CMEC and new calculations

Found_true_love

Hi all

the new gross figures that CMEC will use (12%) of gross easy enough to understand for paye but for self employed does that mean that the invoiced total will be the basis or will it be after normal business expenses are taken into account?

If its the latter then there is absolutely no change in how the calculation will be made other than they will now be taking 12% instead of 19% for one child.

Have I missed something?

maggied_2

I'm interested in this too. My OH is self employed and considering going down the CSA route (not via them, just using their calcs) as he's been overpaying for a while now.
However if he has to pay based on his gross then that doesn't take into account things like materials / equipment hire etc.

Anyone know?

alwayspuzzled

I think its gross PROFIT. ie after all business costs and expenses took off but before the tax and NI is took off.

speedster

cmec is going to be just as as miserably inefficient as its predecessors.

SE is going to cause them even more problems than it does now, as the new system is unclear from the off as to how to calculate.

RedSky

I recall reading that it will be based on taxable income as per your P60 if PAYE or self assessment if self employed. Thus MPs believe - "It will also net the self-employed and take in rental and dividend income."

romanempire

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Found_true_love

RedSky wrote: »

I recall reading that it will be based on taxable income as per your P60 if PAYE or self assessment if self employed. Thus MPs believe - "It will also net the self-employed and take in rental and dividend income."

So if thats so then the new system treats SE EXACTLY the same way as the old system?

Lets talk about those rental incomes. House is rented out at £1000 per month the mortgage repayments (interest only) are £750 per month other "allowable" expenses (management fees, office costs repairs etc) are £200 per month gross profit before tax £50 per month. 12% is then taken for PWC (but only if this means your overall income is more than £200 per month) less deductions for relevent children and deductions for overnight stays of the qualifying child(ren)

A change that keeps the status quo but reduces the NRP libility from 19% to 12%, someone has not thought that through have they?

shell_542

Found_true_love wrote: »

So if thats so then the new system treats SE EXACTLY the same way as the old system?

Lets talk about those rental incomes. House is rented out at £1000 per month the mortgage repayments (interest only) are £750 per month other "allowable" expenses (management fees, office costs repairs etc) are £200 per month gross profit before tax £50 per month. 12% is then taken for PWC (but only if this means your overall income is more than £200 per month) less deductions for relevent children and deductions for overnight stays of the qualifying child(ren)

A change that keeps the status quo but reduces the NRP libility from 19% to 12%, someone has not thought that through have they?

Whereas PAYE employees end up paying more ... in our circumstances anyway, 2 children in resident home (NOT stepchildren) and one child with PWC. My H would end up paying £30 a month more on the new system without in increase in wages.

That and the SE side of it ... it's sure looking good for the new system aye?

Found_true_love

shell_542 wrote: »

Whereas PAYE employees end up paying more ... in our circumstances anyway, 2 children in resident home (NOT stepchildren) and one child with PWC. My H would end up paying £30 a month more on the new system without in increase in wages.

That and the SE side of it ... it's sure looking good for the new system aye?

Dont get me wrong, Im all for a system that helps the hard working NRP who is self employed get a better deal, but to come up with a system that hits the even more hard working employed NRP who is so easily shafted by those wimmin complaining to the CSA thats unforgivable.

Lets vote to scrap the CSA/CMEC and start from scratch.

Basic principle.

1 a child costs a finite amount to keep clothe etc.

2 lets determiine a fair cost for that (£3000 per year?)

3 PWC gets child benefit to help with that cost upkeep, so that comes off the figure at 2

4 There is a presumption of shared 50/50 care, therefore the remainder of the costs associated with bringing the child up gets split between both parents EQUALLY

5 The NRP pays his half to the PWC JOB DONE

6 If the PWC doesnt think that fair then roles are reversed and mother gets to pay father!

7 If the NRP cannot take (his/her) fair share of the 50/50 split for each day he has to give back to PWC, NRP has to pay 1/7th more to PWC as a recognition

shell_542

Found_true_love wrote: »

Dont get me wrong, Im all for a system that helps the hard working NRP who is self employed get a better deal, but to come up with a system that hits the even more hard working employed NRP who is so easily shafted by those wimmin complaining to the CSA thats unforgivable.

Lets vote to scrap the CSA/CMEC and start from scratch.

Basic principle.

1 a child costs a finite amount to keep clothe etc.

2 lets determiine a fair cost for that (£3000 per year?)

3 PWC gets child benefit to help with that cost upkeep, so that comes off the figure at 2

4 There is a presumption of shared 50/50 care, therefore the remainder of the costs associated with bringing the child up gets split between both parents EQUALLY

5 The NRP pays his half to the PWC JOB DONE

6 If the PWC doesnt think that fair then roles are reversed and mother gets to pay father!

7 If the NRP cannot take (his/her) fair share of the 50/50 split for each day he has to give back to PWC, NRP has to pay 1/7th more to PWC as a recognition

It's just not practical is it?

On those calculations that would mean every NRP (having no overnights at all) would be paying £160 a month child support ... for everyone ... £160 for the worker on £100,000 a year or another one on £10,000 a year.

If it was shared care it would be approx £80 a month ... could an NRP on job seekers or IS afford to pay £80 a month to the PWC, whilst getting no benefits for the child (as they cannot be split, the Mother would probably get and keep them) and would have to contribute to the child's costs for half of the time?

LizzieS_2

Found_true_love wrote: »

1 a child costs a finite amount to keep clothe etc.

And there lies the problem. Each child is different and raised differently. It is unreasonable to create a system which demands how the children of separated parents are all brought up on one fixed sum. The alternative is to work out an unique cost for each child which of course complicates a complicated system even more.