And now they're introducing a tax break for married couples!

[LadyBiscuit]

So not only do higher earning lone parents not get CB when the couple next door will still be eligible, they will also get a tax reward for being married.

BBC story

They really don't like single parents do they?

am married- yay

don;t like this marriage is the only way forwards ideology- boo

Dh's business is still in early pahse so doesn;t take him into tax bracket yet (will do by election I suppose)- PMSL

'I'm donating my £75 to the Labour Party. Dh is spending his on gin, for me, to apologise for being a Liberal-voting tosser.

Lucinda

I am very happily amrried btw, but marriage doeesn't matter a jot to those oputside of it

What matters, what makes the difference is stability and loving relationships

Yes there are stats about married couples etc but that doesn't change the fact that there are very many people raising very well raised kids alone, or cohabiting. Who deserve as much recognition of this fact as anyone else.

TBH, I can't imagine why anyone would get married in a recession: better things to do with the money. Ok you can have a £5.40 basics and asda frock do, but most people would p[refer to save up and have a bigger (or whatever their own dream is) one later on. Sensible to me.

So why should abnyone care if a couple is engaged, married, delatying it, or shgging teh vicar as long as it works and nobody gets hurt?

its not about the pittance of money

DP and I have been co habiting for 20 years and have 6 DC

My lovely firstborn started at a bloody good University on Monday and today ran down the freshers fayre and joined the labour party ....

GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR how very dare David judge us

NotanOtter I don't think that Cameron is implying that ALL cohabiting relationships will break down, but I have to say that he is right to imply that most do- simply because that marriage is nearly always started with the intent of staying together whereas cohabitation varies greatly from zero commitment to full-on lifelong commitment.
You are very rare -most cohabitations break down or convert to marriage.

BUT in couples who are EXACTLY SAME with high levels of commitment-apart from fact one is married and other is not, I'd say chances of staying together are same.

But I don't think that anyone -not even poorest- is going to stay in a marriage for £150 a year.

I agree with your anger over being treated 'as married' and not when suits.
You have every right to be peed off.

it's ok NotanOtter (didn't realise you had 6!)

just means we can judge even more when all the allegations about shagging around married Tory ministers come out !

Assuming the stats are right, if a couple are cohabiting but aren't really that committed to each other, will going to a registry office really make them more likely to stay together?

If they have children and are committed, a wedding ring won't change that either. "It wasn't little albert and veronica that made me work at our relationship, it was this here bit of gold on my finger!"

It might do. I can think of several reasons:
a, People have pride and getting married is a public statement of commitment. A lot of people may feel foolish if they don't give it 'their best shot' whereas if 'just' cohabiting the temptation is to just go. (I have personal experience of this).

b, The legal differences between cohabitation are such that it is much more difficult to leave a marriage without getting financially burnt- this is incentive enough for some to 'make a go of it'

god what nonsense and tripe has been written about cohabitating couples

this has nothing to do with him wanting to encourage marriage

he was caught on the hop about the child benefit and came up with something he thought would appease people (I know they had thought about it previously but certainly not the details and the timing of the announcement coincided with them needing to get out of a hole).

They hadn't even thought up how it would work when they were being asked about it!

Why they did this all before the spending review this month I do not know. Bad political judgement!

marantha:

You are very rare -most cohabitations break down or convert to marriage.

BUT in couples who are EXACTLY SAME with high levels of commitment-apart from fact one is married and other is not, I'd say chances of staying together are same.

Those two statements contradict one another you know.

Tax break for married couples is not a "value judgement". It is an incentive. Tax breaks for companies for example are almost always incentives - if you invest this much, you pay lower tax etc. This doesn't mean the state thinks companies who don't invest so much are worthless

And I doubt if anyone will have any success challenging it in European courts, given that France has had this two break for married couples for a long time now. And you get additional tax breaks for every child. And no, this is not a value judgement and the state is not saying childless couples are worthless.

