Hoo-bloody-ray! Child benefit cuts to be 'looked at for fairness'

[NoWayNoHow]

Basic logic and maths prevails at last!

Fingers crossed they actually find a fairer way to implement - I remember the uproar when it was first announced, simply because it was so ridiculously prejudiced against single salary families.

Bonkers, £42,000 is something like £2300 a month after tax. Mortgage on a 3-bed semi might be £600 a month, a nursery place might be £800 a month, after school club might be £100 a month, commuting costs might be £200 a month, you could have a family of four quite easily living on £150 a week after all that and having their child benefit being taken off them, which doesn't seem fair at all.

Whatis £42,000 is a lot of money. IMO, you should be saving quite a bit each month with that income. I don't think the government should be paying an extra £200 a month for families on that income. There are far higher priorities.

But I do agree that the system is unfair. Sure, complain about it being unfair, but I don't think many people will feel sorry that those earning £42,000 are losing a government benefit.

"and actually I think there are far more questions here that have not even been thought of yet"

Spot on. This won't have come about because of any great change of heart, or because of ideology. If they were going by public reaction, they'd not be fiddling with such a poorly thought out and largey detrimental change, they'd be abandoning it.

Which leaves the possibility that they are actually getting some very hard advice that it is unworkable in its current form. They're saying "show again" before the advice leaks, in the hope against hope something can be salvaged.

PMSl bonkers do you know how much that actually is a month?Saving don't make me laugh how? Do show me how.

Avantia how are they going to look at the higher rate taxpayer info and work out from that who does and doesn't get child benefit? They don't know about relationships, children, who is living where, anything.

They will not be able to do it that way, it will have to be a different way surely.

I wonder how they are going to do it with couples who are not living together. Is it based on who is the biological father, or who lives in the house, or what?

Our mortgage is 1K a month,high council tax(expensive tiny house),huge water bills(SW),5 mouths to feed...........

It is unfair.

I know several self-employed people whose spouses "work" in the business,, so they effectively earn half a salary each. One woman I know told me outright that they wouldn't be losing child benefit because she and her husband do this.

Also, what about the child benefit that is paid to workers from abroad? I simply fail to understand why if a worker has 7 children back home he should receive child benefit for them? I really don't get that one.

Ha! at bonkers.

DH earns just over the threshold (by perhaps £100). I SAHM. Three children.

Very little left each month as it is. Will be down £200 a month.

And no we couldn't live in a cheaper house as nearly all the affordable housing is snapped up as 2nd homes or rentals by people like Cameron and his cronies.

Sardine - I am just throwing this into the pot as thoughts that the higher tax payer seems to be an easy target - how they work things out I really don't know - a bit like the Government it seems .

I am not saying that that way is right or best way to do it .

They know that I get CB , surely when they look at their records with my NI number they see what tax I pay and any benefits ( all beit just CB) that I get .

How they would tie my records up with DH I have no idea - perhaps someone works in HMCR or benefits could explain .

Very little work down here too.

£42K is a great deal of money if you're a pensioner in a paid-for small south-facing bungalow.

£42K for a growing family in the commuter belt is just about liveable on.

This latest conversation illustrates my thing earlier about how when a benefit is universal people are relaxed about it, as soon as it is tested in some way then there are arguments about what the test should be.

How much is enough or not enough is different in different areas and for different families and so on. There will always be people who think £x is loads of money, and people who think £x is not much money - whatever £x actually is.

I'm in a similar position to Marge2. DH earns about 43k so we'll be affected by this, he does not share his money. He won't tell me how much he earns but I have a rough idea, I have no idea how much he has saved up but I think its quite a significant amount.

I totally get what someone else said that it shouldn't be the state's problem but instead my DH should sort himself out. Unfortunately its not going to happen. I suppose techically it is domestic abuse - financial abuse.

I'm lucky now that I do work part time and earn an OK amount - however I have to pay for all childcare, all food shopping, my car tax, garage bills, petrol, all of dd's clothes. There is not a lot left over (if any) at the end of the month and I'm really going to notice a drop of £30 a week.

A few years ago when I was out of work for 7 months I had no money coming in apart from the child benefit. DH wasn't giving me a penny, I had to dip into an insurance payout from when I was in a bad accident to put food on the table.

There will be women in this position long term, with no pot of insurance money to dip into.

People are always making a comparison between a couple earning £40,000 each (£80,000 total) and one family member earning over £44,000.

But, if two of you are both working, the childcare costs would be huge. Plus, if only one person is working, there is always the opportunity for the other to get job.

The latter argument doesn't work with single parent families, though!

I think they have not thought for one second how they are going to administer this. It is going to be a nightmare.

Sorry, but I still stand by what I've said.
You have had plenty of time to review your spending. £200 IS alot of money, but if on £42,000 you are dependent on that each month I believe you are living beyond your means.

I really can't imagine that any family on that salary is really scrimping by.

Viva please tell me it's none of my business if you want to, but why do you stay?

Gideon says it'll go ahead

What a shambles. They're sending out mixed messages.

Believe what you like bonkers.

Most families in this country live to their means - whatever those means are. People will have taken out mortgages based on their income and £200 is a lot to lose a month. If everyone had the same housing costs and commuting costs and council tax and so on I would think your point had some merit. But they don't.

Our tiny 3 bedroom is £1000 a month if interest rate doesn't go up(because we're near London I guess), our childcare is £1600(it was slightly cheaper before DS got kicked out of pre-reception for wetting his pants but we're now paying nursery price again), payment for 1 shared cheap family car is £300 per month (ending soon, phew!). I work long long days, part time, in order to make working worthwhile, my salary is much less than childcare, so DH is actually paying for childcare in order for me to go to work because I love my job. Rest of his salary goes to mortgage, bills, insurance, food, tax. He is at the moment not far from hitting the threshold and us losing CB. We haven't been able to afford holidays all our married lives(2 essential visiting family type holidays in 9 years of our marriage, not even had our honeymoon yet), we work all the time, we cannot afford to fix things that are broken in the house, definitely no iphone/ipad crap, tv is 9 years old, £50 phone that we've used the last 5 years, we cannot afford to buy anything apart from necessities for the children, feel like just quitting my job and saving £1600 on childcare costs. We'd probably be better off. If we live a difficult life then, I'm at least doing something worthwhile - looking after my children. Perhaps the grass always looks greener on the other side. We will definitely miss CB a lot when DH hits the threshold and we lose CB.

Pardon!!!!!!!

We have to live somewhere,rent is higher than mortgages often down here.I've cut back from £100 a week on food to £80.No baths,don't flush the loo every time,no holidays(only camping).What else should I do exactly?

42K is nothing. It will be taxed so that will take it down quite a bit. Then there is a mortgage, cars, council tax, food, petrol, insurance, soaring energy bills. The older the kids get, the more expensive they become.

If you have paid off your mortgage then it wouldn't be too bad.

totally agree Gramercy, I really think the government should be looking at the money it pays to kids who don't even live here first, before taking it from higher rate taxpayers.

I also think the self employed will keep themselves under this threshold so they don't lose the benefit.

Most families in this country live to their means ...and there lies the problem! When "your means" are £42,000 a year then I believe you probably have a pretty decent living standard. If that standard was lowered a little then most people with that salary should not be completely floored by a drop of £200 a month.

I personally would not take out a mortgage which relied on a government benefit to pay it, especially when to be receiving £200 a month means you have three children.

So bonkers where should we live then? Should all families on £42 move out of the London/SW area then or areas with expensive housing?