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

MilaLae at least you have a car and can go on some sort of holiday many of the poorest in this country don't.

The thing is Hudd if you bought your house years ago or had help buying it your experience of £44K is going to be a lot different to those buying from scratch in recent times.

I think the 44K slot is too low,if they'd stopped it at say 100K I don't think anybody would even notice it. CB is a lot of money for people on that 44K or roundabouts.

100K is way to high, I earn nowhere near 100K but think it is ridiculous that I get money from the state that could help those in the most need.

I bought my house 4 years ago and am in negative equity at the moment and sound to be on a similar income level as yourself and whilst I can't through money around, I'm aware that I'm not poor compared to others and certainly shouldn't be recieving welfare.

Hudd people receiving benefits don't have cars or go on holidays,really

Sorry I don't think that's exactly true to be frank.

Hudd you can't compare yourself to me you may have had help buying your house,have a smaller mortgage etc.

Life circumstances make a big difference around 44K.

When I was on benefits I didn't have a car or go on holiday. That seemed to be the nom amongst the other single mothers on benefits that I knew.

Re mortgages, we have one of a similar size to MilaMae's. We live in London. If we were renting a house identical to ours in our road, we'd be paying about £600 a month more than we are currently paying. We couldn't pay that much more, it's simply not there. We will really miss our CB when it goes - which isn't to say that I don't feel even sorrier for people who will be hit by the HB cap etc as they are clearly worse off than I am. But two wrongs don't make a right. Targeting families unfairly in this way twice is twice as disgusting.

And yes, we do earn more than a lot of people and we do live in London (but DH has nowhere else where he could sensibly do his job, though I suppose he could go and get a different job and earn half the amount and contribute much less in tax and NI).

There are plenty of people receiving benefits who have more expensive cars and holidays than I do. Obviously there are plenty that don't but there are some that do. So sorry pardon me , 1 weeks camping and a battered old car is something I won't feel guilty about.

Horton has put it more eloquently than I could,that's exactly what I'm trying to say -two wrongs don't make a right.

That's great water. You just need to track down that house, check that the wages at the school cover the rent and then you only have a few million more jobs and houses to find.

MilaMae. You cannot be serious.

The cut off point should be an income of £25,000 and ignore the partners salary.

If they were being 'fair' they would raise tax for all HR taxpayers not just attack families.

Why shouldn't borderline HR payers feel aggrieved - they have often worked bloody hard to get to where they've got (earnings wise), pay plenty into the system and get very little out.

Added to which CB has been a constant so people do rely on it.

Both I & DH work in the public sector and if you factor in 1)pay freeze 2)increased pension contributions 3) lost CB - over the next 3 years we end up with the equivalent of approx an 18% pay cut. Fair? - my arse!

think it is ridiculous that I get money from the state that could help those in the most need

But it's not going to help those in most need, is it? I would gladly give up my child benefit if they were going to, say, double the amount of CB that the poorest families get. Or give it to single parents or very young parents or someone else who really really needs it more than I do. But please forgive me if I don't think it is a good idea to remove it from families who are already struggling with stuff that is getting more expensive by the day (food, fuel, other necessities) in order to fix a crisis that wasn't their fault. Why aren't they going after the big businesses' tax that hasn't been paid (think I read at least £6bn for one large company alone)? Or taxing the banking industry that was propped up and rescued with tax money taken from rich and poor people all over the country? Or taxing large inheritances more stringently? Or raising HRT across the board so that at least those who are earning more are all contributing equally?

The whole thing stinks.

CB isn't for paying for investments like mortgages.

seriously for your own good you really need to be appreciative of how lucky you are.

i'm afraid listening to you is persuading me that this policy is right, and i was against it.

I can't believe how much Mila is being attacked. My husband earns more than the threshold but we will definately feel the difference when CB goes.

In many of your eyes I do not deserve the CB. I have a nice house and a car and had a holiday this year, and I do not earn but currently look after my two small children.

However I am aggrieved because as a 'SAHM' I feel totally undervalued. It is as if I do not exist. I am bringing up two children, who will in the future be responsible adults contributing to society. No one notices though. If I went to work I would get help towards their childcare costs.

I see CB as placing a value on me and my decision to stayy at home to raise a family. taking my CB makes me feel I am on my own and not at all valued in society.

Noone is asking you to feel guilty Mia. We also have oldish cars and camping holidays but don't see that makes us hard done by.

I must know people who claim entirely different benefits to the ones you know. I don't know many if any who are driving around in expensive cars and enjoying holidays.

Merrymouse I was being tongue in cheek aboutt the job as Mila said she needed somewhere to work that was affordable.

