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

ukcarper

olly300 wrote: »

I bet if you have a mortgage or had one your payments were/are low.

That's why some people are getting upset.

I did have Mortgage but if you think payments in the late 70s and 80s were low with interest rates over 10% you are mistaken.

Pete111

I think he had to do this.. If only to give more credence to the 'we are all in this together' line when the cuts that hit the poor are announced.

Personally I have no issue with the removal of benefits for middle/higher income earners in general - benefits should be a safety net not a 'free' top up.

But that's just me.

Generali

I made a poll.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/2769816

I am not racist so decided to include anyone that wants to vote rather than only people that agree with me/live in the same country as me.

ninky_2

in theory i support making child benefit means tested but i'm not sure this is the most sensible way of going about it.

it's quite common for parents to split these days. from what i understand of this, the child benefit would be paid if the father no longer lived in the household regardless of his income. this seems unfair and would seem to contradict the conservatives desire to promote marriage.

chucknorris

chucky wrote: »

you reap what you sow?

Is the correct answer

LilacPixie

carolt wrote: »

My point about housing costs was in response to your point that you could easily afford to absorb the loss of CB - my point was that others on identical income might no be so fortunate.

and my point was if that was the case then surely the family must of been using child benefit to subsidise their lifestyle choices specifically housesize/area. Most people these days have all/some mix of mobile phones, sky tv, 1-2 cars, holiday once a year maybe more, gym memberships, some 'designer' clothes/shoes. I just cannot imagine how cutbacks cannot be made without 'suffering'.

StevieJ

ukcarper wrote: »

I did have Mortgage but if you think payments in the late 70s and 80s were low with interest rates over 10% you are mistaken.

They haven't got a clue :eek: they think you used to buy houses at the sweet shop the olden days

Really2

ninky wrote: »

in theory i support making child benefit means tested but i'm not sure this is the most sensible way of going about it.

it's quite common for parents to split these days. from what i understand of this, the child benefit would be paid if the father no longer lived in the household regardless of his income. this seems unfair and would seem to contradict the conservatives desire to promote marriage.

I agree, but could this be the precursor to implementing some kind of marriage related tax relief?

WestonDave

The other end of this has just been announced - a cap on total benefits so that a family on benefits cannot have more in total benefits than the average family earns from working.

globetraveller

good grief- we are going to get scenarios where folks are going to demand a wage decrease. Plenty folks must be just over the threshold.
I am a neutral here as I have had no children and am far too old now:). It has to be per household I think. I have always thought it was ridiculous to be giving CB to those who can go on holidays abroad or drive an expensive car. Its good though that the change is not immediate as folks can live exactly to their means and so they have a chance to sort out finances.
We do need a more radical overhaul of it all though. IMO cb should be one payment only- regardless of amount of children. Use money saved to give free nursery places for those below a certain income- and find work for those who are on benefits and have never worked( but are well able to).