount of tax, child benefit used to be available to all and it does feel like there is little point striving for a high salary to contribute to for everyone else’s benefit but not your own family’s.

Your employer should be able to do it for you @Katie1186 DH does the same. Although our kids are now older so no longer need the hours but he still overpays into his pension.

👏🏻 Exactly that!

not to mention that having a child is an option whereas being disabled is not

You don't need benefits

Ignore the race to the bottom comments OP. What you wish to do is perfectly legal and sensible.
it can be done either by asking your employer to increase the employee pension deductions it takes from you or by making manual payments directly to your private pension. If the latter, you will need to reclaim the higher rate / additional tax back via your self assessment tax return.

@milkyteaformeso you’re saying OP really is so hard up she can’t find that £500 childcare money herself?

@ProudDadasome of us do want that actually

Exactly. As she will be paying so much tax she should be entitled to free childcare.

Completely agree, but also some disabilities can come on after children, so there is a middle ground too.

Race to the bottom with these responses . MN is for everyone. And everyone should be well informed about the tax and other implications of government policy which impact on their personal circumstances. Which will be different to other people’s personal circumstances. Because that’s life.

@Katie1186

it’s far easier to get your employer to up your contribution % vs claiming back via tax return.

I can adjust mine on a monthly basis if needed to work around bonus etc.

I kind of agree with your inital comments, but I also paid income tax my entire working life - also at 50% - (and still pay income tax) but nobody gives a shit about that then it comes to discussing how I'm supposedly a scrounger for having PIP. Having a disability and a demanding job was also hard work, but there are plenty around here that put us down. There are also people who have nothing but disability benefits, and we can't afford them (we are told) so I think it is a legitimate question to ask how we can afford free childcare for people on nearly 3 times the average wage. I think what you will find is that the hypocrisy of MN posters is the root of the malaise - benefits for the better off are great and necessary, whilst benfits for the poor are just supporting scroungers and malingerers.

@GandalfatemyhamsterI am not commenting on what the op can or cannot afford. It’s none of my business. I am simply saying what she wishes to do is legal and sensible.

But that's not the situation we are discussing.

I'm sure if the OP were in any way disabled she would have said so. She's earning over 100 K., has chosen to have a child & is now trying to get free childcare when the government is cutting back on benefits to disabled people because they say we can't afford the benefits we are paying

So someone who doesn't need it just wants it is working out how to make their finances fit the criteria (which will also benefit them in later life) to take money, they don't need out of the pot.

Yes, lots of people do it, it doesn't make it right.

Yes, the government needs to close that loop hole, because people won't do the morally right thing,

It's just wrong.

Why shouldn’t a high taxpayer get a few years break?

Women who choose to have children in shitty circumstances and be dependent on the taxpayers for years and years on end didn’t need benefits until they made antisocial and selfish choices. Where is the umbrage toward them?

OP has and will contribute a lot more to our society than the average benefits recipient. Why shouldn’t she get something in return?

Have your employer increase your pension withholding, OP, it’s easiest.

If we restricted benefits only to recipients of involuntary health misfortune, you might have a point. But we don’t. Lots of people deliberately choose to create scenarios where the taxpayers have to support them.

If the actual burdened taxpayers like the OP get an occasional break, then, I don’t have a problem with it.

If you look at all my previous comments on this thread, I wasn't disagreeing with you. I was just replying to the poster, albeit slightly off topic as you have rightly pointed out, but I wanted to remind people that it isn't an either/or. Things can get heated when discussing issues such as this, and I feel people with children who have disabilities can get a lot of judgement on why they had kids etc, when they were healthy at the time of having children. Those in glass houses...

In op's case yes , no disabilities. The whole system needs overhauled. I do not feel sorry for op, and I believe this thread may not be genuine. Somebody earning that kind of money would have the intelligence to know what they can and can't do in this situation.

Tell that to the hundreds of thousands of women deliberately having children with an eye to collecting SMP and benefits. Why don’t THEY fund their own expenses like you seem to expect OP to??

There was an article on just this subject the other day in The Economist

Who will speak for Henry?
https://economist.com/britain/2025/03/26/who-will-speak-for-henry?giftId=83a98762-7149-4c6c-8611-60202ac77d1a&utm_campaign=gifted_article

Here is a snippet

For starters, Henry’s tax affairs are painful. Overall, the tax take is close to its highest level since the second world war. Middle-earners have it good. Still-generous tax-free allowances of £12,750, recent cuts to employee national insurance and a basic rate of income tax at its lowest level in the modern era mean that the average earner is lightly taxed.
By contrast, Henry is hosed. At £100,000, the removal of the tax-free allowance creates a 60% marginal tax rate for those lucky enough to have a fat salary. When national insurance and student-loan repayment—which act like a tax—are included, a young high-flyer can face a 71% rate. It is not quite 1960s levels, when The Beatles moaned about “one for you, 19 for me”, but it is not far off.
Henry misses out on perks others enjoy. The Conservatives introduced lavish free child-care allowances, which are worth tens of thousands. Yet Henrys are excluded. When all this is put together, a Henry in London with two children under five is better off earning £99,999 than £149,000. Tax experts must often explain that tax rates ensure there are no gigantic losses when income crosses a certain threshold. In England, however, earning one pound over £100,000 can cost thousands.

Lots of people deliberately choose to create scenarios where the taxpayers have to support them.

I think the point is that it is either right to do that, or wrong to do that - it is hypocritical to say that wealthier people are being wise if they "create scenarios where the taxpayers have to support them" whilst others are scroungers for doing the same thing.

@TheHerboristeok so do you think anyone should pay tax, based on your vitriol against women in poverty? OP is essentially benefitting twice, benefiting from her pension and benefitting from free childcare. As someone below already stated, it’s around £300-500 of a monthly wage of £8000. I earn £1900 a month (pretax) and I have to pay all my own childcare myself (breakfast club, afterschool, holidays) and I’m a single parent.
In this climate where libraries are shutting, food banks are at breaking point, day centres for disabled people are shutting, there’s a six month wait to get a carers assessment, people are having their care packages stopped etc, yes I do think it is greedy (!!!) that someone is taking steps to mean they are wealthier at the end of their working life and have free childcare.

Why would having a 100k income mean she would know everything about everything? She’s asking if it’s better to have it come out of her salary or if it still counts for the funded childcare if she makes her own payment post tax to her pension. If she hasn’t done this before there’s no reason she would know which is easier, hence her question.

Honestly some of these comments are ridiculous and bitter.
Ask your financial advisor. If you earn 100k you should already know what to do.
🤦‍♀️

Can you send a link to evidence this statistic? Or have you just plucked this number out of thin air?