Cross Poster Subsidisation

StevieJ

I think they really now do need to make the personal allowance transferable.

StevieJ

Really2 wrote: »

But is the point they are choosing to earn less? There is nothing stopping the higher paid couple both working also.

If you did it on household income you could then argue 2 working are worse off because of child care, should they then be paid more to keep up with the ones where one stays at home?

It would be never ending, top rate tax is an easy cut off. Benefits should not be fair to all, otherwise why were all the poor not subsidised to earn the same as the top 10%.

Yes but it should be fair to those earning the same amount, not only child benefit but personal allowance. It would be easy to add say £10k onto the income of duel income (in lieu of child minding etc) and ask them to self declare child benefit (or not claim) when earning over £55k joint. Here is something even more radical, maybe we could go back to joint household income and charge HR tax on earnings above 55k

LilacPixie

No

StevieJ wrote: »

Yes I agree but you must be able to see why people earning less than you, but losing child benefit are disgruntled.

But they are not really. Those households where one person is a higher rate taxpayer are losing child benefit, thats a HH income of over 45k gross when I believe the average HH income is around 38k.

I really do not see how families with an above average HH income of 45k+ a year or 2.5k net take home can sit and say quite honestly that for the removal of £80 for 1 child, £133 for 2 children and £190ish for 3 kids will mean that their children with suffer I really am lost for words. By all means have a moan and a grump but to honestly be able to say that your kids will suffer because of it is just an alien concept to me. I would rather go without myself than let my kids suffer any hardship.

Really if a family cannot provide basics of shelter, food, warmth and clothing on 2.5k per month then I feel they must be spending in another non essential area and if thats the case £200 a month isn't going to make a difference.

Really2

No

StevieJ wrote: »

Yes but it should be fair to those earning the same amount, not only child benefit but personal allowance. It would be easy to add say £10k onto the income of duel income (in lieu of child minding etc) and ask them to self declare child benefit (or not claim) when earning over £55k joint.

Why? 2 working with child have to pay child care. Thus they pay more out, it is like me saying it is fair the government boost everyones wage to above top rate tax bracket to make it fair and more can stay at home.

The reason 2 work is most probably to be able to live a better standard of life, much like the people on £60K get.
But the trade off is they don't have the joy of one partner staying at home to look after the child in the pre school years. Also they have the cost of a few £K per year in nursery fees.

Why is it unfair that someone earning the same as two people get in full time work gets less benefit.

The ones earning less have child care of £K's per year and don't get to stay at home with the kids.

Sorry, I don't get your argument on this one if the people who earn £30K each go up to £44K they lose it.

If the ones where one earns £60K goes down to £43,999 they get it.

It is open to all, it just has a cut off. I really don't see 2 people working to get the same wage as one being better off IMHO.

LilacPixie

No

StevieJ wrote: »

I think they really now do need to make the personal allowance transferable.

I agree. Really I cannot see why somethings are individual and some are joint. Tax credits are joint, we earn too much for them, If OH or I were made redundant then we would not get income based JSA because of the others income. Why oh why is child benefit single? IMO the whole system needsan overhall but it would cost a fortune, possibly far more than it would save short term and with the country up to its eyeballs in debt no government is goingto propose such a radical and costly overhall, plus the system they buy will be rubbish and it will all go belly up for about 4 years and the negitive press will lose them the election.

Either your an individual or you are a family unit. The whole one for somethings and another for something else when it suits them is pointless

Graham_Devon

Really2 wrote: »

Why? 2 working with child have to pay child care. Thus they pay more out, it is like me saying it is fair the government boost everyones wage to above top rate tax bracket to make it fair and more can stay at home.

A single parent working has to pay childcare too.

This isn't just about couples.

The problem is, we have a situation whereby family 1 may be taking in 80k a year, and getting CB.

Family 2 next door, may take in 50k a year, and get no CB.

Family 3, may be a single parent taking in 46k a year, worse off than the other 2 families, but also having to pay full childcare, and also, won't get any CB.

Bit crazy, isn't it?

Just seems like a rushed through thing. On one part, it appeases the coalition part, as lib dems like it, but on the other hand, it makes them all look rather silly. I can see the need to save money, but there must of, surely, been better ways to do it, like the tax credit system.

This is why I likenened it to the 10p fiasco. That was rushed through too, even though there were obvious problems. I imagine we'll see some u-turning and major tweaks to this CB thing yet.

StevieJ

LilacPixie wrote: »

Really if a family cannot provide basics of shelter, food, warmth and clothing on 2.5k per month then I feel they must be spending in another non essential area and if thats the case £200 a month isn't going to make a difference.

The point is most most HR taxpayers (I am sure) would understand the loss of child benefit but not so happy about financing you when your household income may be higher.

StevieJ

Really2 wrote: »

Why? 2 working with child have to pay child care. Thus they pay more out, it is like me saying it is fair the government boost everyones wage to above top rate tax bracket to make it fair and more can stay at home.
.

I made allowance for that in my post.

It would be easy to add say £10k onto the income of duel income (in lieu of child minding etc) and ask them to self declare child benefit (or not claim) when earning over £55k joint.

And as Graham pointed out, so does a single HR parent.

Really2

No

Graham_Devon wrote: »

A single parent working has to pay childcare too.

This isn't just about couples.

The problem is, we have a situation whereby family 1 may be taking in 80k a year, and getting CB.

Family 2 next door, may take in 50k a year, and get no CB.

Family 3, may be a single parent taking in 46k a year, worse off than the other 2 families, but also having to pay full childcare, and also, won't get any CB.

Bit crazy, isn't it?

I know and a single parent could be on £30K (or £15K), so half that of £60K....

What other way is there to do it without making it another quango to deal with it.

Wage is an easy cut off, in the end of the day the money is not that much.

If it means that much abolish it for everyone. But all you are doing is going to hurt the poorest.


In reality how many familys earn between £44K and £87K without one being a top rate earner?
How many earn £44K+ and have a top rate earner.

Some will get hurt, but not the ones who need it most, time for the country to have a bit of a reality check if this is a massive issue.

Top earns stand to lose a benefit, and people are now arguing it is unfair? Would they rarther everyone not have it so the poorer are worse off?

If it upsets anyone who are a top rate earner and cant make up the £1K + in the next year or so drop me a PM and I will send you a £1.

StevieJ

Graham_Devon wrote: »

A single parent working has to pay childcare too.

This isn't just about couples.

The problem is, we have a situation whereby family 1 may be taking in 80k a year, and getting CB.

Family 2 next door, may take in 50k a year, and get no CB.

Family 3, may be a single parent taking in 46k a year, worse off than the other 2 families, but also having to pay full childcare, and also, won't get any CB.

Bit crazy, isn't it?

Just seems like a rushed through thing. On one part, it appeases the coalition part, as lib dems like it, but on the other hand, it makes them all look rather silly. I can see the need to save money, but there must of, surely, been better ways to do it, like the tax credit system.

This is why I likenened it to the 10p fiasco. That was rushed through too, even though there were obvious problems. I imagine we'll see some u-turning and major tweaks to this CB thing yet.

Very good point about the single HR parent.