Tory Marriage Tax - makes me feel a bit icky

[HohohoBumperlicious]

Am I right to feel a bit - for want of a better word - icky about marriage tax. I am married but it just seems wrong to put a financial and moral (as after all the root of the tax is surely a moral one) premium on marriage.

It's not always the best state and certainly isn't one that should be the default, it is, after all, a purely social construct designed to fit in with perceived views on what is 'moral'. I'm sure people can be perfectly happy and good members of the community without being married.

Am I missing the point somehow?

'Abra1d: the days of parents needing to agree that their adult daughters may enter into marriage are long gone. Is all your thinking based on such out of date concepts? If the Croation cousin chooses to get married, she can. Family hoo-ha it may entail, but then you might think that if she wants to marry but quails in the face of her family she simply hasn't got the determination that any long-term relationship demands.'

My cousin isn't Croatian. Her partner is. His parents are pains in the neck so she doesn't want to be part of their clan (they have 'interesting' (ie, bloody scary) things to say about their Bosnian Muslim and Serb former neighbours, for instance). But she adores him.

Tax doesn't have anything to do with her situation, I was just pointing out that I am aware of some 'good' reasons why some people don't want to get married. I'm puzzled as to why you regard this as such a reactionary position.

So should a woman stay married to a man who keeps sleeping with other woman? Is it best to show dc that men can walk all over a womans feeling by seelping with other woman and then coming home and sleeping with his wife.

Should those dc keep seeing their mother crying due to the hurt and pain it is causing her?

cause i don't think that is right or proper to allow dc to think that it is reasnable behaviour and actually be taxed on a different level

TBH I would actually pay more tax to be a divorced mother than stay with a shit like that

People keep saying that children do better in married families but is this compared to single parent families or to happily, long-term cohabiting families. I'd be surprised if it was the piece of paper that says you are married that gives the benefit, or whether it is just being in a stable family. So why should such an artificial construct be rewarded?

'I also get annoyed that as a stay-at-home mum my husband gets taxed so much' Fossie your husband gets taxed the same as everyone else. Why should your DH get a tax break (i.e. a pay rise) compared to a single bloke on the same income. Just because he had the good fortune to find a woman he wanted to marry. One could argue your DH has enough good luck having a family, in fact the single bloke is more deserving of a tax break for living on his own. It costs more to live on your own than half the costs of living as a couple. Plus, he needs the tax break so he can buy beer and fags to cheer him up from his loneliness and the despair or not being married

at not being married.

Riven I adore hamsters. They are my favourite ever small mammal

I would hazard a guess that children don't do better in married families per se but in stable family units- whatever the arrangement of parent/s. That's the key, surely. Cameron and shower are being particularly thick if they think that the fact that people are married essentially makes them stable as a family unit. Surely they're married because they're in a stable relationship, not the other way round. This is just the same old Family Values shite that the Tories like to trot out, surely?

Sorry if this has bin said already. I haven't got time to read this properly, and it's been a looong day

I nearly bought up my breakfast yesterday when I suddenly came across a large billboard of David Cameron staring down at me. I was pleased when I went past today to see people had taken pot shots at it with snowballs

Get used to the big smuggy billboards, Bumperlicious- that'll be it for the next five years. We'll all have to do Wakey Shakey routines daily in public areas in front of the image of Glorious Leader

...with oatcakes and cheese for sustenance

i am a single mother, raised both my daughters alone with help only from neighbors in the same position, both my daughters are bright hard working, my youngest engaged to be married. my eldest a working single mother. my mother was a single mother who had many partners, never worked a day in her life, excepting illegal activity, 11 children half of us put into care system during 60s/70s, i was taught how to steal, fight, beg, expelled from 3 schools but when i had my children something clicked (79/83), i went to college and worked hard to give them a good loving home. i lived in a council block the majority of which were single parents, and in the past 10 years have watched the community and its spirit dissapear replaced by long term benefit claimers, gangs of youths, young children unable to play out, ethnic minorities that cant or wont intergrate, NO Labour have had their day trying to please everyone, Lib Dems are of the same ilk. The Tories notably Ian Duncan Smith have spent alot of time researching social cohesion, family life, addiction abuse, and a small part of that research was, which isnt exactly news to anyone, that marriage, children within marriage provide on the whole a more stable, happier family and community, so the Tories try encourage and want to give tax incentive, makes you feel ICKY why? Britain needs change, good practice should be encouraged, the Tories or not saying that Single, Same Sex, Co Habitors are wrong and should be punished in some way, the Tories are saying that marriage is proven and should be reconised.
And lastly if it is a marriage of violence emotional abuse, fiscal incompetence, get out, single parents are a strong group you will get support and help will be there.
sorry went on but i really cant fathom what is so hard to see.

