New Benefit cuts -- tell us what you think?

[jen_br]

Today it was announced that Child benefit will be lost for those families who have one earner paying the higher tax bracket..
http://web.orange.co.uk/article/news/ch ... uk_economy

What do you feel about that? Do you feel that its fair to keep on penalizing those who have children? What about those familes that don't have kids but are high earners do you feel that they should have a higher tax?

It's said now that; ""[size=5]A one-earner couple with an income of £43,875 would need a pay rise of £2,975 or more to ensure they were no worse off after paying income tax and national insurance and losing child benefit."

How does that make you feel?

****Remember this is a discussion there will be varying views and opinions try to stick to facts and thoughts as opposed to attacking one another ****

[alastairq]

Re: New Benefit cuts -- tell us what you think?

that's just over a 6% pay rise.......I suspect , for someone on that sort of salary, not out of the way, in the private sector.

Then there's the distinct possibility of bonuses?

Overtime?

The fact that the Govt. don't intend to penalise [if that's the right term?] couples whose combined income exceeds the amount quoted, suggests concern about the risk of incentivising the removal of women [especially, or though not exclusively] from the workplace.

Although I beg the question as to why a family with an income from a single source, above 40k pa, should receive tax benefits for children?

When many families survive on incomes of less than half that?
[the 'average' income seems to be around 25-26k pa]...........

Or, are people on better incomes [by comparison] concerned that they may have to downsize their lifestyles?

I, of course, speak as a public sector worker [Civil Servant, to be right] on less than the national average salary, performing a job which is 'skilled', essential to the nation, yet at risk of short term, short-sighted redundancy [once gone, I will not be back, so when the need for my skills returns, as it will, I will not be around to fill the need....or rather, my colleagues wont]....

I have received my last pay rise for at least 2 maybe 3 years to come.

My pension will effectively remain static...unless I 'purchase' years...

so no, I have no issues with the govt's proposals....but in reality they area sop to the unwashed public and media.

[jen_br]

Re: New Benefit cuts -- tell us what you think?

But remember they are loosing child benefit which is 20.00 a week and 13.20 for every 2nd child. I feel that this is going towards the upkeep of a child (mine for example 10.00 goes towards my kids bank account and 10.00 goes towards clothing food etc)

I guess for me I don't understand why a NON means tested benefit is becoming means tested. the people earning 25-26pa could be better off then the person earning 40k per year ya know?

I rather have had a tax increase then... for people earning over X amount that way its fairer to all people not just penalising those with kids.

[alastairq]

Re: New Benefit cuts -- tell us what you think?

(mine for example 10.00 goes towards my kids bank account and 10.00 goes towards clothing food etc)

surely not suggesting half your tax credits go towards boosting your child's bank account? Is this right and proper use for a benefit?


I don't see how there can be a penalty for those with kids?


Or should there be far higher tax rates for single or childless people?

What might be seen as 'unfair' is that the removal of credits wont happen to a couple whose combined incomes exceed the quoted amount.


I suspect this has been left in place for reasons stated in my last post.

There has to be a cut-off point somewhere.....otherwise we have a situation whereby 'benefits' are paid to those who can afford to do without.

We already have that situation with other benefits....

[jen_br]

Re: New Benefit cuts -- tell us what you think?

(mine for example 10.00 goes towards my kids bank account and 10.00 goes towards clothing food etc)

surely not suggesting half your tax credits go towards boosting your child's bank account? Is this right and proper use for a benefit?
Darn right I do.. its child benefit which is a NON means tested benefit.. means everyone gets it *well now its means tested* and the money is suppose to go to benefit the child.. hence the name. Tax criedts are a different thing.

I don't see how there can be a penalty for those with kids?
By taking away child benefit your penalizing those who earn a good income but have kids.. why should they be the only ones who are paying back the deficit? what about the other families who don't have kids?


Or should there be far higher tax rates for single or childless people?
Nope everyone should have the same tax percentage (set out in tiers like it is now)

What might be seen as 'unfair' is that the removal of credits wont happen to a couple whose combined incomes exceed the quoted amount.
So if my husband earns over that amount but I choose to stay home we loose our benefit but if he quits said job and we both go get a job earning half the amount of the higher job we don't loose it but then I will have to pay childcare?? does that seem right?


I suspect this has been left in place for reasons stated in my last post.

There has to be a cut-off point somewhere.....otherwise we have a situation whereby 'benefits' are paid to those who can afford to do without.

We already have that situation with other benefits....

[alastairq]

Re: New Benefit cuts -- tell us what you think?

Darn right I do.. its child benefit which is a NON means tested benefit.. means everyone gets it *well now its means tested* and the money is suppose to go to benefit the child.. hence the name. Tax criedts are a different thing.

terminology wrong, sorry.....but I guess you get the gist?

By taking away child benefit your penalizing those who earn a good income but have kids.. why should they be the only ones who are paying back the deficit? what about the other families who don't have kids?

That, really, is about 'choices'....not reasonable choices, but choices all the same.........and the difference affects all levels of income.

I don't see an issue with 'means testing' in this instance...not that is is in reality...it is simply a lowering of the cap above which child benefits should not need to be paid......would you complain if it were set at, for example 80 k pa?

