Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Money matters

Find financial and money-saving discussions including debt and pension chat on our Money forum. If you're looking for ways to make your money to go further, sign up to our Moneysaver emails here.

Flip

1 2 3 4

Original poster

£100 per week better off apart and one less adult.

83 replies

Offred · 03/05/2013 17:11

My husband is a supposed high earner.

I have just checked how money would be if we split, I would have to claim benefits as young children and currently studying.

After he has paid tax our income for six is £100 less per WEEK than we would get if he left and I claimed benefits. Surely this isn't correct? This is without CSA payments and we wouldn't have the expense of feeding him and paying his bills...

OP posts:

ballstoit · 03/05/2013 21:56

To clarify why people are being arsey see the final line of my last post.

What are you studying? Journalism sponsored by the Daily Fail?

CarolBornAMan · 03/05/2013 21:57

I am being factual - your DH brings home about £700 a week - I have asked you to show how the state will provide you with more than that - what is your problem with supporting your original post?

ballstoit · 03/05/2013 21:57

Pretending that benefits gives you more cash than a high earners salary is stealth bashing IMO

Original poster

Offred · 03/05/2013 21:58

I'm not benefit bashing. I'm pissed off that we'd apparently be better off apart and as I asked in the original post thinking that can't be right... If people are being arsey because they have decided to read into the post things I have not written and which are entirely inconsistent with anything else I've posted on here or that I think then I think they need to reconfigure their knickers.

OP posts:

CarolBornAMan · 03/05/2013 21:59

the £700 is after tax - you do understand this right? just checking you dont see your DH pre tax salary as the same as paid benefits ..

Original poster

Offred · 03/05/2013 22:00

I'm not pretending, that is what you have decided.

We, as people would undoubtedly be better off apart, no matter the actual fine differences between income on benefits because we would have virtually or actually double the income if we split.

OP posts:

Original poster

Offred · 03/05/2013 22:01

(And not double the outgoings)

OP posts:

CarolBornAMan · 03/05/2013 22:01

you have said you think it cant be right - and we have all asked you to show how you arrived at the numbers. You have not.

Not sure of the point to an unsubstantiated post .. I may as well post why do people not say I am as beautiful as Kate Moss and not post a photo. If you want support , post your evidence for gods sake

ballstoit · 03/05/2013 22:02

Okay, the answer to your question is, no. It is not correct. And nor apparently is your husbands tax code.

Original poster

Offred · 03/05/2013 22:03

I can't post my husband's wage, it isn't my information to share. People appear to have been perfectly able to highlight what may be the problem without the exact wage so I'm afraid your point seems rather irrelevant.

OP posts:

ballstoit · 03/05/2013 22:03

Go for it then...all that extra cash will make being a lp a walk in the effing park

EhricLovesTeamQhuay · 03/05/2013 22:07

That just can't be right. You'd get around 140 hb, 60 pw per child, 70 income support plus cb. With 4 kids that would be...around 500 per week, yup. And your dh earns over £40k and takes home £400 a week? I don't see how that is possible. When I was full time on £28k I took home more than that.

CarolBornAMan · 03/05/2013 22:07

I think it is your post that is groundless as you cant show us how the state will support you and your kids on more money than your husband earns, despite it being anonymous and your ability to provide a ballpark figure - not sure what your intent was but I would say, better luck next time with trying to put forward an intelligent argument

Original poster

Offred · 03/05/2013 22:08

please, readjust your judgy pants... I am not benefit bashing... Exactly the opposite in fact. People who know me would find the suggestion I might do that absolutely unbelievable. One year we over paid £6k on an income of £49k before tax. Possible tax code is very wrong although meant to have been sorted.

OP posts:

CarolBornAMan · 03/05/2013 22:11

so I go back to my original point - show me how I can earn over £45K a year on benefits.

EhricLovesTeamQhuay · 03/05/2013 22:11

Plus if you currently pay a mortgage rather than rent then a decent chunk of that monthly outgoing is investment rather than proper outgoing. Are you adding up your dh's wage after pension contributions? Because that's another investment. Deduct what he pays in capital on the mortgage and towards his pension from your outgoings and you will find his income £££ goes up considerably.

louisianablue2000 · 03/05/2013 22:11

Ah, so in a previous year he underpaid tax so now he is overpaying tax to balance that? I'm assuming he is self employed?

ssd · 03/05/2013 22:12

op, is this a stealth benefit bashing thread???

if you feel you'd be better off without your high earning dh supporting you, go ahead, separate, live on benefits for a year, come back and tell us how cushy you have it

seriously

CarolBornAMan · 03/05/2013 22:12

why can you not show us your workings out - does not matter what your high earning DH earns - just show me more than £45K as my hard working DH teacher earns just £35K ..

EhricLovesTeamQhuay · 03/05/2013 22:13

You are benefit bashing (maybe inadvertently) because you are suggesting that you could have a better income and therefore quality of life if you were a LP on benefits rather than living with your high rate taxpayer husband. Believe me, living on benefits doesn't pay better than working. It just doesn't.

ssd · 03/05/2013 22:13

"people who know me"

ask them, then

SodaStreamy · 03/05/2013 22:22

I'm reading this more as if the OP and her husband separated 'on paper' and she claimed benefits they would have more money , which of course they would but if they were still a couple just living in separate locations and pretending to be a single parent they would also be committing benefit fraud

CarolBornAMan · 03/05/2013 22:27

I think she is more of a DM reader getting hysterical over benefits for larger families as she is not prepared to give actual numbers here ..

there is something not ringing true about any of her posts as nothing is backed up

ivykaty44 · 03/05/2013 22:41

If your dh earns 49k then his take home pay should be £681 per week

If you dh earns 40k then his take home pay should be £576 per week

you are saying op that your income would be £100 per week more than this -so nearly £700 per week for 4 children and yourself

You are living in cloud cuckoo land and that is why you can't come up with the figures - you don't have the figures

CogitoErgoSometimes · 04/05/2013 07:27

If he's only paid £6k tax on a £49k income you are looking at one hell of a bill for tax arrears.... Presume he's registered for self-assessment to deal with the High Income CB charge?

Even if your current family income is £500/week and your benefits would amount to £600/week I still think it would cost your 'ex' far more than £400/month to live independently.

Flip

1 2 3 4