Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • Former MSE Sam M
    • By Former MSE Sam M 2nd Jun 15, 4:39 PM
    • 238Posts
    • 159Thanks
    Former MSE Sam M
    Marriage Allowance
    • #1
    • 2nd Jun 15, 4:39 PM
    Marriage Allowance 2nd Jun 15 at 4:39 PM
    Hi!

    This is the discussion thread for the



    Click reply below to discuss. If you havenít already, join the forum to reply. If you arenít sure how it all works, read our New to Forum? Intro Guide.


    Thanks folks ,
Page 54
    • molerat
    • By molerat 28th Nov 17, 12:04 PM
    • 17,483 Posts
    • 11,717 Thanks
    molerat
    Can married persons tax allowance be claimed if your spouse doesnít work at all please?
    Originally posted by Milligac
    Yes. I would imagine that is the case with a large majority, certainly in mine.
    www.helpforheroes.org.uk/donations.html
    • polymaff
    • By polymaff 28th Nov 17, 12:22 PM
    • 1,806 Posts
    • 781 Thanks
    polymaff
    I no longer work and put in a claim to HMRC for the Marraige tax allowance. I stopped work on 31/3/17. I had paid tax for the 2 previous years as I had gone above my tax free allowance.
    I thought they had transferred my tax allowance to my husband from April 2017 as before this we were not eligible to do it.
    Originally posted by Purplehaze58
    Why weren't you eligible in the previous years?
    • Consumerist
    • By Consumerist 28th Nov 17, 12:26 PM
    • 4,694 Posts
    • 2,329 Thanks
    Consumerist
    Even if it is their fault that they paid him a rebate they shouldnít have paid? It was them who messed up my claim for Marraige tax allowance. You expect HMRC to know what they are doing.....
    Originally posted by Purplehaze58
    There was a time when you could pretty much rely on HMRC to do things correctly but, sadly, that is no longer the case.

    HMRC has extensive powers even if they make mistakes. If, however, repaying the rebate would cause undue financial hardship, you can ask if they could make an arrangement or to collect the monies owed over the following tax year by adjusting his tax code.
    Warning: In the kingdom of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
    • Consumerist
    • By Consumerist 28th Nov 17, 12:45 PM
    • 4,694 Posts
    • 2,329 Thanks
    Consumerist
    Can married persons tax allowance be claimed if your spouse doesn’t work at all please?
    Originally posted by Milligac
    To claim Marriage Allowance the donor (non-taxpayer) only needs to have a National Insurance number (whether working or not) and the spouse needs to be only a Basic-Rate taxpayer for the year(s) claimed.
    Last edited by Consumerist; 28-11-2017 at 12:50 PM. Reason: clarification
    Warning: In the kingdom of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
    • Purplehaze58
    • By Purplehaze58 28th Nov 17, 12:45 PM
    • 12 Posts
    • 1 Thanks
    Purplehaze58
    Why weren't you eligible in the previous years?
    Originally posted by polymaff
    Because in the previous 2 years I was working so had no tax allowance left to transfer to my husband.
    • Purplehaze58
    • By Purplehaze58 28th Nov 17, 12:59 PM
    • 12 Posts
    • 1 Thanks
    Purplehaze58
    There was a time when you could pretty much rely on HMRC to do things correctly but, sadly, that is no longer the case.

    HMRC has extensive powers even if they make mistakes. If, however, repaying the rebate would cause undue financial hardship, you can ask if they could make an arrangement or to collect the monies owed over the following tax year by adjusting his tax code.
    Originally posted by Consumerist
    Yes they are doing that from April next year. I have put in a formal complaint as I honestly beleive this is wrong... a government financial department should get things right. Iím quite finance savvy so if I got caught by this there are going to be many many people in the same situation through no fault of their own.
    HMRC canít even provide me with a copy of what I actually claimed for, not even a transcript of my on line form. That is just wrong. I went online today to look at the claim form for MTA and in my personal account it still states ĎWe notice that you may be able to claim for previous years.....í errmmmm.... MAY BE able to claim suggests to
    me that they CHECK before doing it. Obviously they donít, which again is wrong. All I can say is thank god itís only 2 years previous that is claimable!
    Last edited by Purplehaze58; 28-11-2017 at 1:01 PM.
    • polymaff
    • By polymaff 28th Nov 17, 3:16 PM
    • 1,806 Posts
    • 781 Thanks
    polymaff
    Because in the previous 2 years I was working so had no tax allowance left to transfer to my husband.
    Originally posted by Purplehaze58
    I thought that you would say that. That does not make you ineligible.

