So child benefit to go for higher rate taxpayers

[foxinsocks]

So says George osbourne on breakfast telly. Missed the details but sounds like it comes in from 2013!

I also wonder if they have thought through the pressure this will put on part time jobs- my child benefit is' luxury' money, it doesn't put food on the table but buys me a coffee in starbucks, etc; however without it I shall be aiming to go from sahm to part time worker, potentially ( as there are a finite number of such jobs available), displacing someone else into claiming benefits? I'm sure a lot of people will aim to do the same, as cb is often enough to make the difference between being comfortable as a sahm and skint!

Scaryteacher, I disagree (unless tax was increased by 10% or so)

Is Vince Cable really, really completely happy with the coalition do you think? I wonder if he has been advising Osborne? In other words, is there an insider working to undermine the government?????????

MollysChambers - if the ConDem's only get one term at government, but succeed in a major reform to welfare and reducing the deficit, then it will be a great thing that they have done for their country. History will see it as an important period of government for the success of this country. It's refreshing to see politicians doing the right thing, instead of just trying to cling to power by doing the popular thing.

Talkingnonsense / Riven - Unfortuate x post there.

I cannot imagine it will affect CB for children who aren't living with you anymore.

Means testing CB is well overdue imo but I do think the threshold should have been a bit higher. It's horrible to get money taken off you but given that it's 3 yrs off then famililes may have time to think about making up the deficit.

I've just had £20 a week taken off me, no warning, not sure why as I have always declared my correct income but that's the tax credit system for you. It has really made me struggle, it sucks, but most families relying of tax/wtc are used to being treated like this.

A2% tax rise would wipe out any cb advantage for us.

I don't know many "yummy mummy" SAHMs. Most people I know stay at home because they have children, and children have school hours. You are generally more likely to find a SAHM trailing round the supermarket looking dispiritedly at the 2for1s than sipping a latte in a new Autumn-range sassy Boden outfit. We don't all live in Surrey.

Absolutely agree with Lenin. It would be a great deal fairer to raise the same amount by applying a (smaller) tax increase to all high rate earners, regardless of whether they have children.

Whoops, talkingnonsense and rivens x posts were an unfortunate clash!

My partner earns is just in the higher tax abnd. Our child benfitmoney is not for lattes or holidays, we rely on it for food.

Here, here Lenin.

Sorry! I know I am lucky that i could manage without it. But in fact, I wouldn't, I would go back to work, which also has knock on effects.

It's a totally ill thought out idea. Costly, confusing and grossly unfair. Just about the daftest thing I've heard from the tories to date.

Having said that, I do find it a little ironic that many are moaning now that the cuts are hitting them directly. Oh, and pointing the finger at other groups in society who have it all far too easy and should be targeted instead.

Were you all you HRT up in arms when the plans to cut CTC for anyone earning over £24k were announced, or were you one of those saying 'we all have to tighten our belts'? Are cuts only unfair when they affect your pocket?

Why the hell don't they just put up income tax? It's the fairest way to make sure we all pay our share. Of course, those 2 parent families earning up to £83k between them might not like that....

History will see it as a more stupid ideas from the party that brought us the poll tax.

vince will be fuming

look next year, people in the HRT bracket will be paying an extra 1% in national insurance, paying 20% vat (I know that affects everyone) and from 2013 lose their child benefit

while I agree that is not so damning for someone earning £100k, I do think for a single parent earning £44k and paying childcare, it is quite a drop in net income to be honest

Well Riven the poster above confirms that comment!

Don't forget the public sector pay freeze as well, and we don't know what they will doing about public sector pensions either; or how the SDSR will affect the Forces who are not actually entitled to redundancy payments.

erm..

this is a question because i really don't know..
If you just do another tax hike on the highest earners then that is just another tax hike - whatever your views on that.

But the administration etc that goes into the claiming and provision of CB to people who probably shouldn't get it costs doesn't it?
I can see why just excluding it for a certain group makes sense ratherthan providing it and then claiming it back from wealthier people another way.

But taxing wealthy people with no children to fund wealthy people who have children seems to me to be penalisingthe groups who are more likley and able to say 'fuck this then, I will go resettle and take my skills abroad'

And the brain drain discussion - so oft greeted with 'fuck offthen' seems to always ignore that some of the high rate payers would not just pack a bag and leave.
If DH and I buggered off then DH would have to sack about 20 direct employees and that would affect other clients/service providers etc.

Now I am not going anywhere and I have no problem with high taxation. But to give it to those who don't need it and then just tax it back seems ...clumsy and expensive to administer

But I may be missing something