Child benefit cut unenforceable

[mcquade]

It has emerged that the scrapping of child benefit for upper rate taxpayers is unenforceable and the Treasury is in a flap about, having failed to consult civil servants before making its headline-grabbing announcement. Yet another mess. Full story here:

blogs.wsj.com/iainmartin/2010/10/28/child-benefit-cut-unenforceable-treasury-in-a-flap/?mod=rss_WSJBlog&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

as said, countless times on here................go check out the figures!

cutting CHB wont save us!!!!!!!!!!!!

Is the cut to CB not part of the cuts to welfare that will help reduce the deficit though.

will it?

do you have a link with definate evidence of that?

The Government claimed the CB cut would save £1billion a year when they announced it didn't they.

yes, ''the government'' did. so the people making the decision are the same people who said it would be good? well, fancy that!

critics at first said it would be more costly and would save considerably less. then the government announced married persons allownace, reducing the amouny saved again.

now, they are going to have the inland revenue going though hoops to check out who gets it and who does not and they are going to have to employ fraud people to weed out the 'cheats', and they are going to have to set up a computer system to check and cross check, as they dont have the right sytems set up to deal with thier 'money saving plan' as yet.

now, lets think of another way to get that deficit down?

A billion is literally small change to the govt budgets. I don't know why they're so keen on this, except that I think it is a way to show people that they're targeting HRTs without actually doing so. Because HRTs are their core voters.

Precisely Horton. It has nothing to do with saving money, and everything to do with PR.

i haven't said people aren't entitled to worry but have focussed in my recent posts on challenging inaccuracies and focussing on reality.

it wasn't accurate to say the hrt tax earning family were on the same money as a family with a combined income of £17k getting benefits on top. it was an inflammatory untruth that needed to be corrected as it was so misleading. so challenging maybe but not aggressive.

it appears this policy is having the desired effect upon the attitudes of the group it was targetted at.

Wallows I'm not entering into anymore conversations with you because you are pissing me off. I don't want to be waste time being pissed off with a computer screen.

I did not say that an HRT earns the same as a family on £17k, I said £17k I said the difference is not as great as some might think.

A salary of £17k is around £1100 a women on another thread said that she received top up benefits of £700. Dh is a higher rate tax payer and earns £2100 therefore it is a difference of around £300 per month. My salary is irrevelant as I am comparing a HRT with someone on a low salary. I'm not trying to say that someone on a low salary is well off I'm trying to illustrate a point that not all higher rate tax payers are earning thousands more than those on lower salaries. A higher rate tax payer does indeed earn thousands more before tax but after tax we are talking hundreds not thousands.

You are choosing to distort my posts. You say that I am a SAHM, where have I said that? I said I am on maternity leave. I have said that after paying childcare I would be left with £3 per month. I cannot afford to return to a job where I will end up being out of pocket. I have not said that I plan to be a SAHM I have said that I intend to be self employed. I cannot afford to accept a job that is low skilled because a childminder will cost more than I can earn.

IIf my business plans are successful, the loss of the CB will be insignificant but if it doesn't we have to make choices and that will mean Dh and I either living at opposite ends of the country or splitting up. I don't have a problem with that but Dh does. He doesn't want to uproot the family and I can see his point.

I'm not saying that we are the only family making such decisions. Lots of families across the country are going through redundancies and losing their homes.

"It appears this policy is having the desired effect upon the attitudes of the group it was targetted at".

What do you mean by that? Are you saying that I resent families on low incomes who receive top up benefits? Because you are barking up the wrong tree Missy! Last week I wrote to my MP to express my disgust at some of the measures that the Tories are introducing that will effect hardworking families on low incomes.

Anyway I don't why I am trying to justify myself to you. So lets just leave it.

Well said, dollshouse.

all i was doing was pointing out the discrepancies in the comparison you were making - eg. not including your income or current CB in the equation or taking into account that they would be paying childcare (it was their combined income that was 17k) and you either were as well and needed to add your salary in for a fair comparison or were intending to switch over to sahm and not have to pay for childcare which would also skewer the comparison.

there is nothing wrong with challenging inaccurate statements.

so what you were actually trying to say then was that the hrt payer only comes out a few hundred pounds better off if their partner doesn't work or you don't factor in their salary than two low income working adults. a) if you both work and count your salary it's a lot more than that and b) for a lot of people £300net a month is a LOT of money.

good luck with your business. living at oposite ends of the country seems an extreme reaction to losing child benefit. my friend is a single mother only just hrt earner who pays for full time childcare and will now be losing her tax credits and child benefit and also has to travel a great deal for work. i dare say she will feel it too and does not have the option of a sahp to lose the childcare costs or one who works just to cover them yet she doesn't seem to think she's going to be bankrupted.

Wallows. I think the mother on the other thread was a SAHM but it doesn't really matter anyway.

Sorry for saying I was pissed off. I don't like falling out with people.

If we relocated it wouldn't be because of the loss of CB, its more to do with the general cost of living and financial situation that we have found ourselves in since having children. We need to either halve our housing costs or cut out the cost of dh's commute. If we had been sensible we would have relocated to a cheaper place before having children but we didn't see the financial crisis coming and its implications.

me either. premonitions would be a wonderful thing. if i'd have sold my apartment less than a year earlier i would have made a £30k profit which would have been handy when motherhood and ill health came along. as it was i came out with a huge shortfall.

hang in there and it will work out. really hope it doesn't come to major upheaval for you.

Really hope it all works out too dollshouse.

The living apart thing is our plan b,dp's job is fine but if the cuts get too bad dp may get a London job and live with his parents,just come home at weekends.We could never afford a house near London.

I guess we're lucky he's got parents he can stay with. Really don't want to do it as I used to hate it as a child when my dad was away but I'm guessing we're lucky that dp's skills are in quite high demand.

Not sure I'd have given up my career if we'd seen this coming,having said that having 3 in one go it was never really viable with childcare bills.

Sorry Wallows for getting stroppy,hope it all works out for you too.