MSE News: Higher rate tax payers to lose child benefit

andys15

andys15 wrote: »

Once again I am discriminated against for being a high earner. I pay £1526 every month to the system and I get nothing in return. I cannot even get an NHS dentist. I pay for all my prescriptions, I have never claimed any support. Now they are taking away my child benefit, just because I earn to much. I wouldn't mind if it would go to support the real needy, but it wont, it will go to funding the underclasses, who have never worked, have 5 kids and get free everything.Talk about rewarding the failures. I still think there should be a number to ring where I can get one of these people who have no intentions of ever working, and get them to do chores for me. I pay £1526 every month let one of them come round and do my garden.

Oh and that figure does not include council tax, another £141, car tax £300 plus a year(my roads are terrible and thats what I thought car tax paid for)
I suppose these underclasses do pay some taxes though, for all the fags they and their 12 year old kids smoke.

whica001

To avoid paying the higher income tax rate if you earn a few £k over the limit why not pay the difference into an AVC pension per month. The money is deducted before tax and you will get the money paid out when you retire with interest. You should then still receive the child benifit because you have reduced your earnings below the threshhold limit.
Do the maths to work out if you will be better off in the long term.
You can usually adjust your payment into an AVC and also pay lump sums in. AVC is a fantasic way of saving and avoid paying high income tax rates. Do a google search to find out more about AVC pension.

Wee_Pilsbury

Many here are calling for full means testing for Child Benefit. I'm lead to believe that the cost of implementing full means testing would be more costly than the simple (and perhaps flawed) method the Government have announced. I think that is probably true or we would be going down the full means testing route - once you start that you have form filling, initial decisions, review decisions and usually an independent appeals procedure (like all the other means tested benefits). This costs a fortune so it is far easier and cheaper to either pay everyone or find a simple method of not paying some.

whica001

To avoid paying the higher income tax rate if you earn a few £k over the limit why not pay the difference into an AVC pension per month. The money is deducted before tax and you will get the money paid out when you retire with interest. You should then still receive the child benifit because you have reduced your earnings below the threshhold limit.
Do the maths to work out if you will be better off in the long term.
You can usually adjust your payment into an AVC and also pay lump sums in. AVC is a fantasic way of saving and avoid paying high income tax rates. Do a google search to find out more about AVC pension.

Indie_Kid

commutergirl wrote: »

Don't penalise the working parents who are obviuosly doing their bit to contribute already.

But they don't need child benefit. Or are you really telling me that someone with an income of £60k "needs" money to clothe and feed their children? (or child)

I pay £1526 every month to the system and I get nothing in return.

Apart from a GP when you need one, a school for your child, a hospital when your family is sick, etc.

itsgottogetbetter

I am so disgusted with some of the ridiclously spitelful and stupid comments posted presuambly by people with no children.

Whilst i agree that child benefit is not a right. why do some people on here think that CB is an incentive to "breed" and "over-populate"!! Really... how far do you think it really goes.

My partner works 70 hours a week and I work 15... He has worked really hard to get his income over 44k... and the extra 130 we get a month really does help with childcare costs so I can go and work my hours. I had children as we wanted a family not so I could get money from the government.. and as it stands we would love another baby but wont now be able to afford it.

Its a difficult decision they have made which I do get.. but it should be means tested...

And as for the people who have got such strong opinions on how many children you should have and why they as tax payers shouldnt have to pay... maybe its because you cant find anyone who wants a family with you!!!

andys15

sh1305 wrote: »

But they don't need child benefit. Or are you really telling me that someone with an income of £60k "needs" money to clothe and feed their children? (or child)



Apart from a GP when you need one, a school for your child, a hospital when your family is sick, etc.

Well we are in BUPA. I could send the kids to private school for £1524. Dont think because a family earn £60k they are well off. We have a combined earnings of £95000 and we are not drinking champagne everyday. Once I take into account my massive mortgage and debt payment I earn less than the average man. Anyone who has bought there first house in the last 5 years will have a massive mortgage, and some like me will have debt due to the large deposits you have to pay. Lets have tax relief for us who are mortgage poor...HA I dont think that would wash.

Indie_Kid

andys15 wrote: »

Well we are in BUPA. I could send the kids to private school for £1524. Dont think because a family earn £60k they are well off. We have a combined earnings of £95000 and we are not drinking champagne everyday. Once I take into account my massive mortgage and debt payment I earn less than the average man. Anyone who has bought there first house in the last 5 years will have a massive mortgage, and some like me will have debt due to the large deposits you have to pay. Lets have tax relief for us who are mortgage poor...HA I dont think that would wash.

A mortgage is a choice and your debts aren't the governments problem.

jkmum

I think some people here are not realising there is a big difference between someone who earns 'around' the 40% bracket and someone who earns twice as much. Those of us at the lower end still have to pay for prescriptions, council tax and car tax. There's no way we could afford Bupa and fat lot of good it would do in the first few hours after an RTA anyway.

As for complaining about the high cost of the mortgage, just because you are a high earner, does not mean you need the house to match.

andys15

sh1305 wrote: »

A mortgage is a choice and your debts aren't the governments problem.

Well the government are at fault for letting the housing market boom like it did. I am sick to death of reading stories about families getting a load of kids, and never working a day in their lifes but all of their kids seem to have the Playstations and the 50inch plasmas. Then you have families who work 70odd hours per week and just get past the 44K mark and will now lose this benefit. Its an absolute joke and shows that failures are rewarded, which sends a dreadful message to our youth. We now have 2 even 3 generation of families who have never worked a day in their lifes and the children see it as the norm. Lets get them doing something for the money they get. I have every right to moan about where my £1526 per month goes. If I gave up my job tomorrow that money would not be there, so I am effectively working to pay for all this. I am not having a dig at people who claim benefits, income support, JSA, etc etc. I am having dig at those who have absolutely no intentions of contributing to society. The job centre must know this type of person, they must have a stereotype of them. Get their bone idle, money grabbing, backsides into the society that feeds and homes them, and get them contributing in some way.