Tax credits may be cut under Tories - The Times

wageslave

baileysbattlebus wrote: »

She told me her wages basically keep a roof over their heads and pay the bills and they live on the tax credits.

Before tax credits were introduced, she would have had her rent and community tax paid.
Under the old system any monies she received from the childrens father would have been taken into account but it doesn't count as income under the tax credit scheme. This effectively punishes children with deadbeat fathers and makes no sense at all.

donaldtramp

Fantastic idea. When can we implement it?
Oh we can't, Brown's still spending our future wealth...

space_rider

ILW wrote: »

What is the father of her two children doing to support her and his kids?

Being let of paying for them by the CSA.

leveller2911

StevieJ wrote: »

If I was entitled I would take my chances £2500 and you didn't notice :eek:

we got clobbered with an over payment 4 yrs ago and not received a penny since.Yes Steve we didn't notice either.The BIG problem with tax credit system is your "entitlement " is based on your previous years accounts (self employed) so when your current year ends and the accounts go in if you have earned more money then youe been over paid.
The tax credits people say "you can ESTIMATE your earnings":eek: which then makes you to blame if there is an overpayment later.

WFTC not fit for purpose.........

Pobby

ILW wrote: »

What is the father of her two children doing to support her and his kids?

A good point, mind you we live in different days to when I was a young man. It seems to me that you must have " choices ". One or other partner gets the feeling that they fancy someone else so the tax payer has to fork out. Funnily enough, I understand why some kids today are so messed up.

nearlynew

I don't like all these new taxes and the way they are administered.

What was wrong with the "good old days" when you had a different tax code depending on whetehr you were married, single, had kids etc. ?

Now, you've got all these new government departments with all this extra administration and cost and have to fill out all sorts of forms ...................... it's as if you have to apply for what is rightfully yours.




Beware of a government that has enough power to provide everything.........................



............ because they will also have the power to remove it.

Pennywise

wageslave wrote: »

Tax credits have benefited employers far more than they have employees.
It is no coincidence that employers like Tesco, Argos etc have the majority of their staff on 16 hour contracts, the lowest level the system starts to pay out to those with children.

But that was also the case before tax credits. The 16 hour thing (or similar) has been in place for a couple of decades at least - I think it was the earnings threshold for income support or family credit or something of that ilk. Tax credits didn't come out of thin air - they are a replacement for some tax reliefs and some state benefits. Trouble is they're more complicated, cost more to administer and are no fairer than what they replaced.

There should be no fixed thresholds at all - all benefits/tax allowances etc should be fully variable. It makes absolutely no sense that someone working 15 hours gets nothing but if they work another hour and they're quids in. Just like the stupid thresholds for stamp duty, VAT registration, etc - they put artificial barriers in place which do more harm than good.

Fridge2

It would be better to just abolish all these ridiculous topups and cut taxes in the first place.

That way, we could keep the money we earn in the first place

baileysbattlebus

ILW wrote: »

What is the father of her two children doing to support her and his kids?

As far as I can remember - and this is done through the CSA - he has to pay £118 per month - but as often as not doesn't - the money is paid to her through the CSA - some months she gets something and some months she doesn't. She can't rely on it or take it into her budget.

I don't know his financial circumstances obviously, but I do know he went on to have 3 other children with more than one woman - the share of the maintenance pot gets smaller each time another child is added. Who knows when he will stop producing children?

Maintenance payments aren't taken into account for tax credits (if you are lucky enough to receive them) - I think they are for income support.

But absent non paying fathers are something else - you wouldn't want to get me started on that one.

People are quick enough to jump on single mothers for being irresponsible but the father plays his part too.

She thought they were in a stable relationship and that they would get married, until one day, out of the blue he walked out and moved to another part of the country. She was pregnant with child #2. It's only been the last year or so that she has received anything at all. All be it intermittently.

baileysbattlebus

Pennywise wrote: »

But that was also the case before tax credits. The 16 hour thing (or similar) has been in place for a couple of decades at least - I think it was the earnings threshold for income support or family credit or something of that ilk. Tax credits didn't come out of thin air - they are a replacement for some tax reliefs and some state benefits. Trouble is they're more complicated, cost more to administer and are no fairer than what they replaced.
.

You are right - in the mid 1980's my sister (after her husband left her) got a part time job and received FIS - family income supplement. She used to have a book like the old family allowance book that she took to the post office each week. And because she got that, she got other benefits - free school meals, school uniform grants, etc. The level of FIS was fixed for 6 months whether your circumstances changed or not - you were never overpaid. The level you got was based on "x" weeks wages - so what people used to do was work minimum hours - no overtime for the "x" weeks - get the maximum they could - then work overtime etc until it was time for renewal.

I think the idea with the current tax credit system was to roll up everything that people received under the old system and base it on your annual earnings instead of "x" weeks. Which to be fair was more logical and theoretically would be less wasteful - as all of your earnings are taken into account. Unfortunately it hasn't worked out like that - especially for the claimants.