Oh can we please stop repeating this myth that the children of married couples do better than those of single parents because of marriage per se.

In study after study, if you take income out of the equation, you find that all the figures - truancy, criminality, obesity, depression, lack of qualifications, etc. - flatten out.

The single biggest variable in how children do in life, is not whether their parents are married, but how much money their parents have got. And since lone parents are on average much poorer than married parents, their children do worse than the average, NOT because of lack of marriage, but because of lack of money. Where lone parents have the same amount of money as married or cohabiting parents, the outcomes for their children are exactly the same as for their married counterparts.

That's not something most newspaper articles will tell you.

Edited version ;0)

Icky???
I am new to this site so I just give a bit of background.
I am a single mother, raised both my daughters alone with help only from neighbors in the same position, both my daughters are bright hard working, my youngest engaged to be married. my eldest a working single mother. my mother was a single mother who had many partners, never worked a day in her life, excepting illegal activity, 11 children half of us put into care system during 60s/70s, I was taught how to steal, fight, beg, expelled from 3 schools but when I had my children something clicked (79/83), I went to college and worked hard to give them a good loving home. I lived in a council block the majority of which were single parents, but in the past 10 years have watched my community and its spirit dissapear replaced by long term benefit claimers with no intrests at all, gangs of youths, young children unable to play out, ethnic minorities that cant or wont intergrate, NO Labour have had their day trying to please everyone, Lib Dems are of the same ilk. The Tories notably Ian Duncan Smith have spent alot of time researching social cohesion, family life, addiction abuse, and a small part of the research that came out time and time in all communities, (which isnt exactly news to anyone), that marriage, children within marriage provide on the whole a more stable, happier families, community, social cohesion. so the Tories try to encourage marriage and 'would like' to give a marriage tax incentive, this makes you feel ICKY why? Britain needs change, proven practice should be encouraged, the Tories are not saying that Single, Same Sex, Co Habit families are wrong and should be punished in some way, the Tories are saying that marriage has proven social benefit and should be reconised.
And lastly if it is a marriage or any relationship of violence, emotional abuse, fiscal incompetence, get out, single parents are a strong group you will get support and help will be there.
sorry went on but i really cant fathom what is so hard to see and why there is such opposition.

what planet are you on 'myth' honestly no wonder we are in a state with your supposed myth's, facts are facts, no matter how un PC they maybe

Oh god, things are no worse than they were 100 years ago, except 100 years ago the rich would hide/ignore their feckless behaviours (drug taking, adultery...), and they probably never had to come in to contact with the poor and feckless.

I disagree that Britain is Broken, but I fear that statement is going to become a self fulfilling prophesy.

herbeatitude,
'The single biggest variable in how children do in life, is not whether their parents are married, but how much money their parents have got. And since lone parents are on average much poorer than married parents, their children do worse than the average, NOT because of lack of marriage, but because of lack of money. Where lone parents have the same amount of money as married or cohabiting parents, the outcomes for their children are exactly the same as for their married counterparts.'

please provide research material for this claim.
money my dear is not the be all and end all of family life, or have you hit on something here, do parents now think parenting is about what you buy your children?.

tisfedup have you actually read and understood my post?

Which facts are you referring to?

(Polite request, could you use paragraphs? Otherwise your posts are very difficult to read)

i dont need a reason to not be married
i have no extenuating circumstances that put me in this predicament
i have been unmarried but with the father of my 6 children since my early 20's - twenty years ago
BOLLOCKS to the tories if that is not good enough and UP YOURS Cameron if he thinks it MATTERS

tisfedup if you look on the gingerbread site there's plenty of research evidence there. I'm not going to spend hours trawling it.

