If you don't qualify the the 30hrs- do you tell people?!

[WhatToDoAboutTheNosys]

MN please don't come at me with stealth boast accusations! I know we are in a very fortunate position but I do have a genuine question.

We have a toddler and my DH earns just over 100k, so we don't qualify for the 30hrs of childcare funding that will come into place soon. He's the sole earner and pays a very big chunk of tax, I grew up on benefits with a single parent family and I find it very surprising that with his income we are in a great comfortable position, but certainly not rolling in it like I would have imagined someone with this income would be.

When I'm chatting with people about childcare/preschool they say oh yeah you'll get your 30 hours, the thing is we aren't and we don't have the money to pay for those hours, so he won't be going in for them!

With acquaintances I just not and say uh huh, but with friends and family it's hard to have an honest conversation about our options and the hours he'll do without telling them how much he earns. Which I'd rather not do!

If anybody is in the same situation what do you do? If people we're close to start asking why we're not putting him in for his hours (he'll continue just with 1 day at childminder) shall I use say I don't want all of that time apart from him?!

Or if you found out your friend or family was on a salary like that would you see them differently? In the past I wonder if I'd have judged them thinking surely you must have so much free cash and are being tight, it might change my whole perception of them?

I don't want to get a job just to pay for him to go in fir the 30hrs in case that's suggested, I'm in the amazing position that I get to spend this time with him while he's young and I don't have a profession so it would be minimum wage that would be eaten by the nursery fees!

@Viggooooh that sounds unusual. Almost every primary school I know has morning or afternoon nursery class (3 hour sessions).

People on maternity leave are still entitled to 30 hours and taxfree childcare, despite being at home with their new baby - as I pointed out to an acquaintance (who would have had a good maternity package as was a civil servant) what is the difference between us now (2 young children including a baby) except she had tax-free childcare/30 hours and I didn't. She didn't like that

@howdoyoulikethemweeds you make some good points but your acquaintance might have pointed out to you that the difference between you was that she was in employment and paying tax and NI on her maternity package.

I am sorry to say that if you want to see policies from a government of any colour which encourage one parent to SAH you will be waiting a long time.

I live in Australia and the standards are much lower. I believe the uk nurseries have a much lower child/staff ratio.

I am not on that level of income. But I don't lie to family and close friends. Why do you want to lie to people close to you so that they think you have less money than you do?

That's so random I'm sorry. We don't qualify and I see no "shame" in it or the need to hide it.
Few of my friends are the same and they just casually mention 'we don't qualify' and we move on.

No one is surprised.

Yeah, that's the bracket we are in and would be a fair bit worse off. But if you have a child in the 30 hours bracket and earn that income, you can put £25k in a pension and get the additional 15hours. It works out slightly better overall and DH still pays all relevant tax, so no one is losing out.

People pretending to be poorer than they are are just annoying.

It did get slightly awkward for me when I asked the (school) nursery for additional hours over and above 15 to cover my working pattern and they didn't know what to charge me! Several people thought I must have misunderstood the qualification criteria and I had to spell it out for them. We were the only family in this position. I'm sure the other people involved forgot about it as soon as we ended the conversations but it was awkward for me at the time so it's a fair question!

If he earns just over - pay into pension to bring it under 100k and you'll qualify (and pay less tax)

How old is your child? People are talking about 3 year funding. 2 year funding is supposed to be April but details have not been released.

She's embarrassed to say she doesn't qualify

@jannier but she doesn’t qualify because she is a sahm - ie not working.

@jannier so she doesn’t need childcare.
I am baffled why she is embarrassed about this.

We just say we are using our 15 free hours. Maybe people I talk to are all in the same boat as no one bats an eyelid

@Needmorelego childcare isn't just for working, like others have mentioned it's also for socialising them. My DS is at the age that lots of people are talking about their options and the funding hours.

@jannier he's soon to be 2, which is mostly why this is coming up a lot at the moment because people are talking about how the hours come in in April.

@howdoyoulikethemweeds all very good points well made!!

I think she believes she's low income not really sure.

So 2 year funding for all is not even on the horizon until April nobody has been told what the guidelines will be as providers we don't know exactly what will be paid or if we can even stay afloat as currently we only survive by taking the paying under 3s don't stress about something that may not happen and if it does is ,over 8 months away

@WhatToDoAboutTheNosys you don’t need childcare for socialising - you can just go to Stay and Play/Rhyme Time/Story Time/Activities at local museum/playing in the park for that.
Then at 3 start a pre-school environment (15 hours) as a start towards being independent.
You only need childcare if you need someone to care for your child.

I mean, we’re considerably poorer than you 😂 we qualify for the 30hrs, but if someone mentioned not getting the 30hrs because their household income is too large but they still cannot afford childcare for 30hrs a week.. I wouldn’t think any kind of way about it.

We all live to our means. You live to a bigger means than some but it’s still what works for your family. You undoubtedly likely have a bigger house in a more costly area, you can probably afford a holiday a year - that’s normal for your family. I wouldn’t feel ‘ashamed’ to talk about the cost of living/childcare from your own perspective based solely on your household income being comfortable. It’s still hard for everyone.

Not that hard if you only have the mortgage and other bills. OP doesn't have the extortionate childcare and her DH has a decent way. I imagine it isn't hard for her. 😀

I don't think anyone's surprised when I say I don't qualify, wouldn't your friends be the same as they can see your lifestyle?

I am not shocked that my friend who drives a Tesla mentions to me that she doesn't qualify. Or another friend who is flying to Brazil for a wedding soon.

Surely whatever you earn is often reflected in your lifestyle so isn't a "shock" to friends etc.?

Lots of women are on maternity allowance or statutory maternity pay and would be paying nil tax and NI during this period. Besides it it was about tax income, the minimum threshold to achieve the benefit wouldn't be 16 hours at minimum wage - an income of less than £9k per year and one at which zero tax /NI income is derived.

My point is that childcare help should be universal - those who want a SAHP would not use it anyway. If they want to encourage women into the workforce, making it universal would better help with that - many European countries do this - instead many parents have to wait until their children start school.

Further, as stated, excluding those who pay the highest tax from this benefit just creates resentment. At the moment my family is paying scandinavian type taxes and being excluded from any benefits provided by it.

Further, that same civil servant acquaintance who is receiving a generous maternity package, and that you state is entitled to childcare benefits due to their taxes, would not be entitled to those same benefits if their husband earned £100,001 per year. Their tax amount would be the same. Is this fair? If they 'earnt' the benefit due to their taxes, according to your counter argument, why have they 'lost' it because of their husbands/partners income?

I'm not sure what your second point is referring to either - universal childcare does not encourage a SAHP, if anything it will help people return to work - which is why many European countries offer it.

if you found out your friend or family was on a salary like that would you see them differently?

Absolutely not. I'm on around the average salary for the UK