Using a close relation as a childminder

Marisco

Cheers sixer, I read the AND as OR There would be nothing stopping a relative looking after a child, and getting paid out of your own pocket though, would there?

Sixer

Marisco wrote: »

Cheers sixer, I read the AND as OR There would be nothing stopping a relative looking after a child, and getting paid out of your own pocket though, would there?

Absolutely not! I paid for an Indian takeaway every Friday night!

And of course, if somebody's relative is seriously thinking of making a career as a child minder, then there's nothing wrong with the prospect of confirmed business being a weight in the decision.

The key intent behind the rules is that benefit should only pay out to "proper" child minding businesses. If a relative happens to run a "proper" child minding business, then it would be ok to use them.

abs1985

Hi, am bumping this thread as it pretty much covers the topic I'm trying to find out about. I am looking for childcare for my daughter so I can go back to work, and my sister is a registered childcare professional so I would like her to take care of my daughter and am prepared to pay her the going rate.
I have read the HMRC guidelines, and am aware of their criteria, but what confuses me is the whole 'childminder' issue. My sister is registered and has worked for 4 years, as a Nanny. Meaning that she only takes charge of one child at a time. Now, I understand what HMRC are getting at, and that a lot of people have tried to screw the system, but as a Nanny she would only take charge of my child. She lives in a 3rd floor flat, so getting her place approved would be pretty difficult. Surely, if she was employed, by me, as a Nanny, and I was responisible for her tax etc, why would they be so reluctant to pay? Seems mad that if she were a friend that wouldn't be a problem, but because we are related that's a whole new ball game.
Anyone got any ideas/suggestions as to how we could get round this?

GobbledyGook

I think it's something to speak to Tax Credits about specifically.

It used to be that you couldn't get tax credits if a relative was looking after your child even if they were registered, but I believe someone took them to court on the basis that a relative of theirs was the childminder with the best reputation in their town so why shouldn't they be able to use them.

I think now as long as they are registered with OFSTED (SSSC/CC in Scotland) and are operating as a childminder (paying tax, insurance) etc you can now claim, but the other children area is a grey one that I'm not entirely sure there has even been a definitive answer from HMRC for.

tallerton

DX2 wrote: »

Childcare provided by relatives can be qualifying childcare if



all the following circumstances apply:

• the relative is a registered or approved childcare provider

• the care is provided away from the child's own home

• the care is provided to non-related children in addition to the

related child or children.

QUOTE]

The IR115 document that you linked to is nothing more than a general view on the subject.

You have to go into the CTC regs to see exactly what the situation is.

A relative in England can be a RCM AND receive payment from CTC's. There is absolutely no need to have another child that is not a relative as well.
The only questions that are asked, is it a bone fide business, is there at least one child, and is the realtive fully registered.
I am a 'registered child minder' with everything that goes with it and only care for my grandchildren (4 of them). The children are cared for AWAY from their normal home (in my home).
Yes I would care for them even if I wasn't paid, but all three of my daughters work and receive CTC. They would in any event give me something for looking after them out of their wages, but as the government is willing to pay me for this, why would they turn it down.

They keep 100% of their income, which they need to provide for their respective families and at the same time I receive a guaranteed income from the government for acrrying out my activities. Surely that is fair? Do you really expect me to do it for nothing and send the money back?
The net income I receive is below my tax threshold so I don't pay any tax, and it enables both myself and my husband to have a few of life's luxuries that we need and enjoy.

Juicyloo

back in the day, we had to look after our own chikldren, I went to grammar school and gave up my career as there was no such thing as flexible working in 1988. Not even a smidjin of help with childcare. IMHO this is why the benefits system is screwed. Made us a s a family become very prosperous cos we had to, My children have been brought up the right way

mitch161

juicy. so have i which is why although i could sign on disability. "knock a girl up" claim myself as a part time carer. and be in receipt of over £1000 a month... but no. ill stick to JSA or hardship payments of £65 or under as morals mean more to me then money.

this low income is my incentive to keep motivated to job search every day. if i received £250 a week i probably would not even look once a year.

i actually have a widget on PC that shows since last employed what my earnings total would be if stayed in work compared to actual events.

i was on about £1000 a month wage which now totals £10,500 of potenial earnins i would have but in reality since being unemployed have only received £2800 ish total in benefits for 40 odd weeks of £65. seeing i have lost out on £7k-£8k is what drives me to keep at it and keep apply for jobs not benefits

so i am going to stay honourable and hope my lucky day comes soon with a job. just a shame that soo many people are so openly admitting to want to money grab.

juicy keep at it, your parents obviously taught you well, good for you.