Thank goodness tax rise scrapped

[Jems557]

So we’re a blended large family, so after maintenance and all the outgoings for our large combined family we don’t have very much left at all, as obviously we need a big house so our mortgage and council tax is a lot, we need a bigger than average (although several year old) car etc. However we don’t claim any benefits, my DH works hard to provide for his and our children but so much is taken in tax anmd maintenance already, there is no tax allowance for raising children. This would of hit us hard

The point is we do and want to pay for our children but the state takes a huge portion of the money we earn to do so off us

Some peoples ideology around children in this thread explains a lot about why we have such plummeting birth rates

Of course it does. That’s what tax is.

Genuinely not really sure what your issue is, is it having to pay HRT on a high income?

Your monthly expenditure on the children that let’s face it you chose to have?

How much better off you were when the state (as in, tax payers) were footing more of your bill?

Your husband earns well, there’s a consequence for that - we put more into the economy. Which is fair, we earn more.

Having more left after those deductions is a different matter, but it’s still very closely linked to the family choices we’ve made.

Children cost money. Both their parents and the state. Rewarding parents for having them through tax benefits would just make that cost higher.

What's your ideology, OP?

Allowing people to earn a basic allowance enabling them to feed, clothe, accommodate and educate their children is not a ‘reward’ as they will be spending the reduction in tax and most likely more on their children. We obviously share completely different ideologies when it comes to children, to me they are valued citizens of this country, many of whom will contribute positively to society in the future, but first and foremost should be valued as individual citizens. To you they are just pet ornaments of their parents, with such opposing ideologies we are bound to go round in circles on the issues of what would constitute a fair tax system. All I can say is under the current system many of those I know with children find it’s either not worth there while being higher earners or staying in this country. Perhaps someone who is already comfortably off due to a low mortgage etc doesn’t quite see the issue as keenly

See my post above, to add I don’t believe there is any morality to penalising blended or large families within the tax system by effectively giving an entire family (whatever their size) just 2 basic personal allowances

Yes,no doubt they'll be coming after sick and disabled people again.

It wouldn't make any difference to the finances of your situation if you'd had a torrid two year affair and his ex-wife had caught you in flag del in the marital bed.

The only question is whether your husband can afford the maintenance of his children with his ex, while also supporting your household. It sounds as though he can, but resents that taxation makes it more difficult and presumably you have to cut back on other things.

All I can say is - join the club. We're all in the same boat as middle-earners (by which I mean, not earning millions but being comfortably above living wage). I don't think your blended family status entitles you to any tax breaks others don't get - it's a situation you chose. Your reasons were good and your conduct was honourable, but this isn't the 1860s - you get no reward for 'virtue' in 2025. Most of us lead, at the very least, blameless lives but it doesn't make you richer.

We had that with five children. We just sucked it up.

Can I ask, would you choose not to have children purely on the basis of current tax policy or other people’s ideologies that they shouldn’t be born?

Benefits dont go up that much.

I think it’s incredibly disingenuous to claim anyone in the HRT band is in need of a “basic allowance” to feed their children, particularly when you look at the conditions those far worse off have to live in.

High earnings are the benefit of being in a highly paid job. What we spend it on is our own concern and own issue. If you’re a high earner struggling to feed your children, you have an expenditure problem.

My children are absolutely valuable. To me. They’re a direct cost to the state in terms of education, resources, health etc. Purely because they put nothing in, in terms of tax. They do spend money, lots of it, but it’s ours. They earn nothing and spend loads. Like all children. Of course they’re valuable members of society. Just not independently economically valuable.

We’re not “comfortably off due to a low mortgage” at all. We’ve got a very expensive disabled child, so quite the opposite.

However - we both have a reasonable income, so it’s not falling on just one of us to take that load, and what we do have we’re grateful for. I would never for example claim that we need a “basic allowance” when I’m looking at the income we’re fortunate to earn.

Well bully for you and whatever your circumstances were (which probably are not the same as ours) but I’m relieved there apparently won’t be this tax rise and would certainly be voting with my feet at the next election if there was, that’s the wonderful thing about democracy:)

You now have secure housing over relying on a landlord, that's definitely a huge benefit. Not to mention a financial asset instead of helping someone else to pay off their mortgage.

Was it a choice not to have credit card debt? I don't have credit card debt because I simply can't afford it. The most I do is the odd Klarna payment because I know for sure I'll be able to pay it.

So you have 2 higher incomes so very much doubt you are struggling, and having had a disabled child I am well aware of DLA PIP etc. Have you ever considered how fortunate you are to both have jobs where you can both have higher incomes and the flexibility to work around your children (or have childcare that enables you to) more so a disabled child

Preaching to the wrong choir love.

No I’ve never considered how fortunate I am to wake up at 3am and then work a 50hr week. That’s the product of lots of coffee and even more willpower.

We’re fortunate to have flexibility, sure. We’ve earned that flexibility by working hard to get to positions that allow it.

We’re fortunate to have an income that means we can meet his ever growing needs. We also work very hard for that privilege.

You can't win though when you have a disabled child.

If you work, your child clearly isn't disabled enough and you milked the system for DLA.

If you don't work, you need to do whatever you can to work despite the fact that it can be almost impossible to find work around your caring responsibilities to a disabled child and like you said, often harder to find childcare.

I was helpfully told by someone yesterday that if they had a disabled child, they would just move to a small, cheaper house in a cheaper location so they wouldn't have to claim UC. Like it is oh so simple.

