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!

duckyfuzz. good examples (from the Guardian!)

The fact the "Single mother working as an IT manager" loses out whilst the "Married couple living in Coventry" don't lose anything shows how unfair the new CB rule is.

The other two examples show why some benefits need to be cut much more! Why should the "Unemployed lorry driver living with his wife and three children" get £33,000 in benefits. That's £45k/year tax equivalent. Thats obscene. Or the "Couple with three children, living in Hatfield" get £11,000 in benefits when they are already earning the average wage. There have to be more deserving people than this for benefits.

Ok irst of all HB rates vary- here ffor example nobody gets more than £5220 a year: slightly less than that other figure! Also, that is already about to drop, with a predicted serious issue for londoners being the result.

Ditto council tax benefit.

Finally, at the moment the family working on £45k would also get the CB wouldn;t they? So really teh figures are meaninglless- they are about to drop, and quite markedly so.

mjinhiding

Housing benefit is one of the most scandalous schemes ever devised. In some parts of London there are people getting £50k+/year in housing benefit ... or to be precise their landlords are! It pushes private rentals higher and also keep house prices higher, pushing up the cost of living in London for everybody.

I wonder why they didn't do it on household income as the figures would have been easily accessible via the tax credits system.

Actually agree HB is qwrong

I eman its a benefit that goes to private landlords anyway isn;t it? Not the family.

But as I said it is about to drop and has been quite strictlyc apped as it is. Boris was apparently v v annoyed.

I have no idea; we have always had a working adult in the house

But only @ £17k of that is ever seen by the claimant, yes they get housing provided but in most if not alla reas they will ahve to pay a top up from that extra themselves

Esp. if in London

HB rates are regional so always less than most housing in the area.

noddyholder not everyone gets tax credits, not even among those entitled as there is a (justified) fear of the admin going wrong and dealing with overpayments and paybacks. Not to mention those who either feel they don't need the money so don't take it or can't face the paperwork.

I havent read the whole thread but I would like to see benefits only being paid for the first 2 children for those that are going to receive it and they should start off with CB. Surely this would save us lots of money and help address a number of other issues if it discouraged people from having more children.

SanctiMoanyArse

It doesn't matter at all if housing benefit goes to the person or to the landlord. That's still tax revenue that's being wasted, that could instead be reallocated to more deserving cases.

The housing benefit system is being changed thankfully. The max rent will be 30th percentile or £400/week. But that's still a possible £20,800/year!

i love rainbows - I said that earlier in this thread. Completely agree. Would maybe stop people having children just to get more benefits.

ilove what if someone goes onto benefits after having their kids?

I can see your argument but... not sure. I think there are betetr targets out tehre than famillies with children to raise (start with nonpaying absent fathers) and it will hurt the most vulnerable- say a parent whose last child ahs a disability.

Siasi thats not that everywhere! Only in some places.

Here, that will be I think about £4k; it certainly places our home at risk as we live far from the housing that is used to calculate the price. I had hoped we could make it up with carers etc but tbh so much else is being played around with I doubt we will still have a roof next year (no landlord here will take 4 kids if two autistic, ours is lvoely and kind)

Now, we are working family so only get part HB but even boris is scared what will hjappen in inner london (far from us).

If the rule is that you only get paid for two and you carry on then you simply won't get paid for the others you have. In reality would this make that much difference. I have reused all my clothes, bedding, beds, toys etc. I would also only ever give a 3 bed house max size. Boys in one room, girls in the other. If you want more you need to go out and earn it, we cannot afford to keep paying these large families where no-one works these large benefit packages.

Cutting CB to higher earners was an easy target for GO, I am sure it has been said but they are clearing the way for big deep cuts and targeting higher earners first gets them so brownie points.

ilocve I;ll go earn it, wanna care for two autistic kids for me? Tip: dont let them near your own kids, ds1 is prone to thumping people.

BTW we do ahve a job in the family. So we do go out and earn it. I still think it places young children at a disadvanatge and would always prefer to see it not happen.

Well, as I said MJ I can't say- we get help but s amll bit of HB and TCs plus my carers. So can't really asnwer for it.

I actually don't have a problem with a not-low state provision for a time: if people are out of work then its better to keep them in their own homes, bills paid. Cheaper for teh state. I do think i'd stagger it down after six months to a year, except where disability / illness are factors (ie where people can find work: I know tehres not much not much but 6 months is enough usually)

Thanks Muminbeds! I am always amazed at these huge amounts supposedly paid in benefits.When I got ill and was on dialysis i couldn't really get anything that would have kept us going.Ds was 5 and at school and I couldn't walk him there in the end so hired a childminder which we paid.Dp decided after seeing me vomit in the street one day that enough was enough and handed in his notice to look after me and keep the house going.They told us to sell our house because he had 'left' work and even though they would only have had to pay mortgage for 6 months as I had a transplant they still said no!I was obv doinfg something wrong or it has changed hugely in the last 10/11 years

I am not arguing its right, I am arguing I dont know if the figures are. But that I wouldnt reduce them for teh first few months- no help to state of a low payment outs someone compeltely under- eg they lose their car so theyc annot get to work (before anyone yells public traansport I'm in a Welsh village OK )

I think for a short time it maintains peoples chances of getting off benefits and back into work; although I might cap it at what was earned if lower. After that then absolutely it seems a lot.

NH yes it ahs changed hugely.

Tax credits for a start; then presumably he'd get carers if you got DLA.

Sancti

I don't mind the state providing some benefits but the current system can be exploited. We're not talking about those needing carers or the genuinely disabled. For the fit and healthy there needs to be a strong incentive to work. Those who can work but don't should expect only the bare minimum.

We have to remember the money is coming from already overburdened private sector taxpayers. The country has a huge national debt and we need to compete with cheaper and increasingly well-educated workers from emerging economies. We need to use every £ as best we can.

I dont agree purely on the basis that babies can't work and raising children in poverty hugely impacts on their life chances.

But there we go.

We don't agree... c'est la vie.