Child Benefit fiasco: cuts 'unravelling' already...

purch

Seeing as HMRC can't run the Tax Credits system efficiently and correctly, and require taxpayers to tell them how much they earn, then I find it hard to believe that with a benefit that in most cases is paid to the wife, or mother, and which requires no other information to be provided, they will be able to work out who qualifies and who doesn't

carolt

Really2 wrote: »

Are my eyes failing, as I am sure I just read you thing people earning up to & over £100K should still get benefits?

As they do currently.

Or as they do in every other European/world country - usually at far higher levels.

See:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/8041774/Child-benefit-how-it-compares-across-the-world.html

I quite fancy the $2,628 they get in Ireland - clearly not a country feeling the need to make any cuts - or Australia - hope Gen is enjoying the $3,613 he gets per child. Compared to our $1,883 per child (well, oldest child actually -less for others) we receive here.

It's good no-one on this forum is a total hypocrite.

StevieJ

carolt wrote: »

Make no mistake - this is the whole point.

As I pointed out in a earlier post on why we have universal benefits in the first place, creates the wedge to start on bigger fish like the NHS in the next parliament joke, no chance they be elected. Then again many a true word and all that:eek:

carolt

BACKFRMTHEEDGE wrote: »

You should have voted Labour then shouldn't you?

What on earth did you expect?

You've spent years off your life running down the last Labour Government on this board and all I can say is that some people don't know when they are lucky!

LOL:p

I didn't vote Tory, I can assure you!

How funny you accused me of 'running down Labour' - A Badger will confirm that just a couple of days ago he was accusing me of having a strong but secret Labour agenda!

The truth is I have no firm commitment to any political party - I think Labour failed massively in how it dealt with the economy initially, which is partly why these cuts are needed.

BACKFRMTHEEDGE

Now that I've stopped laughing at CarolT....

Many people who have kids might have to seriously consider turning down a pay rise as they approach the higher rate tax band - it would now have to be a fairly hefty pay rise to make it worthwhile, taking into account the loss of child benefit and the higher rate tax.

Alan_Cross

PhylPho wrote: »

I prefer to regard the current administration as the 'coalition government' regardless of headlines or comments seeking to vilify a particular component of that administration.

As one who has so far admired the government's conduct, it's come as something of a disappointment to see such ineptitude so relatively early in the administration.

The benefit calculation should of course have been done on the basis of household income. And a government with a functioning brain cell would (a) have realised that and (b) easily predicted the public reaction to getting something so simple, so wrong.

As you are so obviously a self-confessed Cobblition groupie, I imagine raising with you teensy matters like the ridiculous Gove school capital repairs fiasco, the torpedoing of Sheffield Forgemasters future and Fox's deliberate 'leaking' of his own letter as having been somewhat 'earlier' will cut absolutely no ice whatsoever...

Really2

carolt wrote: »

As they do currently.

Or as they do in every other European/world country - usually at far higher levels.

See:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/8041774/Child-benefit-how-it-compares-across-the-world.html

I quite fancy the $2,628 they get in Ireland - clearly not a country feeling the need to make any cuts - or Australia - hope Gen is enjoying the $3,613 he gets per child. Compared to our $1,883 per child (well, oldest child actually -less for others) we receive here.

It's good no-one on this forum is a total hypocrite.

To receive some Family Tax Benefit Part A, the maximum income levels are $76,256 a year for a family with one dependent child under 18 and $77,355 a year for a family with one dependent 18-24 year old. These thresholds are lifted by $6,257 for each additional dependent child under 18 and $7,356 for each additional dependent 18-24 year old.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_benefit

I make that around £46K the cut off (or around £40K 0n 2007 figures like the article)...... perhaps not so much of a hypocrite now?

Alan_Cross

carolt wrote: »

I didn't vote Tory, I can assure you!

How funny you accused me of 'running down Labour' - A Badger will confirm that just a couple of days ago he was accusing me of having a strong but secret Labour agenda!

The truth is I have no firm commitment to any political party - I think Labour failed massively in how it dealt with the economy initially, which is partly why these cuts are needed.

Only very 'partly'.

It's the bankers, dear. The bankers.

carolt

No idea of exchange rates - if you say so. |Still a hypocrite - no brown envelopes winging their way here today for all those years of child benefit claimed.

Maybe too busy counting his bonus money...

carolt

Alan_Cross wrote: »

Only very 'partly'.

It's the bankers, dear. The bankers.

Yes, but we didn't need to bail out the bankers - that was Labour's decision.

The bankers may have been the beneficiaries, but they couldn't have done it without Labour's say-so.