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!

Dreamingofsun- what about childminding? I know of quite a few parents at school who now do this; you would have no childcare to pay for your DD.

Two salaries of 22K are not the same as one of 44K as the two salaries attract two separate tax allowances.

For this proposal not to punish stay-at-home mums (or dads!) the tax allowance should be transferable between them.

The average annual income is around £25K in this country. There must be, therefore, other people earning less than that as well.

Purplehippo Good luck with starting a family. What you might find that you choose to / have to go part time (as your salary does not cover nursery fees). It can mean having to find a new, in many cases, much lower paid job. Employers know that many part time workers are mothers, so they can get away with paying less.

Child benefit is partly there to protect non-wokring main carers's right to pension as well. But of course we do not worry about that now. I could see it on my Mom and MIL though how hard (impossible?) it is for a woman to get a decent pension, if she chooses to have a child.

mjinhiding - if you mother is prepared to do 2 days childcare you could easily make up the cost of child benefit. I'm not saying you would want to and i'm not saying it would be convenient. my initial point was that if someone isn't working already then its feasible they could

I havent read thread because I dont have that sort of time , so apologies if Im repeating what others have said

But if George O is reading this, or the Daily Mail or anyone else, Id just like to say that we have 3 dcs, we both work, dh full time professional earns just over £45k. I re-trained to be a nurse so I could earn better money, and work 24 hours per week to fit in with our family, we just about manage on this, live in a 3 bed (5 of us) one holiday a year, just a normal family.

The child benefit allows me to work 24 hours as it supplements my income, allowing me to work and contribute to this country doing a worthwhile job, whilst spending quality time with my children and being able to walk them so school and back every day.

Am I really 'rolling in it' am I 'living a life of riley'. NO IM NOT. I am an ordinary mum, with an ordinary family who relies on this extra money from the goverment.

Why are we continually punished for betterting ourselves, for going to work, for wanting to spend quality time with our family.

To the Coalition, you want families to stay together, to set a good example to their children, to play together, to walk to school and not clog up the roads, to get back to work, to take pay freezes and keep smiling.
Im sorry but this is one shaft too far. You cannot have it all (unless you are a wanker banker obviously)

My husband spent most of the last two years working 3500 miles away and returning for one week every two months. And there is no way OFSTED would consider our flat suitable premises for registered childminding, while our lease wouldn't enable us to make any structural changes. Of course, we could always sell at vast profit in the current booming housing market to enable us to buy... oh, no, that doesn't work either.

Now, as I said before, we personally will manage and if anyone is going to lose CB I accept entirely that it should be us (although DH pointed out yesterday that in fact, given the way in which he is currently paid, it may be that we don't wind up losing CB entitlement at all, which if so would be further indication that this is a barmy policy). But plenty of other HR taxpayers work long and unpredictable hours, often away from home or travelling. That's often how they got to be HR taxpayers in the first place.

It's the child that should be considered - who is responsible for it, how much do they earn, get a total & see if the child qualifies for child benefit.

Is anyone else worried about what else they are going to do us when they annouce the full cuts.

mjinhiding. you have a point there. i too have noticed the cost and thought it might be due to gov funding. plus i can see that the shift working also makes it hard.

I don't see how "if your mother is prepared to do 2 days childcare you could easily make up the cost of child benefit" -- mijnhiding doesn't have an option to work two days a week in her current role, so her only options are (a) to return full-time to her current role and lose £350 a month through working (b) to find another local job that does let her work the specific two days a week that her mother can provide childcare (have you actually tried looking for regular part time jobs? They are like gold dust around here) or (c) to become a SAH parent.

I know someone who works in this area of government. Apparently, if the govt were to means test CB properly, it would actually cost more than simply giving everyone CB, hence the decision to base it on an arbitrary thing such as HRT band.