Sadly those above the cut-off income are not paying back the deficit.....far from it. That will end up being the province of those on low incomes, who rely on public services for support..they are the one's who will pay the highest prices.

So if my husband earns over that amount but I choose to stay home we loose our benefit but if he quits said job and we both go get a job earning half the amount of the higher job we don't loose it but then I will have to pay childcare?? does that seem right?

swings and roundabouts, really. Luckily your family is in a position to make such choices...far too many are not.

AS I see it, if I were in the same position, the choices are, either to adjust one's family income upwards to compensate for the loss......if indeed the loss really does matter....

or, adjust incomes downwards to a level that can take advantage of the system as it [will] stand?

IN any event, any change of cut-off income is likely to raise objections, as people once able to take advantage, appear to no longer be able to do so.

With regard to single or married tax allowances [or equivalents]
I don't believe we should return to the income tax system of old, whereby tax codes were set according to marital status....the present system is fair and equitable.....and clearer...[to me, anyway]...


But then, speaking as a potential red-under-the-bed, I think it really is about time middle England contributed , it is after all, new labour's heartland, so what would one expect from a tory/liberal coalition?

[Susie]

Re: New Benefit cuts -- tell us what you think?

Personally I don't see it as a bad thing, as it will be there for the lower income families.
I know its hard to generalise, but if it goes to everyone then households with an income of £100,000 would get it as well, so I am happier that a line has been drawn and that those who are most likely to need it still receive it.
If anything I would like to see child allowances gradually removed, but to compensate a higher tax free amount so that everyone working would pay no tax on the first £800 a month (rising to £1000 a month). That way with the other cap to the amount of benefits thats coming in all working households would be better off overall and it would put those who will not work in a position where they would be better off working, and hopefully mean that those who cannot work such as the disabled would be able to have slightly higher benefits.

[jen_br]

Re: New Benefit cuts -- tell us what you think?

Id like to see it so that I can transfer my tax allowance to my husband!

[Susie]

Re: New Benefit cuts -- tell us what you think?

Id like to see it so that I can transfer my tax allowance to my husband!

I would agree with that, it used to be possible but was taken out so it should not be hard to reinstate it!

[oscar]

Re: New Benefit cuts -- tell us what you think?

Im gonna get shot down in flames (probably), but I dont agree with Child benefit anyway. If a couple decide to have children, then why should the Government help pay for their upkeep?

There are people in this country who seem (according to the press stories) to have large families solely to boost their income. (not that I am saying this applies to people on this site)

Do people realise also, that Child Benefit gets paid to kids that dont even live here! - Just because one parent works here. (though that is probably a different story.

[jen_br]

Re: New Benefit cuts -- tell us what you think?

Well, Oscar I guess we can then say why are we paying cold weather payments and tv licencing to the elderly? And why is it those with kids are getting cut backs to pay back the countrys deficit? -- see what I mean? Im not saying that I don't agree we need cutbacks.. but ffs they already got rid of the 250.00 CTF for kids.. and now Child benefit... makes me sad.

Kids are tomorrows future, and we need them for economic balance... so discouraging people to have kids isn't a good idea either... (but I see your point about people who have kids just to get freebies -- id like to believe this doesn't happen)

[LooLoo]

Re: New Benefit cuts -- tell us what you think?

I think they will have to back track on this Jen - it has not been well thought out and I "personally" don't agree with it.

Although I did have to smile the other day when one of the guys in the office was saying about his claim for child benefit - SERIOUSLY HE DOES NOT NEED TO CLAIM....

[jen_br]

Re: New Benefit cuts -- tell us what you think?

Thats just it.. one person can be earning 43 and the other person earning 43 and they will get it.. but if one was earning 44 and the other nothing.. they would loose it.

[LooLoo]

Re: New Benefit cuts -- tell us what you think?

it is a lazy way of doing it - they dont want to pay it everyone, they don't want to means test people so they have just brought this in and not thought it through.............

I think it should be kept (not that I have children but I know what a difference that amount of money makes to families, esp where the 2nd earner is a stay at home parent or part time working

Re: New Benefit cuts -- tell us what you think?

I've been thinking about this some deal.

On the surface of things I agree with the principle of those saying those who are earning £44+ shouldn't get child benefit, I really do.. on principle.

I know that my inlaws are a one wage family and bro-in-law is very near if not over that threshold. I also know that they are strugging to stay afloat and have been quite some time. Extortionate mortgage that they once could afford... blah blah and debt. We can't forget about debt. That is crippling them. They've no spare cash at all.

Then there's us, ex bankrupts, obviously no debt coping fine on a lower than the average salary.. £44k a year? WOW!! Very well off. Get my meaning?

If I'm honest I don't agree with the £44Kers getting child benefit but also relise that not everybody is well off at £44K.

The difference is whether you need that child benefit to help clothe, feed and educate (activities, interests, toys, books) or whether it's spare cash going in a bank account.

Means tested? I don't know but I do respect the decision even if I totally and utterly think that two people earning £80K can still get it. That is ridiculus in my book.