"The legal differences between cohabitation are such that it is much more difficult to leave a marriage without getting financially burnt"

I definitely wouldn't agree with that. If you aren't married to your partner, you aren't entitled to any of their possessions (e.g. a house) or salary on divorce. I would say you can leave a marriage and do very nicely, as some high profile court cases have shown!

Also, I think once you have children and live with somebody, the effect of separation emotionally is exactly the same, married or not. There is plenty of incentive to make a go of it.

On the other hand I do think that if the state want to recognise two people as joined for legal and financial purposes, it is pretty difficult for them to do so without a piece of paper somewhere stating that this is the case.

Yes, but at least the wives of the shagging around tory ministers will have recourse to the courts to get a settlement IF they decide to leave, cohabitees do NOT have this option.

And people think it's 'nonsense' when it is suggested that married couples are more likely to stay together than cohabitees?

Of course they are! Marriage carries risk of losing a lot of money, cohabitation can just be walked out of and apart from financial provision for children and divvying up of JOINTLY- owned assets, there need be no OTHER loss of monies.

?But surely the wife of the tory minister is leaving the relationship because, being married, she can leave the relationship and do quite nicely out of it?

Are you suggesting that the tory minister will buy her some flowers and try to make a go of it so she won't get his millions?

Don't know why they are bothering with the tax break really. Apparently they are lowering the HRT threshold to £42,375

Joined up thinking anyone?

Simplification?

Fantastic news, strong family structure should be supported by the state, we have too many 'helpless' victims who by no fault of their own ended up with 8 children by 8 different fathers and expect the taxpayer to play daddy.

Oh, you know I don't give a hoot about the Primark handbags being flung to my general direction, so save your breath, dear. [yaaawn]

This is all well and good but is there anyone here who can explain why I am single but not?I am single don't want or intend to marry am in a long term relationship and totally happy not to be given this marriage 'incentive' but am not able to be 'single' when it comes to my finances.Dp has had to support me every time I have been too ill to work over the years

Let's sit back and wait for the divorce rate to rise then. Presumably those who will be lured into marriage by the government 'incentive' of a few quid will not have must respect for or appreciation of the institution. The whole thing is truely laughable and a pathetic waste of public money.

merrymouse Yes, I am assuming that our (hyopthetical) tory minister may not wish to part with his money.

Marriage is about tying yourself legally -and financially- to another adult. Unless a person is nuts, they do not undertake this decision lightly, therefore I can only assume that any person who marries feels pretty confident that things will work out.

Cohabitation is NOT about this, it is a far looser arrangement. Those who do it are not really risking that much because cohabitation in itself does not tie a couple together- they are legally strangers, it is easy to cohabit and just move in with somebody. You don't have to make a commitment for it.
People know there will be not expected to support a former cohabitee financially (other than child support) so this makes it easier for them to leave.
I know this is cynical, but I also think it is true.

StewieGriffinsMom - loving your work on this thread.

What really pisses me off is that £150 is not going to encourage anyone to get married. I'm cohabiting and have got no intention of getting married for the sake of a measly £150.

I don't think it's going to encourage anyone to stay married either.

However, it is going to cost the country a shit-load of money which we clearly can't afford right now.

Also, you don't get the same distaste from rest of society when a cohabitation breaks down.
I knew of a 28-year-old married couple (childless) who broke up after a year of marriage because they were 'bored of each other'. The people around them said they 'should have tried harder'.
An UNmarried/cohabiting couple of similar age and situation broke up. Nobody judged them at all. It was apparently, in their case, 'one of those things'.

No Unfitmother - even though I loose out yet again.

We are paying for past excess

I still blame Tony and Gordon

Didilala Love it

Marantha you are misinformed here.You are not ties legally wrt the terms of the marriage contract but you are not considered single either.If dp and I are considered strangers in the eyes of the law then I should be owed 1000s in backdated incapacity benefit/DLA and housing benefit for all teh years I was on dialysis and having cancer treatment.BUT I wasn't and dp had to support me!