should higher income working parents get child care tax relief

[zippitippitoes]

..or would that mean the benefit would be spread so thinly that low income families would suffer?

If granny or sis wants to look after the kids then should they be able to be paid through government subsidy? Without formally becoming registered childminders.

\link{http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,17129-2233371,00.html\ david cameron on tax breaks for higher earners on childcare}

the out of control property market is a double edged sword though as it has made a lot of people money who wouldn't have expected it

No matter how you look at it Caligula you need people to work and pay taxes. The working populations is decreasing and that is a huge problem at the moment. However, I can see that there might be an argument for paying mothers to stay at home if it results in more children (and future tax payers). I know it might seem cold to talk in such monetary terms, but lets not stick our heads in the sand.

The biggest problem is the out of control property market and people not affording living costs let alone anything else.

AMEN, ST. GEORGE

Caligula: so few people on low incomes can afford paid childcare so they stay home instead and mind their own. hence barely anyone can take advantage of the 'tax break' GB created.

but if mothers stay at home producing children then they might just breed more people who stay at home and don't work either

I was thinking the same thing Zippi.

Bozza - I guess that's the million dollar question. Yeah in the 60s/70s and before that's what happened and no-one got paid to stay at home. Nowadays it's welcome to the consumer age. In the 80s it was drummed into us about how we'd have a better quality of life, we'd own our own homes, we'd have lots more available to us but hey who's going to pay for it all - we are!! We always have to pay for what we have got. But I can't quite get my head round the simple question that if you go out to work you earn £££, pay your tax and then get more tax credits for child care to help you go out to work. If you don't go out to work, you don't get £££ so you don't pay your tax and you don't get more tax credits.

Heck - I'm getting all jumbled up in my head now

NO
rich gits
goa dn buy a top hat and monacle

Uwila "Why should I go to work to pay taxes to pay someone else to stay home? No thank you. "

Well for that matter why should I work to pay your childcare costs just because you don't earn enough to pay them?

Fairymum - I think that is a good point. If the overall desire is to raise the birth rate to create future taxpayers then both working parents and SAHParents need an incentive. And if the birthrate is lowest amongst the middle classes, then incentives need to be aimed at the middle classes.

I wouldn't have had any children if I'd been forced to work full-time whilst they're pre-schoolers.

We best address the cost of living in this country (which includes childcare and housing) if we want to be competitive in the world markets.

I wonder though if it's true that we don't have enough offspring then surely demand for housing will go down, and so will the prices.

No Uwila if the birth rate keeps going down we will have to import workers, which will keep housing demand at the same level or higher than it is now.

One thing that will never happen, is housing becoming affordable. There is no mainstream political party which is even addressing the issue - it's the elephant in the living room.

if you can afford a house with a big enough living room for said elephant

Zippi "but if mothers stay at home producing children then they might just breed more people who stay at home and don't work either"

But that already happens.

You shouldn't. My chidlcare costs should be deducted from my taxes (or rather my taxes should be not be taken from the money I spend on childcare). That way I am only benefitting from what I have already earned. Except of course for people on really low incomes who may get more back than they put in. And I actually think that you too should get to deduct your taxes. I'm not the one arguing for an upper limit. I was only willing to concede the point.

demand for housing goes up because there are more smaller households..

lots of people don't have pensions ...they can't afford them

I have worked. I will work again. I am currently not working, but am keeping busy doing another degree and enjoying my two small children. I am fortunate that my husband earns enough (just barely) for me to do this. We have made various choices in order for us to be able to afford this, including living in a tiny house so we can afford the mortgage on his salary alone. Our situation is our choice, and I don't expect any more support from other taxpayers, but the suggestion that I am lazy and breeding lazy, unproductive children is a bit much really.

Ah, didn't think about the foreigners coming (says Uwila the foreigner).

The problem with the current voucher scheme is it operates as a salary sacrifice.

So because I don't earn much if I accept the vouchers my salary for pension (& other benefits) purposes dwindles, so it hardly makes it worth it.

If it was just an increased tax allowance, this wouldn;t happen.

It is also crazy that it is a voluntary scheme.

If they could sort those two issues out then it would be exactly what DC is proposing.

Wouldn;t it?

Oh no, becky, I think your choices are very good. Education should be encouraged too. Good for you. I wish I could afford that choice. I always wanted to get another degree when my kids were young. But, I forgot to marry a wealthy man.

Beckybrastraps - your situation mirrors mine exactly :)

message deleted

Oh goodness - that smile looked smug - it was actually just a friendly hello smile. Studying with small children in the house is not as fun as studying for a first degree as a youngster!

You got that deleted quickly Cod. I don't believe you!