Child benefit to be scrapped for higher rate tax payers from 2013

SingleSue

Really2 wrote: »

I think someone mentioned it above, 1 income will have no child care costs etc.

So perhaps it kind of works out in the wash after expenses are taken in to account.

But not always, we had 2 incomes and no childcare costs...I arranged my hours around hubby and playgroup/tutors/school as no begger would have the children.

If me and hubby had still been together, we would not have been able to claim child benefit under these new rules, our last year together our joint income was in excess of 60k (I didn't get to see the final figure as we had split by then but his March bonus after we split was in excess of £6k) and of course, that figure would have been a lot higher now, especially as his boss was asking him to take over the day to day running of the company with the income to go with it.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

carolt wrote: »

we're going to lose over £2250/year after tax - that is a LOT of money.

I am REALLY, REALLY ANGRY. :mad:

FURIOUS. :mad:

:rotfl:

Ahhhh, not so keen on people losing money, when it's YOU doing the losing, are you carol?

I've seen you rant and rant and rant some more about how lower house prices and less debt is good for the country.

Well, a lower benefits bill and less national debt is just as good for the country, so suck it up.

The_White_Horse

if it is a universal benefit, it should be universally scrapped.

i hate scroungers taking money out of my pocket.

StevieJ

WestonDave wrote: »

In my view this negates the apparent simplicity of it - now all higher rate tax payers will have to start submitting tax returns so they can capture the need to claw back child benefit whereas now, higher rate tax payers who only have PAYE income, don't have to do them. Stand by for the tax return system to go into meltdown!

Not if you don't have claimable kids.

Graham_Devon

It's just been absolutely confirmed on the BBC due to confusion.

ANY household with someone living in it with an income of more than £44,000 a year will lose the benefit.

So that's cleared up.

lostinrates

Really2 wrote: »

I think the point kind of lost looking at just the basics of this is that a person who is a top rate earner is more likely to have a partner on a similar wage level if working.

Not All will I understand, so yes 2 people on a joint £60K may get it.

You should be looking at an equal, you would also have to expect a person earning £60K to have a earning partner also.

Otherwise you should also compare £30K single wage household against £60K single wage household.

It is hard to argue the single £30K earner is not worse off, and the situation is just as likely.

Or a top rate earner might also be likely to have a partner not working at all but capable of working? I think, (its hard to think of the circs of everyone you've met so I might change my mind ) most often it seems the second partner stays working but doesn't earn what they could to fit in with a demanding high earning partners' schedule or childcare.

chewmylegoff

RenovationMan wrote: »

All higher rate tax payers fill in a tax return via self assessment. There will be a tickbox on the form that says something like "Are you in receipt of Child Benefit", when this is ticked, the CB will be taken back via tax code. Pretty straightforward.

On the BBC, the spokesman said that it'd be easier and preferable if high rate taxpayers simple didnt apply for CB to save admin all round.

this is not right and hasn't been for some time.

current requirements are:

the basic criteria are that everyone who is self employed, who earns £100,000 or more, or who has investment income of £10,000 (gross) or more, has to fill in a self assessment tax return.

The_White_Horse

how can a dirty benefit scrounging chav with 7 kids still be entitled to CB on all 7 kids??????

that is unfair.

carolt

Generali wrote: »

You have no idea. Seriously, you expect the world to work so that your massive sense of entitlement can be realised. You want to earn a huge income, then have that subsidised yet further by people that chose to live a different life to you or can't afford to pay for their own lives and in addition subsidise your massive expectations.

Then you blame The Tories or The Bankers or BTLers when you can only have what probably 99% of the world's population can only dream of.

No more than you blame The Socialists or The Lefties for when anything in the economy goes wrong.

I don't mind taking a cut in child benefit - it will be hard for me, hard for my children and hard for my OH, make no mistake about it, but if the sacrifice was needed to pay for the bailout of the baking system, then you know (even though, clearly I was not responsible for the collpase of the banking system, and unlike you, not being a banker, never benefitted from bankers' huge salaries which we now subsidize through our taxes) I would accept that sacrifice.

I do, however, rather dislike being put on the bonfire as the first sacrifice, so to speak, whilst the bankers' bonuses go back up, and whilst those who choose not to work get virtually as much in benefits as I do.

Damn right that offends my principles as well as hurts my pocket!

lostinrates

carolt wrote: »

I do, however, rather dislike being put on the bonfire as the first sacrifice, so to speak, whilst the bankers' bonuses go back up, and whilst those who choose not to work get virtually as much in benefits as I do.

Not quite the first. Our household tax bill went up in the budget, albeit by less than we feared.