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

lostinrates

chucky wrote: »

it should be houshold income instead of making it 'higher rate tax payers'.
it will complicate the system and make others better off when they shouldn't be.

Shame we can't do tax free allowances by household too.

Chucky said almost exactly what I think on this one. I'm a little more positive about it though. Its not fair how its done, I agree....and even by household, what about two households that are both responsible for the child? That should be a consideration too...but of course very expensive and complicated to consider.

TBH, I think £45k for a single person would allow you to bring up a child. Live like millionaires, no, but live healthy lives in most of the country (those pesky housing costs in some areas...).

bootman

We will have this taken away based on one income. What is the point of trying to better yourself. I have a tiny part time job OH is above the limit, we get no other credits at all apart from this and only have one child as that's all we can afford.

This should be based on whole of house income, so unfair. Also capped at 2 kids and if you don't pay in you don't get anything back!

This will do nothing to stop the out of work breeders, they are the only ones to afford kids.

carolt

drc wrote: »

I wonder if this includes households where nobody works and they are getting more than £44k per year in benefits "income" at the moment (and not paying tax or NI on this amount which a working family on £44k a year would be)?

Oh no - of course not, drc - because they are too 'poor', don't you know it - even though their take-home is larger than those who earn 44K plus through hard work - and even though they can't be bothered to contribute at all by actually working themselves. :mad:

Graham_Devon

carolt wrote: »

Not as I understand it Graham - if either earner is a higher rate taxpayer, you lose the benefit.

BBC stated this morning that it was based on a single income of the person claiming the benefit. Said something along the lines of "in most cases, its the father earning the higher wage, with the mother earning less, so the child benefit will not be affected".

That was the whole point of not means testing. It was to be done on PAYE, or self assesment on that individual.

This may have changed, so you may have heard something more. Indeed, on the BBC website, it does now state it will hit those with a single earner on the 40% threshold.

So yes, looks like I was wrong in saying that, though it's all a little confused at the moment.

Anyone know any more?

harz99

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Unless you both pay 40% tax, you will be fine. Just transfer the CB to the person who doesn't pay 40% tax.

Sorted.

That's the stupitidy of the thing!

Everything I have heard on the BBC news today, including from GOs mouth, indicates that you are not correct and that if either parent is in the 40/50% tax brackets, neither parent will be able to claim CB.

Where do you get the info to base your statement on?

carolt

According to the Telegraph, and what I hard this morning on the radio, it is definitely withdrawn if either earner earns over 44K - BUT not if each earner earns £43,999.

Which is an ourageous travesty.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/8040632/Child-benefit-to-be-withdrawn-from-middle-classes.html

"So from 2013, households where anyone earns more than £44,000 a year will have to pay back through the tax system any money they claim in child benefit."

lostinrates

carolt wrote: »

Oh no - of course not, drc - because they are too 'poor', don't you know it - even though their take-home is larger than those who earn 44K plus through hard work - and even though they can't be bothered to contribute at all by actually working themselves. :mad:

Do we know this isn't going to be tackled? with the emphasis being on those working should be bringing home more than those not working?

drc

carolt wrote: »

Oh no - of course not, drc - because they are too 'poor', don't you know it - even though their take-home is larger than those who earn 44K plus through hard work - and even though they can't be bothered to contribute at all by actually working themselves. :mad:

It's 2 years away so lots can change in that time. Does seem crazy that it is based on penalising one higher earner rather than the total family income. I guess the coalition sees the middle classes as a very easy cash cow. Afterall, it's unlikey we're going to go out and riot if we don't get our beer and fag money.

The logic is crazy though.

A family with one higher earner on £50k = no child benefit

A family where both earn £40k (£80k total income) = full child benefit.

Graham_Devon

harz99 wrote: »

Everything I have heard on the BBC news today, including from GOs mouth, indicates that you are not correct and that if either parent is in the 40/50% tax brackets, neither parent will be able to claim CB.

Where do you get the info to base your statement on?

Certainly looks like I am wrong.

I got it from the BBC. George Osbourne was on this morning. He said it would be based on PAYE or Self Assesment as the cost of means testing would be far to high.

He stated if an individual earns enough to be paying the 40% tax, then that individual would not be entitled to child benefit.

I'd go with what you guys are saying though! And I'll remove my comment to save confusion!

carolt

lostinrates wrote: »

Do we know this isn't going to be tackled? with the emphasis being on those working should be bringing home more than those not working?

Because that only applies to those going from unemployment to employment, so that they are not worse off in employment.

Those already in employment (even where earning less than they would on benefits) will not be deemed to need the benefits to incentivise them to work, as they are already mugs enough to choose to work without it.

Gosh, the Tories are a bunch of idiots. Whoever thought up these [policies clearly didn't bother to think through any of the logical implications or moral hazard involved.