Child benefit to be axed?

[Coolfonz]

Here's a nice article representing some city views...the comments are nice as well! Good old Tory voters!! Rah rah!!

www.citywire.co.uk/personal/-/news/money-property-and-tax/content.aspx?ID=401785&re= 9506&ea=228360

"But if Osborne wants to save real money, Child Benefit is looking increasingly vulnerable after his hatchet job on CTFs. Child Benefit is a universal tax free benefit paid to all parents at a rate of £20.30 a week for the first child and £13.40 a week for subsequent children. Official statistics show that some 7.5 million families receive Child Benefit in respect of 13 million children at an annual cost to the Exchequer of over £7 billion a year and rising - annual increases are index linked. After the axing of Child Trust Funds, Child Benefit could be next on the list."

I don't understand why people keep getting so offended at the payment of child benefit to all. It's pretty cheap to administer, so why not keep it? Yes lots of people get it who don't need it, but they probably pay more in taxes anyway. And it's a lifeline for when other benefit payments get messed up, it provides a bridge between recieving benefits and starting work (not a particularly useful one, but it helps if you are determined) or e.g. in my situation when I left XP and could not notify benefits in advance, I had to move out and then wait for them to come through, the CB came through first because it was just a case of changing my account details.

I think the abusive relationship scenario is important as well - yes it's not foolproof, but it's a very simple thing which must make a big difference to a lot of people. Just because it doesn't help everyone doesn't mean it's worthless.

I think the welfare of children in a country (including children growing up in abusive situations) is partially society's responsibility - that's why we have social services. Social services don't ever reach lots of children, hopefully the child benefit being paid to the mother helps out some of these children.

My DH and I both work fulltime, we have 2 dcs, but we rely on our CB to supplement our incomes.

well they must have changed the rules then MrsPear - as DS1 was born in the September, exH didn't get his leave to remain until the following April.......but I claimed CB right from the start, and was also entitled to claim any other benefits as well.

If they were to means test CB I do wonder what would be the implications for pension entitlement. At the moment the main carer in receipt of CB gets notionally credited with NI towards their future state pension. It would be dreadful if that stopped along with CB payments. We could live with losing CB, or having a reduction, but we could not accept DH losing out on his state pension because he looks after our children.

It would also be completely daft to means test CB and retain it as a separate benefit. In that case they should surely increase WTC or CTC accordingly and just administer the one scheme.

gaelicsheep your point about pension entitlement is an important one.
one of the great things labour did was this - it's changed my mother's outlook hugely that she was given retrospective NI credits for the entire time she was receiving CB
just because a family are relatively well off now doesn't mean they will be at retirement age, especially if the marriage breaks down.

Was that a Labour thing then RobynLou? I'd assumed it was always the case!

..and Labour have taken it away RobynLou. Once your child reaches 12 the HRP credit goes unless you are a carer for an SN or disabled child. That came in from last month.

Taxing cb is a possibility, but they need to tax the person who gets it, as we have independent taxation, and not just the higher tax payer in the family. I don't work, so it would be tax free for me.

Boy, they kept that one quiet! DH has a few years to go, but that is seriously crap.

The problem with means testing benefits is that someone is always just above or just below the 'cut off' point.

My Mum and Dad worked all their lives, paying into pensions along the way. It's not a lot, but my when my Dad died, my Mum also got a small widows pension. She's now just above the threshold so gets no help with anything, other than the winter fuel allowance, which really is a god send when you're counting every penny.

If you're going to have a cut off point, it really has to be at a very high level of income, meaning very few will not receive it. It's not going to save a lot of money but perhaps it's the principle that matters?

I suppose a sliding scale is the fairest way of dealing with that, rather than the all or nothing you get with many benefits.

So child benefit has been frozen for 3 years...does that mean no increase in it for 3 years or no benefit at all!!

It means no increase for 3 years. Thank God they are not means testing it yet, we would not cope without it and dh is a middle income earner. I use child benefit to pay for essentials there really is no way we could manage without it.

Makes sense to scrap child benefit completely and add it on to Working Families Tax Credit. That was it goes to those who need it, people on low wages.

And make it payable only if the child is resident in this country, same with other Tax Credits.

Only fair.

But it isn't just people on low wages who need it. I have friends from school who are on low wages who had the sense to have their children when they were were still teenagers and they have more disposable income than we do.

My brother is on half the salary that dh is on and yet they keep horses and holiday in Florida and Canada. My brother bought his 3 bedroomed detached house for £45,000 back in the late 80's. We bought our 2 up 2 down for £170,000 7 years ago so are crippled by a huge mortgage and because of where we live we have huge commuting costs too.