I agree it’s an asset but not one we can draw down on, it is our choice to use credit cards to buy decent food, clothes etc. I believe given what we earn we should comfortably be able to buy these basics anyway and more, indeed anyone should

Whoever told you that is being cruel and ridiculous. When my disabled child was a child, it was difficult enough to work let alone to have had that flexibility and been able to be a higher earner. The person who is in a household of 2 higher earners cannot compare themselves to households with just 1 higher earner, they are being able to maximise 2 personal and basic rate tax allowances

I'm really struggling to where you fit in, OP, to the societal/political spectrum.

Are you saying that you are on the more right wing - provide for yourself and bugger everyone else. Or are you more left wing - the broadest shoulders blah blah?

At the end of the day, you are not a special case (beyond emphasising that you are a blended family).

❌ Where your statement is not fully supported (or is inaccurate)

You said the top 10% hold “nearly 60%” of total wealth. According to ONS data, for April 2020–March 2022, the top 10% threshold is £1.2m+, but the ONS does not state that the top 10% hold 60% of all household wealth. It states the top 1% hold ~10% of wealth. Office for National Statistics+1
Your figure that the top 1% own “about 23% of all wealth” comes from other research (e.g., the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) estimate for 2016-18) which suggests the survey underestimates the richest, meaning the top 1% might hold ~23%. Parliament Research Briefings+1
You said the bottom 50% hold “less than 5%”. The JRF (Joseph Rowntree Foundation) article states this figure — that the bottom 50% held less than 5% in 2021. Joseph Rowntree Foundation But the ONS survey (for April 2020–March 2022) says the wealthiest 1% held 10%, the same as the bottom 50% combined (implying bottom 50% hold ~10%) in that dataset. Office for National Statistics+1
You said “Wealth inequality … has increased since the 1980s.” The evidence: relative inequality (share of wealth held by the top) has not shown a consistent, large upward trend in UK data — the ONS indicates relative shares have been “broadly stable” since the 1980s according to one report. The Guardian+1
according to Chatgpt

It's not “poor-bashing” to want the government to manage a well-run house rather than just fritter away tax. No system that relies on tax as the only lever can succeed. But never let the truth get in the way, eh? Show me a country that has just taxed its way to success. I’ll wait…

Everyone keeps wheeling out the 'other countries have high taxes' line. High tax is not the same as being a successful high-tax country. We don’t have:
an economy that genuinely draws investment (hello, Ireland), high productivity,
an efficient, well-run public sector (hello Norway), or infrastructure that actually meets our needs. High taxes hit harder when everything is failing or broken. It's not greasing the wheels, it's throwing money on the fire.

Our benefit bill is rising, more and more people are being signed off, productivity is low, government spending is out of control, they can barely service their debt and the liability for unfunded public pensions is another runaway train hurtling towards us! Growing inequality is a very real problem, but tax. as currently used / mooted, is a deeply flawed tool. It won’t solve anything other than dragging more people into poverty or dependency on the state, whilst stifling the growth and innovation which our economy so desperately needs.

Asset wealth in the form of someone’s only home is another blunt instrument. Many people want to downsize but can’t afford to, and/or there simply aren’t enough of the right homes in the right places at the right price. Wealth taxes based on the theoretical value of your home ( as mooted) at a single point in time are arbitrary. Unlike other taxes, they’re not based on income received or gains actually realised. It’s dog-whistle politics and dog-whistle taxation. It doesn’t address the root cause of inequality or the real reasons the government is under financial pressure.

We are well and truly screwed if we don’t look at the real drivers: low productivity, low wages, inefficiency and waste in the public sector, out-of-control spending and debt, corporates that take more than they give. Add to that a political leadership whose main talent seems to be how well they can blow a dog whistle and make crap decisions. They are not just force their hands into our pockets (they will be back for private pensions) - they are sewing them shut

Seems to me the current strategy continuing the trend of a race to the bottom (l, Employer NI, minimum wage and business rates, anyone?) not a well executed plan to reduce inequality.

We both work in positions that allow us the flexibility to leave work as and when needed, fit things around school, attend meetings.

We’ve got 3 weeks of de-sensitisation dentist appointments coming up for example. We will attend them, and then put the length of time that takes back in at some point.

We didn’t just fall into those jobs, however. They’re the product of hard work and long hours. You’re right, we are fortunate to be able to do that, but it’s not luck or happy accident. It’s very, very tiring.

You’re also right, it’s not comparable. In much the same way having one higher earner as you do, isn’t comparable to having none.

Someone saying they simply wanting to be able to comfortably pay for components of life such as decent food, clothes, swimming lessons for their children out of the money they have earned is not the same as saying bugger everyone else. Not least when you see many people paying much less tax than your family very comfortably being able to afford those things and more. I’ve always been happy paying tax set at a fair level, am glad of the NHS and welfare state etc

My DH did not fall in to his higher earner position either, it came after many years of alot of hard work and taking on a lot of extra responsibilities and sacrifices for us as a family (being away for weeks at a time) I am also in a job that the FTE falls into the higher earner bracket which I have achieved after many years of study and work and ongoing professional fees etc. However our 2 jobs cannot be both done full time using available childcare and are a juggle enough to combine them as we do. If we were taxed as a household our earnings would be quite sufficient to live modestly comfortably. Families who are not able to split earnings evenly between both parents are particularly penalised

Agree, to have certain groups end up with ridiculous marginal tax rates just doesn’t make sense, these are often some of the most highly skilled people whose work could drive the country forward whether that is a surgeon who could do extra operations to get people well enough to work again or my DH whose work could help the british company he works for get extra business they compete for internationally. So many parents at this level though find it’s just not worth their while due to the marginal rates. Add in the extra tax being paid happily (if it was just 42% total) plus the investment in our children’s education and welfare we want to spend the money on that we would be allowed to keep in a fairer tax system, it’s win win win but instead we have this crazy system that ends up leaving him with only 20p in the £ and even less if he tries to
increase his income much more