You provide the research that shows the outcomes of children from one parent families is so dreadful and I'll pick the data to pieces, how's that? I know of only one survey which found that marriage alone was important in outcomes, versus loads which show that the main factor in bad outcomes such as those I've listed, is money.

And er, no, no-one thinks parenting is just about money I have not stated or implied that.

one parent is ok

oh my goodness children in single parent families do well, this article really blows away the old myths about single parents, oh and there is the peice about money making things better

I've recently discovered that I feel very strongly about the issue of couples and tax allowances. I think it's actually about fairness and consistency rather than class, and I think it's a separate issue to marriage (although I will concede that marriage seems to be the most sensible measure/declaration of legal couple status for tax and benefits purposes).

I'd really like for DP and I to be able to pool our tax allowances (even though we're not married). We would definitely get married if we were able to do so. Right now we don't really want to spend money on getting married (no matter how cheap it can be) when there's no advantage to it. Indeed, we find ourselves at a disadvantage because we comply with the rules and don't pretend to be single.

I work full time (although I'm currently on maternity leave). DP recently finished a phd and has been looking for an academic post, but there aren't many out there so it'll probably be a while. DP hasn't paid enough NI contributions (although he's paid some in every year of his phd) to qualify for contributions-based jobseekers allowance. Because of my income (and the threshold for this to happen is very low actually) he doesn't qualify for income-based JA. So, essentially, he's entirely dependent financially on me through no choice of his own. And, as he's no longer a student, I lose my single person council tax discount, even though I'm still the only one with any income.

Since the government insist on assessing my income as the family income for all these purposes, it seems only fair that the collective tax allowances of us as a couple are taken into consideration when assessing how we are taxed. It won't matter once he gets a job, but the unfairness of the system annoys me.

Herb....

Did I say, 'the the outcome from one parent families is so dreadful'?

I think not, as I would be critising myself,
please do not try and twist what I say.. thankyou.

Yes happy to oblige, (pararaphs) although I think you are rather assuming, (didnt do to well at school) ;o)

I think you will find that your post did imply that money was the main factor.

I have no doubts what so ever that single parents, co hab's, same sex couples, make wonderful parent's,
being one myself 'harrrp harrrp blow own trumpet'lol, that is not a issue?

I think we may actually agree but the disagreement comes from being a Tory, idea.

Marriage is a legal relationship - because of that the tax system should reflect its unique nature

I don't think you read my post properly tisfedup.

I did not say tht buying children things is the most important parenting attribute. I said that when you look at the figures behind the headlines, they all flatten out when you take out income as a variable.

Oh can we please stop repeating this myth that the children of married couples do better than those of single parents because of marriage per se.

what planet are you on 'myth' honestly no wonder we are in a state with your supposed myth's, facts are facts, no matter how un PC they maybe

Did I say, 'the the outcome from one parent families is so dreadful'

hmm what where you saying then?

I'm in my early fifties and what I remember most painfully from my "just looking after the children" years is the sense of no longer existing economically. From being a career woman and home owner suddenly I had turned into a nobody - yet i knew with head and heart that I was doing an extremely important job. A job I had to pay other people by the hour to do plus tax if I did not want to do it myself. I know women still go through this feeling.
I think some kind of transferable tax allowance is a good idea, even though it might be quite modest, because it is the only way in which society can finally acknowledge the contribution which non working parents make. Confining it to married people with children may seem excluding but it does avoid fraud. Also marriage is "just" a conventional arrangement, in the same way oxygen is "just" a colourless odourless gas. Marriage - whether you like it or not personally - is the glue of society and I believe a responsible Government has to show some respect to societal structures.

Ivy... the report. gingerbread. ty

'hmm what where you saying then?'

I am saying..

that marriage is a proven commitment that provides family stability, so much so the majority in this country and throughout the world find it the prefered union when starting a family.

but I also know from experience, it is not the only scenario that can provide this, whether through choice or not.

The fact that the Tories seek to reconise marriage as such and wish to encourage marriage with a tax incentive, when current incentives encourage couples to to 'part', I am saying I agree with this incentive, this marriage incentive does not affect single parents, so the Icky felt by thread poster just seems to me political snobbery rather than thinking of ways how best to support families and communities and encourage social cohesion.
I hope that is clearer.