    So, unless there is something else you haven't mentioned, you WERE eligible for MAT for all three years.

    Which may explain what happened.
    • Purplehaze58
    • By Purplehaze58 28th Nov 17, 3:32 PM
    • 12 Posts
    • 1 Thanks
    Purplehaze58
    I thought that you would say that. That does not make you ineligible.

    So, unless there is something else you haven't mentioned, you WERE eligible for MAT for all three years.

    Which may explain what happened.
    Originally posted by polymaff
    No I wasnít. I had earned more than my tax allowance so had paid tax. If I had earned less than 11000 or whatever it was the. There would have been some tax I could have transferred to my husband. But as I earned more than 11000 there was no tax allowance left to transfer 10% of it to him. I was working full time in 2015-2016 and they still gave my husband 10% of my tax allowance to him even though Iíd earned 21k and there was no spare tax allowance to give him.
    • polymaff
    • By polymaff 28th Nov 17, 3:41 PM
    • 1,806 Posts
    • 781 Thanks
    polymaff
    I thought that you would say that. That does not make you ineligible.

    So, unless there is something else you haven't mentioned, you WERE eligible for MAT for all three years.

    Which may explain what happened.
    Originally posted by polymaff
    No I wasn’t. I had earned more than my tax allowance so had paid tax. If I had earned less than 11000 or whatever it was the. There would have been some tax I could have transferred to my husband. But as I earned more than 11000 there was no tax allowance left to transfer 10% of it to him. I was working full time in 2015-2016 and they still gave my husband 10% of my tax allowance to him even though I’d earned 21k and there was no spare tax allowance to give him.
    Originally posted by Purplehaze58
    I'm sorry, but you are completely wrong.

    Do you want to learn, or just rant?

    Are you UK-resident for tax purposes?
    • Purplehaze58
    • By Purplehaze58 28th Nov 17, 3:59 PM
    • 12 Posts
    • 1 Thanks
    Purplehaze58
    I'm sorry, but you are completely wrong.

    Do you want to learn, or just rant?

    Are you UK-resident for tax purposes?
    Originally posted by polymaff
    Iím not ranting... you asked a question so I explained. Yes Im a UK resident born and bred. I know I could have still transferred some allowance to him but why would I do that when I had used all of my tax allowance up, I would then owe the tax man as per the letters I got. Please teach me where I am misunderstanding. Iím not ranting truly.
    • JpR
    • By JpR 28th Nov 17, 4:25 PM
    • 1 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    JpR
    The recipient of the allowance transfer cannot be paying higher rate income tax or the transfer fails. I filled in my Tax Return for 16/17 and now have a tax bill of £220 to pay even though I'm not paying higher rate tax. Several places ( both on MSE and gov.uk ) refer instead to an upper limit for 'income' (£45000 in 16/17). I had dividend and savings income that _just_ pushed me over £45k and the tax allowances for those separately meant I didn't pay higher rate tax. The text of the 2014 Finance Act, which introduced MA, refers to higher rate tax and explicitly mentions savings and dividend income. The £45k references appear to just be lazy shorthand but HMRC seem to applied that limit anyway. Other allowances weren't mentioned, and I don't use them, but CGT allowance and Rent a Room might also cause difficulties for those near the higher rate threshold.

    Any advice? I suspect getting HMRC to change is unlikely.
    • polymaff
    • By polymaff 28th Nov 17, 4:44 PM
    • 1,806 Posts
    • 781 Thanks
    polymaff
    I’m not ranting... you asked a question so I explained. Yes Im a UK resident born and bred. I know I could have still transferred some allowance to him but why would I do that when I had used all of my tax allowance up, I would then owe the tax man as per the letters I got. Please teach me where I am misunderstanding. I’m not ranting truly.
    Originally posted by Purplehaze58
    Read, and learn.

    1. Having personal allowance "left" has nothing to do with eligibility for MAT. The only significant restriction on UK-residents is that neither party to the transfer must be - or would be - higher rate tax-payers.

    2. HMRC has chosen not to challenge eligible applications for MAT. This has resulted in a number of cases where there was no financial gain - or loss - to the taxpayers involved. You will find many complaints of "what a waste of time applying for MAT was" across MSE forums.

