Call to end "middle class" benefits

[AtheneNoctua]

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8319646.stm

"It defines middle class as a household where every adult has an annual income of at least £15,000 and every child £5,000. "

I think the problem is that it's the middle income earners who pay all the tax yes?

So if you want to increase your take no use going after the top earners they only pay a single figure percentage of tax, ditto for the bottom earners so if you want to increase your percentage massivly got to be middle income earners (likewise top earners will avoid, bottom earners will stop working/work under the counter far more easily your teacher, nurse PAYE person can't do any of that)

Only other way is windfall tax?

Agree with others living in London I have no particular sympathy for the property rich who claim to be poor (far easier way for them to get more money than for everyone else if they don't want to then they have made a choice....)
also see no reason why council properties are given for life (except severe disabilities) we have to either accept that families need housing in what we have or that once people are in they're in in whihc case we are just stuffing things up for those coming behind but there again how much of a problem is it?

1dilemma - " I have no particular sympathy for the property rich who claim to be poor.."

Agree with that. The massive capital gains on residential property are totally unearned and have been taxed very lightly for years - and not at all on people's principal residence. NO Govt dare tax those gains though. It is one of the reasons there has been such a massive property bubble.

Also agree that council houses should not go to people for life. My Aunt recently managed to wangle staying in my Grandmothers council house after she had died. My Aunt now lives alone in a 2 bed house for a pittance of a rent that a family could live in. She is a free loader and always has been.

That would have been enough to stop me going Riven. I am pathologically afraid of debt.

The problem with taxing capital gains on property is that generally speaking people sell one house and buy another. If you have to move for work, it is reasonable to assume that you can sell your house and buy an equivalent. Property equity is 'imaginary money' as long as you only own one property and live in it.

I go tas far as p8 so apologies if repeating but isn't this all about disincetivising women into the workforce?

No maternity pay and if you do go back to work then no entitlement to a state pension at the end of your working life - sounds like relying on tax credits and benefits is a more finacially sound option and encourages women to stay at home.

I guess in the grand scheme of things I could stay at home. However, I choose to go back to work after having children for a multiplicty of reasons not least because I like it. No, I don't choose to stay at home, even though I could. But without maternity pay etc not sure that I could afford to go back.

What I don't like about all this "means testing" - apart from the fact that it is very expensive to administrate- is that it penalises people who are trying to help themselves.

My grandparents both worked all their lives and grandad got a couple of occupational pensions that he paid for. They were entitled to no help apart from their pensions because their income was too high.

Their neighbour who had sat on her backside for 80 years (being old doesn't equal worthy) and never done a day's work got every benefit going because she was "poor".

Transferable tax allowances won't happen unless independent taxation is repealed and the whole system completely changed. It would cost far too much; be open to fraud and HMRC has just got rid of thousands of the staff actually capable of doing this sort of work. It isn't simple by any means.

We don't want to repeal independent taxation though. My income is my business not dh's.

I don't see why transferable allowances won't work. As long as you can show a link to whoever you want the allowance transferred to, then why can't it work?

I think all these proposals are really quite scary actually.

Why are so many people on Mumsnet up in arms about childcare vouchers, yet thinking it's quite reasonable to cut child benefit or tax credits? Or means test or tax them?

I'm not low paid, I earn marginally more than dp and our combined income is around £50,000, we live in London and have a relatively tiny mortgage on our even tinier house, no prospect of moving in this city. However, I have 2 under 3 and return to work next week, full time, when I will have about £400 a month left of my wages after paying for childcare.

dp gets childcare vouchers, and I will sign up when I get back to work so I get the benefit at least for a little while. As well as Child Benefit, we get the lowest level of Tax Credit, £20.65 a week with an under 1, dropping to about £10 on his birthday (I don't understand the difference for under and over 1).

So if CB and CTC are cut we stand to lose over £200 a month, or about £170 from February. From childcare vouchers we would currently lose £75 but that will be £150 - a total of over £300 a month.

For most women who have children SMP or other benefits paid from National Insurance contributions, ie funded from payments we've made all our working lives, are pretty essential too.

I'm wondering about so called "independent" think tanks like Reform. It's a charity, and while it's supposedly not party political a number of the staff are leading Conservative Party activists, and the slant of the proposals they support is very pro free market and lower tax etc.

I'd like to know how much public money they have received through government or public sector bodies. Who is paying for this research? I hope it's not me. And why do they have charitable status? I think they're not in touch with ordinary families in most income brackets.

'you certainly don't get the right to pass your house onto your dependants or buy it'

That avries betweel areas- in my aprent's area for example you'd need to be shown as a joint tenat for a decade minimum to inherit the tenancy. That is tomprtoect adult children who never moved on (in my experience usually people with lowlevelSN, though not always obv) or carers who have returned to look after an elderly relative.

My aprents never ahd their rent paid- Dad always worked. They will now when dad gives up work (he is 65 and just going PT so not yet), but theya re potless through no fault of their own.

I agree that people should move on when able but only if that is stated in their tenancy from the off; the people I know and grew up with invested massively in their homes expecting lifetime residency. It has to be played fair; put in a caluse about moving on but it would have to be domne carefully as you could end up with chaos- too many people losing homes due to short erm work or redundancy 9and the ensuing knock on effects of homelessness, childrens educatin being disrupted and the rest).

And ensure that there is enough affordable safe housing locally.

How does a banker earning £40000 get to live in a council house?
Yes, a lot of people are used to getting benefits now and could live on less. According to the government we are nearly middle class - we earn about £36,000 between us and have 2 children. We never go on holiday, don't own our own home and rarely go out for meals etc. We don't feel like we are middle class or middle income or whatever it is.

Council houses aren't allocated by means testing. Anyone can join the list.

saramoon said "According to the government we are nearly middle class". These proposals and definitions aren't coming from the government. They're coming from an "independent" pro free market think tank called Reform which is not party political but does seem to employ quite a few Conservative Party activists. I'd like to know where Reform gets its funding from, and what justification there is for it having charitable status.

Why shouldnt the banker live in a council house what is the difference he pays his rent like everyone else for it.

He might be the same as you lot and 40K isnt a lot once everything is paid out and it depends on where this house is too as rents differ a lot in different areas.

Middle class eh what is that then as most on here are classed it but are struggling big time. So now they want to means test everything then mmm.

I can see the poor getting poorer and the rich getting richer. The gap will be a lot bigger than years before.

I am not a class as we are in proverty or so they say on some website but I dont see it that way at all. We manage because we have too.

the banker may have at one time found him self in housing need - or indeed been assigned the tenancy from his dead mother
i do think 40k is a lot of money

you get less on CTC if you earn that amount than you would have done under the old marriage allowance.