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

Rainmaker_uk

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.

What makes you think this???

That is a foolish and sweeping statement.

I am a higher rate tax payer and my wife looks after our child.

Not only do I lose out on her tax allowance, we got no benefits apart from child benefit.

I fail to see why I am hit by every tax and get nothing back from the state apart from child benefit.

I contribute a large amount in tax to this country and every week I pay more through either income, petrol or other stealth taxes.

I then have to read on this forum the comments from all the ungrateful people on benefits - does anyone ever say thank you? No all they do is attack higher rate tax payers...

carolt

RenovationMan wrote: »

Oh dear, you deleted the post that stated your household income was £44k. Luckily I copied into my response:
Quote:

Originally Posted by carolt
It means I shall have to find more work and my children will see me even less, and when they do, I shall be even more tired. 44K to bring up a family is a tiny, tiny amount, certainly in the South East.

What was it you said earlier?

Oh dear - do re-read the post dear.

That's the problem with selective quoting - either that or you're incapable of understanding the post.

The 44K example is of the kind of person who would be affected by this change, not me personally.

Really2

ukcarper wrote: »

I included LHA for 3-bed house in my area it paid which was £206 per week it paid £113 housing benefit

Do you get that if you work though?

ukcarper

carolt wrote: »

Try again with 3 kids. Plus depends on cost of LHA - varies by area.

Even where the difference is as much as £100/week, that's actually v little once you add costs that a working couple incur that a couple where only 1 works or both work part-time won't - or will cost far less - childcare costs, travel costs, work clothes etc.

Plus other means-tested benefits.

YTou'd be lucky if £100/week would cover that, let alone give you anything left over as a reward for your hard work.[/QUOT

A person on £23k has to pay same as a person on £43k

carolt

LilacPixie wrote: »

Not sure on that Really, lots of women I know have taken 'career breaks' when kids are under 5-6 before returning to the workplace when children are of school age. Childcare really is a fortune. If it wasn't for my retired parents DH would be a SAHD like he was when DD1 was small.

I have been having a mini think and can anyone honestly say with an income of 40k+ that child benefit makes or breaks their family budget? It doesn't with us, if it had been removed or if it is removed as they tweak things between now and 2013 then we would have 2500 less a year (3 kids) so about 190 less every 4 weeks but it wouldn't be a critical loss, less disposable income for holidays, less for savings, less for 'treats' but really it wouldn't be a major hurdle, adjustments would be made our comfortable lifestyle may be marginally less confortable but hardly anything to have a fit over.

I think that depends where you live and what you're housing costs are.

Hard to generalise.

carolt

ukcarper wrote: »

carolt wrote: »

Try again with 3 kids. Plus depends on cost of LHA - varies by area.

Even where the difference is as much as £100/week, that's actually v little once you add costs that a working couple incur that a couple where only 1 works or both work part-time won't - or will cost far less - childcare costs, travel costs, work clothes etc.

Plus other means-tested benefits.

YTou'd be lucky if £100/week would cover that, let alone give you anything left over as a reward for your hard work.[/QUOT

A person on £23k has to pay same as a person on £43k

The person on 23K much more likely to work less hours.

StevieJ

carolt wrote: »

Losing £188/month actually - will make a huge difference to my lifestyle.

And more importantly, to my children's lifestyles - the whole reason the benefit was orignally universal, one of the cornerstones of the welfare state, was that it was designed to ensure that in any scenario, the children would at least have the basics.

I think the basis for universal benefits was to ensure that the middle classes had a stake in the system so less likely to oppose (Labour have always understood this). It looks like the first shot across the bows of the Welfare state

SingleSue

Not around here Carolt...average salary in this county is just a shade over £19k gross for full time hours.

chewmylegoff

carolt wrote: »

Losing £188/month actually - will make a huge difference to my lifestyle.

And more importantly, to my children's lifestyles - the whole reason the benefit was orignally universal, one of the cornerstones of the welfare state, was that it was designed to ensure that in any scenario, the children would at least have the basics.

if it was the case that you won't be able to feed and clothe your children and keep the heating on without that £188pm, then you might have a point.

Arcaine

For the first time this year I will be going into higher tax. My wife only works part time so she doesnt have a big salary, so we will potentially lose the Child benefit money. We have one child and have put the CB into an account for him since he was born. Day to day this will not affect our budgets, but I hope we will finance this ourselves. I agree with the Governments decision though and they are right to do it this way, to set up a large means test would cost more than they will save. I know the system is not perfect and I know that there will be claims of unfairness. But in the long run the most important thing is to clear the deficit, once this is done the 44 billion a year saved in interest payments can be put to better use.