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!

"SweetKitty - I work full-time, have absolutely no family here (nor does my husband) and I do not work around my husband's shifts nor he mine. Now you of one mother with shed loads of childcare to pay for."

Same here. Now she knows two.

And I'm a bit unsure why the taxes we pay should go towards pocket money for those who decide to be a stay at home parent.

The more I think about this the crosser I get. Conflating a couple's incomes was supposed to be a thing of the past!

And what does it say about the value of children and their upbringing to our society? Stuff the "It takes a village" approach; it's every parent for themselves.

Winter fuel allowances for wealthier pensioners next? Nah, DC wouldn't dare....

Mingg - I didn't say there are no families that have no childcare to pay for, from MN and looking at it a few times myself it is very costly even with school age DC. What I was saying is that where I love every working mum (and Dad) relies in family childcare.

I don't get the argument that 2 parents working need more money to pay for childcare, it is very unfair to lone parents.

Yes CB needs to be mean tested but above all it needs to be fair.

That figure of £26k is the gross average, so if there is talk of capping benefits at that then presumably it would be whatever £26k minus tax works out to be.

I wonder how they will classify a household for that benefits cap? I know of several households where there are 3/4+ adults who are all on long term benefits, some claiming incapacity benefit for non-existant bad backs. The amount of income they get between them allows them to go abroad more than once a year and spend an awful lot of money in the pub.
I know people will shout cliche at me, but these kinds of families/individuals do exist. What makes me see red is that the reason that people who need extra help don't get it - Sancti and Riven to name two people here whose situations are fairly well known - is precisely because there are people who are defrauding the system. And I have no sympathy for them, not one ounce.

"Plus once you're in the 40% tax bracket, for every pound you earn over 44k, you only get 50pence of it, after tax and N.I."

I don't think that makes much difference, to be honest.

Right now, the marginal gain of earning £1 for DH is around 20p, because on his wage, the deductions of Tax, NI, housing benefit, CTC and WTC stacks up to at least 80p in the £. So an hour's overtime brings around £1.60 to the family income.

Although I think we forget what things were like in the 70s & 80s. My Dad worked for a fruit & veg distributor. Overtime rate was £1 per hour less than standard rate, which given the wage of the time was a huge proportion of his hourly wage.

People these days feel slighted if overtime is less than 1.5 times standard.

"I'm a bit unsure why the taxes we pay should go towards pocket money for those who decide to be a stay at home parent."

I can see why you might think this, but while it is perfectly true that some people can choose to stay at home or go out to work, depending on the spacing and number of children, salary, opportunity to work around childcare, partner's ability to work around childcare, availability of childcare etc. etc., many people can't afford to work because their salary simply wouldn't cover the cost of childcare.

Just as it's true that many people can't rely on relatives for childcare, many people can't rely on nurseries, childminders etc. for childcare either.

Equally, some people have to give up work because the combination of caring for parents and children is too much, or because they have children with disabilities.

Remember that by being a HRT paying household people are already contributing by paying tax.

For a lot of families mine included it is more than pocket money.

I get more annoyed with the really rich who pay accountants to avoid paying as much tax as possible, target them, not families just above the 40% limit.

I wont be affected by the change, nor am I a single parent, but am so incensed by the unfairness of it all, I have emailed my MP the PM and Cleggy, won't do any good I know, but a good way to let of steam.

Makes you wonder what else they have "up their sleeve" for Women, Children and single parent families.

I'm with you Lenin!! Wasn't it Diane Abbott who said all cuts penalised women, she's bloody well right!!

One of my friends has six children, I bet the 'larger families' section on MN is going crazy!!

merrtmouse - "
Equally, some people have to give up work because the combination of caring for parents and children is too much, or because they have children with disabilities."

The disabilities thing is a red herring as there are dedicated benefits for that.

I find the idea of seeing child benefit as kind of "housewife's salary" worry-some. And I don't care about the credit card debt or mortgage of a single-earner 45k household. I've neither credit card nor mortgage (can't afford it, but pay private rent) and wouldn't expect society to stump up for either.

Ah WM

Those dedicated benefitsa ren'ts afe either

DLA is but the criteria has been tightened and its not for us- its to buy stuff or the kid's SN. the special diets etc. Resppite.

The otehr benefits we get (we have 2 disabled children) are:

carers- seems that will be part of universal credit, so will drop for those whose famillies have no additional work (currenlty you get paid a premium over IS... so if you are a single aprent, or caring for an elderly parent, or even your ill partner).

Universal credit will also means test carer's Allowance so willa ffect the middle class carers even mroe I imagine: double whammy with this.

We also get a premium on top of out tax credits but have no idea agin if this will fall udner universal crediot (we're alow income working family) or not.

Sorry for typing; legendarily abd at best, sick ds4 asleep in my arms right now.

I understand the need to make savings - but is this really the right way to do it? I feel DC and GO are making a huge mistake here and alienating many families (future voters?) If they have to do it, raise the threshold.

RosieandGin - maybe enough emails to DC will make a difference - mine is winging its way to him through cyberspace now :)

Posie Parker- Cherie Booth's law firm have put in a case to say that all these cuts will affect women more than men, and therefore that they are sexist. I don't know what the outcome of this case is so far.
My issue is who exactly voted for this government?

"The disabilities thing is a red herring as there are dedicated benefits for that."

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahaha. Pff. hahahahahahahahhahahahahahahah. Pffffffff. Ha.

How lovely to be so naive.

How can it be fair that a family where the DH earns £40,000 pa and his wife earns £30,000 giving a bulky income of £70,000 a year still get CB. Where another family where DH earns £45,000 and his wife is a SAHM or on minimum part time wage LOSE it??? Its non sensical at best and plain dumb at worst!

this is an interesting article in the guardian

Interesting duckyfuzz, I hadn't realised that someone on nearly £30k could get housing benefit.

MIB I dont think most can, we certainly never did when dh working.