    3. You seem to think that there is no point in applying for MAT if you have exhausted your Personal Allowances. This may be so in your own circumstances, but there are circumstances where basic-rate taxpayers will benefit from MAT.
    • Purplehaze58
    • By Purplehaze58 28th Nov 17, 5:48 PM
    • 12 Posts
    • 1 Thanks
    Purplehaze58
    Read, and learn.

    1. Having personal allowance "left" has nothing to do with eligibility for MAT. The only significant restriction on UK-residents is that neither party to the transfer must be - or would be - higher rate tax-payers.

    2. HMRC has chosen not to challenge eligible applications for MAT. This has resulted in a number of cases where there was no financial gain - or loss - to the taxpayers involved. You will find many complaints of "what a waste of time applying for MAT was" across MSE forums.

    3. You seem to think that there is no point in applying for MAT if you have exhausted your Personal Allowances. This may be so in your own circumstances, but there are circumstances where basic-rate taxpayers will benefit from MAT.
    Originally posted by polymaff

    Yes I understand now that you have explained that HMRC chose not to challenge eligible applications, this is what I didnít know. It doesnít say anything on their website that I can see. Al, I see is this:
    Who can apply
    You can get Marriage Allowance if all the following apply:

    youíre married or in a civil partnership
    you donít earn anything or your income is £11,500 or less
    your partnerís income is between £11,501 and £45,000 (or £43,000 if youíre in Scotland)

    This is why I am surprised because of 2nd line of income of £11.500 or less.

    Thank you for the info.
    • polymaff
    • By polymaff 28th Nov 17, 6:17 PM
    • 1,806 Posts
    • 781 Thanks
    polymaff
    Yes I understand now that you have explained that HMRC chose not to challenge eligible applications, this is what I didn’t know. It doesn’t say anything on their website that I can see. Al, I see is this:
    Who can apply
    You can get Marriage Allowance if all the following apply:

    you’re married or in a civil partnership
    you don’t earn anything or your income is £11,500 or less
    your partner’s income is between £11,501 and £45,000 (or £43,000 if you’re in Scotland)

    This is why I am surprised because of 2nd line of income of £11.500 or less.

    Thank you for the info.
    Originally posted by Purplehaze58
    You've a right to be annoyed with HMRC. They've handled MAT with ignorance and brazen-ness. HMRC have two responsibilities. One, to interpret the legislation correctly and, two, to produce working processes that implement the legislation's intent. I think that they've failed in both with MAT.

    The legislation has always made it clear that there are two types of applicant for MAT. For non-UK-resident taxpayers the applicant must have unused Personal Allowances to be eligible. For UK-resident taxpayers (hence my earlier question) the looser requirement is that they must not be subject to higher-rate income tax. I suspect that HMRC have not understood that there are these two cases - hence the confusing guidance you quote.

    HMRC changed this faulty rule into "guidance", perhaps because they couldn't think of a case where a basic rate taxpayer could benefit from MAT.

    This sloshing around has left HMRC staff completely up a gumtree about how to deal with MAT. It has also left the "experts" up the same gumtree. Recently, BBC Money Box got in an expert to, essentially, parrot what was on the HMRC website. I emailed them about this "advice" given and the replies, were, in order:

    1. You're simply wrong.

    2. You're simply wrong https://www.gov.uk/marriage-allowance/how-it-works

    3. I see what you mean http://www.accountingweb.co.uk/tax/personal-tax/marriage-allowance-mayhem I apologise.

    So you see, there's a LOT of ignorance - and ranting - about.
    Last edited by polymaff; 28-11-2017 at 6:20 PM. Reason: Added Smiley :)
    • polymaff
    • By polymaff 28th Nov 17, 8:26 PM
    • 1,806 Posts
    • 781 Thanks
    polymaff
    The recipient of the allowance transfer cannot be paying higher rate income tax or the transfer fails. I filled in my Tax Return for 16/17 and now have a tax bill of £220 to pay even though I'm not paying higher rate tax. Several places ( both on MSE and gov.uk ) refer instead to an upper limit for 'income' (£45000 in 16/17). I had dividend and savings income that _just_ pushed me over £45k and the tax allowances for those separately meant I didn't pay higher rate tax. The text of the 2014 Finance Act, which introduced MA, refers to higher rate tax and explicitly mentions savings and dividend income. The £45k references appear to just be lazy shorthand but HMRC seem to applied that limit anyway. Other allowances weren't mentioned, and I don't use them, but CGT allowance and Rent a Room might also cause difficulties for those near the higher rate threshold.