I have 3 children and as HRT payer will lose the benefit. To be honest, I don't feel it is grossly unfair for us to lose it. It does seem unfair on households with one income earning just above the HRT threshold. However, as with all these situations, there will always be a slice of society unfairly affected. It's impossible to implement a "perfect" system that costs lest to administer than the net gain.

dreamingofsun - you are assuming there is a partner - some of us are on our own and paying for childcare

dont mind losing CB(better than vat at 25%) but all households on same income should be treated equally

and dont kid yourselves this will be simple the mechanics will be a nightmare and clearly have not been thought through

eg where there are 2 HRT payers in the family who will have clawback, how will anyone know which hrt should pay, what about families where one parent is absent but pay child support, what if they do not pay...

Just heard on the news that more could be saved by addressing winter fuel payments and free bus passes to all pensioners than is being saved with CB..... so lets do it!!!

I also feel aggrieved (understatement) at the reform of CB. I don't disagree in principle to cut back CB providing it is calculated fairly and I accept that SOME higher earners may feel the cut less than those with lower income(s). However, I do feel passionately that the APPROACH the gov are taking is fundamentally flawed. The basic maths is clear on this and the gov needs a wake up call. I rarely feel angry at gov decisions, but this one just doesn't add up. The more people petition, the better chance we have of making ourselves heard.

I actually think the cost of childcare is an interesting issue. It's a really punishing burden on many working families and it's true that costs are rising. On the other hand, do we really want the people who look after our children to be poorly paid? My daughter went to a fabulous nursery and I knew that her carers worked incredibly hard for very little money - in a fair society, they would be much more valued. If we want the best childcare we have to pay for it. Of course, for low-income families that's impossible, so surely childcare has to be provided by the state if it wants to keep people working. I know absolutely nothing about Sweden but isn't childcare state-sponsored there?

Professor/MJ - i can see in your situations that this would be impossible - but i still hold by my original thought - that there are many SAHMs who could go out to work PT to cover the cost of child benefit - take my ex SIL who's never had a proper job in her life - purely because she can't be bothered

Child benefit should not be about about how much the parents earn - it should be about money following the children.
Before we have children and after they've grown up, we all support everyone else's children, whether through CB or for paying for the education system or whatever - that's what happens in a society.

The proposal to limit CB discards this very important principle.
Maybe I should refuse to fund the education system once my kids have grown up?

OK well looks like I'm not getting it then as our household income is spit Me: £53k and my DH: £35K

I hadnt actually factored in CB in our budget so I guess what I didnt have in the first place cant hurt but I am increasingly feeling concerned how much I will be getting squeezed by society/govt!

bbc now announcing married couple tax break - just to add insult to injury to single mums losing cb!!

This obviously hasn't been thought through. How could he even THINK of penalising families just above the threshold while openly admitting that better off couples just below the threshold (e.g. 42K each) will be entitled to keep the benefits? It defies belief that he would even come out and say such a thing!!!
I thought the Tories were supposed to be the 'family friendly' unit - afterall that's what they claimed. First, Child Trust Funds, next, child benefits..... and yet they are 'family friendly????!!!!

I can set up a group on Facebook. There are already a few pages about Child Benefit but nothing cohesive that you could join to campaign against the new cuts. Can anyone come up with a catchy name so everyone know which one to join?

I though we could include rantypants letter as it's a very good summary of most of the points covered here. Also it would be a centralised place from which to organise any kind of demostration/petitions

I am totally angered and perplexed by this completely unfair child benefit cut. My husband earns just over the higher tax threshold and i earn 8,000 working part-time and looking after 2 daughters. We pay for 2 days childcare a week which amounts to more than half of my take home pay. Why on earth should we be penalised when a family who earns up to £80,000 between them gets away with having the benefit!!?? It makes absolutely no sense. If they take away childcare vouchers aswell there will be no point in me working!
Why are families always targeted? What about a tax on single people or couples? Or the irresponsible bankers who caused this deficit? why do they get off scott-free still able to buy Harley Davidson's in their lunch hours, while we struggle to meet our ever-increasing bills????

anothersplace - wouldn't mind betting that they will be next. the cuts so far are just the start - they won't bring the deficit down with just these.