I am a public sector worker so know all about payfreezes. This recesssion has cost my family its home as we had no choice but to sell to look after relatives. I can still see that I have it better than most. My husband had to reduce his hours at work meaning a big pay cut but sometimes it is just necessary to see the positive. We have food on the table and my husband now has more time with the family.

I also want to see the government chasing big business for money but it will take more than that and we all have to do our bit.

I do not undervalue SAHM at all, I was one for a number of years and my husband is almost a SAHP. As a stay at home parent I never made the connection between my CB and my value. I knew I was doing right by my child and that was the only recognition I needed.

can I ask a question.

if a woman has kids from a previous relationship(s) but is married to a man who is not their biological father. If he earns over the £44K threshold, will she be breaking rules if she claims child benefit.

does that make sense?

what I mean is, does being married to someone on a higher wage mean your child benefit will be effected even when that person is not the biologial father of your kids?

I am married to a man who is not the biological father of my child, I think if my new husband were to earn over the 44K that would have more affect on my family's income than my ex husband giving money.

0liverb0liverbuttface most people work bloody hard. Infact I would say that my grandfather worked far harder than I ever did and he was on a low income. He had to work 2 hard physical jobs at the same time just to make ends meet. No luxuries, no car and certainly no holiday, even a week camping.

it does make sense duelling and is a good point duelling. even more so when people aren't married and therefore don't actually have a financial contract at all expressed in the fact that she isn't entitled to make claims on his property, income etc if they split up. so how can their finances be seen as legally tied? and if she has a child from another man and is not married to the current man her position is even stronger than the woman you describe for being able to keep the 'child' benefit.

i'm not saying people should feel bad for being HRT earners or that they won't feel the pinch in relation to their lifestyles and reliance on this money. i was objecting to the 'right to feel hard done by' and the total lack of thankfulness for what one does have in relation to others.

and i was strongly objecting to this stupid idea that people on benefits are driving around in flashy cars and going on expensive holidays. i have never known anyone on benefits to live that lifestyle or even to have a car personally.

oh and yes it does seem to undervalue being a sahm and the job of childcare, society always does. you only have to look at how we treat and regard single mothers.

this government is saying that they will have to work or lose their homes (via hb cuts if they aren't working within 12months) whilst failing to say anything about improving childcare, afterschool clubs, working flexibility, or where the hell the jobs are going to come from.

it was already clear with these anouncements what they cared about mothers, children, families. but funnily not many people were up in arms about that.

well I think some of you have given MilaMae an unjustifiable hard time. DH earns a bit below the HRT threshold but we would really miss ChB if we lost it.

Yes buying a house instead of renting gives you an asset in the long term, but it's £1k/month to put a roof over your head TODAY, whether you are renting or buying it makes no difference.

I decided to work some figures out just to show that those who are just into the HRT threshold aren't necessarily as "rich" as some people seem to think.

Scenario 1 - One parent on £44k (has to commute to work as could not afford to rent/buy near work), other parent not working ATM - 3 children - ChB no longer payable due to HRT payer
salary 44k
less tax/NI £12k
gives net/month = £2667
less mortgage of £1k = £1667
less council tax of £167 = 1500
less travel to work costs of £300 = £1200
net equivalent = £1200

Scenario 2 - one parent works 16hrs/wk on just over min wage, walks to work, other parent not working - 3 children
salary = £5k
(no tax/NI due)
giving net/month = £417

• ChB for 3 Children (204/month) = £621
• tax credits (£939/month according to entitled to) =£1560 (Rent of £1000 + council tax cover by HB/CTB) net equivalent = £1560

ie over £350 MORE a month than a the family with a higher rate tax payer working full time!

That doesn't take into account free school meal for 3 children (worth approx £100/month), free prescriptions, free dental care, optical vouchers, uniform allowance etc etc.

I am shocked by these figures TBH, I was expecting the HRT family to be marginally better off. No wonder the country is in hock up to it's neck & there is such a sense of entitlement in some people...

Maybe HM Revenue & Customs will start asking all sorts of intrusive questions about the sex life of HRT just as they do for benefits claimants.

Will come as a nasty shock if the better off have to experience the same kind of treatment that they've been happy to inflict on the poor.

(Btw, I have been both a HRT and a basic rate taxpayer at various times in my life.)

Mind you, HMRC left hand doesn't seem to know what the right hand is doing - I just got a demand for tax they reckon I owe in one letter and another letter in the same post with a refund.

edam, I doubt it was 'better off people' who actually devised the questions for claiming benefits so don't believe that they were happy to subject benefit claimants to intrusive questions in the first place.

I suspect taxpayers with one HRT in their household and hence will no longer be entitled to CB, won't even claim CB in the first place. Hence avoiding all the hoo hah.

But Betsy many people living in properties that are rented privately using housing benefit are living in very grim properties.