    Any advice? I suspect getting HMRC to change is unlikely.
    Originally posted by JpR
    FA 2016 introduced further detail. Basically that, if without the dividend allowance there would have been higher and/or additional dividend tax liability, you are excluded from MAT.
    • badmemory
    • By badmemory 29th Nov 17, 2:40 AM
    • 1,063 Posts
    • 1,131 Thanks
    badmemory
    Unfortunately HMRC are no longer trustworthy. They no longer have to tell you the truth about your financial liabilities. Well not at least until you owe them penalties. We all now need to know our own liabilities so pretty much all need our own accountants to file our own details as we cannot now trust HMRC to even deal with our basic responsibilities in a efficient way.
    • badmemory
    • By badmemory 29th Nov 17, 2:53 AM
    • 1,063 Posts
    • 1,131 Thanks
    badmemory
    Unfortunately HMRC are no longer trustworthy. They no longer have to tell you the truth about your financial liabilities. Well not at least until you owe them penalties. We all now need to know our own liabilities so pretty much all need our own accountants to file our own details as we cannot now trust HMRC to even deal with our basic responsibilities in a efficient way.
    Originally posted by badmemory
    So you've read this far so I guess you don't believe me. So read the recent posts by dori2o. She (or I think she anyway) posts stating some things re HMRC & posts well re legislation etc. This is definitely not a criticism of dori2o, but of the future as stated, which is fine for me because I know, but what about the milliions out there who maybe don't know, who never get a letter (well not until it is a penalty letter), the ones who don't know about MSE, the ones who don't realise that the news item actually refers to/includes them. The ones who don't think of themselves well off but are no longer entiltled to child benefit. The list will go on!
    • Purplehaze58
    • By Purplehaze58 29th Nov 17, 7:54 AM
    • 12 Posts
    • 1 Thanks
    Purplehaze58
    You've a right to be annoyed with HMRC. They've handled MAT with ignorance and brazen-ness. HMRC have two responsibilities. One, to interpret the legislation correctly and, two, to produce working processes that implement the legislation's intent. I think that they've failed in both with MAT.

    The legislation has always made it clear that there are two types of applicant for MAT. For non-UK-resident taxpayers the applicant must have unused Personal Allowances to be eligible. For UK-resident taxpayers (hence my earlier question) the looser requirement is that they must not be subject to higher-rate income tax. I suspect that HMRC have not understood that there are these two cases - hence the confusing guidance you quote.

    HMRC changed this faulty rule into "guidance", perhaps because they couldn't think of a case where a basic rate taxpayer could benefit from MAT.

    So you see, there's a LOT of ignorance - and ranting - about.
    Originally posted by polymaff
    Just found the email HMRC sent me when I applied it states:
    Earlier tax years

    HMRC will check your eligibility before processing your application

    So as I didnít fulfill eligibility number 2 of not earning less than the specified amount I would say itís their error not mine.

    No wonder people are getting tax bills...itís all just so wrong.
    • polymaff
    • By polymaff 29th Nov 17, 9:34 AM
    • 1,806 Posts
    • 781 Thanks
    polymaff
    So as I didnít fulfill eligibility number 2 of not earning less than the specified amount I would say itís their error not mine.
    Originally posted by Purplehaze58
    So during the disputed years you had taxable income of £40k plus?
    • Purplehaze58
    • By Purplehaze58 29th Nov 17, 9:43 AM
    • 12 Posts
    • 1 Thanks
    Purplehaze58
    So during the disputed years you had taxable income of £40k plus?
    Originally posted by polymaff
    1- youíre married or in a civil partnership
    2 - you donít earn anything or your income is £11,500 or less
    3 - your partnerís income is between £11,501 and £45,000 (or £43,000 if youíre in Scotland)

    Line 2 of their web site for eligibility.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

3,620Posts Today

5,669Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • RT @bearface83: @MartinSLewis check out the @Missguided new 60% off offer. Upping the cost of items almost double to make us think it?s a?

  • RT @efitzpat: Thank you SO SO much @MartinSLewis for your Student Loans refund advice! I just got a grand refunded right before Xmas! Whoop?

  • Have a lovely weekend folks. Don't do anything (fiscally) that I wouldn't do!

  • Follow Martin