It isn't as simple as assuming that everyone earning less than £25k is poor and those on more than £40k are rich it is far more complicated than that.

The decision by the conservatives to scrap child benefit for higher rate tax payers is an utter disgrace. Child benefit should be universal in a society that values families. I earn just above the tax threshold, and it is people like me, the people in the middle that will feel this the most. Child benefit isw crucial in giving mothers the decision to take time out from work and care for their children. This cut will limit the choices of mothers. If the conservatives really valued families and stay at home mums, they would not even consider this measure.

The decision by the conservatives to scrap child benefit for higher rate tax payers is an utter disgrace. Child benefit should be universal in a society that values families. I earn just above the tax threshold, and it is people like me, the people in the middle that will feel this the most. Child benefit isw crucial in giving mothers the decision to take time out from work and care for their children. This cut will limit the choices of mothers. If the conservatives really valued families and stay at home mums, they would not even consider this measure.

The decision by the conservatives to scrap child benefit for higher rate tax payers is an utter disgrace. Child benefit should be universal in a society that values families. I earn just above the tax threshold, and it is people like me, the people in the middle that will feel this the most. Child benefit is crucial in giving mothers the option of taking time out from work and care for their children. This cut will limit the choices of mothers. If the conservatives really valued families and stay at home mums, they would not even consider this measure.

Hello all
Apologies for interrupting!

I have just joined mumsnet after the announcement on CB. I have just had our second baby and have been trying to work out if we can afford for me not to work. This is another blow to that plan - DH is just over the tax threshold so we would lose out on CB. I haven't looked at all the threads properly but it seems unfair to me - surely better to have it based on household income?

What has really angered me is the Government saying repeatedly over the past 12 months that they would protect child benefit only to announce this cut. And they wonder why nobody trusts politicians? If they'd been honest from the start perhaps this could have been handled better.

Rant over - sorry to interrupt your thread! :)

The CB is the only fair benefit for every child because no mater who your parents are you are treated just the same. I became a full time mum after I had my second child. I simply cannot afford the cost of childcare and have no close family near by to help out either. Why the testing considers only one person?s income rather than over all income of any household and number of children each individual family has. Is it this rather old fashion?

I'm a regular follower of mumsnet but this is the first time that I've ever been compelled to write in. I'M SO ANGRY WITH THE DECISION TO AXE CB FOR MIDDLE-INCOMER EARNERS and the total lack of respect the Government has shown to parents across the country in doing so . Whilst I agree that that many truly well-off (and here i'm talking £1000,000) may not need CB, as others have pointed out, there are many cases in even supposedly wealth-off families where many mothers don't have direct access or control of monies other than their monthly/weekly CB. I also don't think that £44,000 is a huge salary for people living in London/SE who basically need this amount to pay for extortionate childcare costs, mortgages and the general high costs of living here. But what concerns me most is that it discriminates againist single-mothers like myself, who may be in middle-management or teaching posts and are earning a salary that is very close to this income cap, and whose ExP doesn't pay childcare maintenance. In such cases these lone-mothers' salary is the sole household income. I am a lone-mother of DS and 7 months pregnant. My ExP left me 5 months when I was two months pregnant and since this time I have no choice but to go it alone. Most months I had have to rely on CB to pay for food, nappies, children's clothes etc because after paying my monthly bills I'm left with hardly anything to live on out of my regular salary. IMHO this is just another way to attack and penalise (middle-income) lone-mothers - it beggars belief that the Government didn't consider this issue when they made this decision - but they don't really care about lone-mothers, and the dfficult daily job we face trying to keep it all together . How can it be fair and right that two parents living together both earning £43,500 each (joint salary £87,000) are eligible for CB but a lone-parents earning just above £44,000 (my acutal annual salary is £44,050) will not be able to get CB !! I implore the powers that be at MNHQ to please get the Ministers to explain themselves and to speAk up on the behalf of us lone-mothers

Hi, just joined because the letter I wrote to Simon Burns, my MP, has been replied to and I'm still not happy.
I complained as this cut targets the lone earner, it does not take into account that families who bring in over £80,000 still get CB, yet those families that earn £44,000 do not, and this is just not fair.
My MP has said that this is the cheapest way to save money rather than implementing a new system, it appears he has not heard of working tax credits, a system that could actually have a dual purpose!
As someone else pointed out, they are happy to pay CB to children who don't even live in this country.
They have it wrong.

charlotteatdesk - please write back to your MP and point out to him that this policy will save no money at all, because the PM has said he will introduce a married couples allowance instead, which will actually cost 1.6 billion as opposed to the 1 billion saved by slashing the Child Benefit.