MSE Parents Club Part 14

r.mac_2

SusanC wrote: »

The thing I find even more than the system is that I get tax funded leaflets put through my door telling me that if you are staying at home looking after your children then you are "doing nothing". I don't see why it's only considered a job and worthwhile if you are being paid to look after other people's children and not if you look after your own.

:mad::mad::mad::mad:

redstararnie76 wrote: »

R.mac - I don't blame you for being annoyed. This latest change makes no sense to me! When I heard them talking earlier about changes to child benefit, I was prepared that we would almost certainly lose our benefit. While it was aggravating, it wasn't life-changing as both my husband and I are on ok salaries. I couldn't believe it - and I don't think it's right - when I learnt that we would still receive it, but a family whose whole income happens to be less than our joint income, but has a stay at home parent, would lose it. This just doesn't make sense. I would much prefer that I lose my child benefit, and they look at general childcare costs for families where both parents work (I'll be paying £185 per week for F when I return in January).

yep - that the point. I think Family allowance is a good thing, but ultimatly if the country can't afford it I'm the first to admit we'd survive without it. Others can't though and they aren't treating everyone fairly by this new proposal. Thts what really annoys me. I prize fairness:o

Dribblekitten

Ooh this child benefit thing has me riled too!

I'm in the same position as RMac and Bruno, hubby earns high rate, me nowt. I'm interested also in what happens to my NI credits though - will I be hammered again? This issue and others (listening to ranters on the radio now about it) I think will come out soon and I will be very surprised if it goes through in 2013 as announced today.

Have a grotty toddler with a rash today, added to a v pregnant mummy, a hubby trying to work from home and rain outside does not make for a happy household.

weezl74

so a really dumb question from me then...

what's the thingie with whose name it's in and NI?

My_Fathers_Daughter

Ooops - so I am the only one who will happily give their CB back It would seem having one parent at home is an influence?

I do get very :mad: about any suggestion to link Council Tax to earnings though. My next door neighbours bought their house when they were first built and cost about £2.50....now they are retired. Why should I pay more to have my bins emptied than they do?

r.mac_2

MFD - my point exactly on CT. I'm happy not to recieve CB as its not required for us to be able to feed/clothe LO. However, I think the way they are doing it is wrong. It actually penalises those who are non-earning SAHMs which is something the conservatives told me they wanted to encourage whilst they were on the campaign trail. I feel they lied to me.

r.mac_2

I have a question re: travel cots. I have a big bulky and heavy travel cot, but we've only used it when travelling by car. I'm heading to London later in the year and wonder what we can do instead of lugging it with us on the plane. My friend hasn't got one we can use and I'm not sure that she would sleep in the bed (though she's have to share with me). Any ideas????

My_Fathers_Daughter

r.mac wrote: »

MFD - my point exactly on CT. I'm happy not to recieve CB as its not required for us to be able to feed/clothe LO. However, I think the way they are doing it is wrong. It actually penalises those who are non-earning SAHMs which is something the conservatives told me they wanted to encourage whilst they were on the campaign trail. I feel they lied to me.

Why does it penalise non-earning SAHM's? The income (or not) of the second parent is unimportant once one passes the higher tax threashold.

I am by no means defending the way that it is being done - it seems silly and will lead to some perverse situations...but you would lose it whether you were working or not...


Can I just point out that we are mainly a 1 income household to anyone who thinks I am sitting smugly because we are two working parents.

tarajayne

Maddy's just woken, her cheeks are covered in a very red spotty rash. It was there when she woke so we stayed home today but it went down a little. Now she's slept it's really bad again. Can teeth do that?

Sami_Bee

weezl74 wrote: »

so a really dumb question from me then...

what's the thingie with whose name it's in and NI?

It is called Home Responsibilities protection and covered the claimant for 2 yrs worth of NI contributions while they are out of work. (its changed now and I think covers for more than 2yrs)
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/MoneyTaxAndBenefits/BenefitsTaxCreditsAndOtherSupport/Caringforsomeone/DG_10018691

SusanC_2

r.mac wrote: »

so theoretically, if DH has his own business we could split his income for tax purposes? I knew that we could do things with diviends as shareholders and salary as employee, but not sure how this works - have you a link you could send me? *DH considering this in the not too distant future so may swing it for us!*

The way we've done it is we made the business into a partnership where we are both self-employed and split the profits 50/50 for tax purposes. I did calculations at the time we changed it of how much tax/NI we would pay like that and it saves over £1000 per year (and it means I am paying NI and therefore can get contribution based benefits). You can also set up a private limited company with you both as shareholders and him as an employee. This isn't worthwhile for us because our income is fairly low so I don't know much about it but I believe it can be worthwhile if your income is high enough to pay the higher rate of tax. If you have it as a partnership where you are both self-employed, you do need to genuinely be doing some work for the business (I do accounts/admin and have records of the hours I've worked) whereas to be a shareholder in a limited company you don't. There was a famous case where the IR tried to get round the shareholder thing but the couple involved eventually won.