Child benefit to go in 2013?

DX2

diable wrote: »

get divorced move out housing benefit pays for the house and kids and you sleep over every so often.............

Housing benefit pays for the kids? Really?

Excellent idea mam and dad got divorced due to benefit cuts, so you go through all the carry on of getting a divorce not caring about the damage this would do to the kids, then you have the brass neck to then go onto say pop over for a sleepover every so often. Jesus mother of pearl nothing surprises me.

pipscot

DX2 wrote: »

Housing benefit pays for the kids? Really?

Excellent idea mam and dad got divorced due to benefit cuts, so you go through all the carry on of getting a divorce not caring about the damage this would do to the kids, then you have the brass neck to then go onto say pop over for a sleepover every so often. Jesus mother of pearl nothing surprises me.

surely the post you are quoting was meant to be ironic? (at least I hope it was!!)

Poppiesrarara

We're a single earning family with 2 kids as well and while I know I'm lucky to be earning close to the 40% tax bracket it will still hurt, after all, you live to your means.

Couple of things, does this start in the 2012 tak year (April 2012) or 2013? If it's next year I need to start making provisions. I have a personal pension that I pay £80-00 a month into, I could possibly get the company to take this out of my wages and pay it in for me to offset some of my tax. Can anyone tell me please.

The other thing that really get my goat :mad: is the way that the members of our great and wonderful Parliament have agreed that they should get £2500-00 per child per year to cover expenses so they can visit them in London as they don't see them enough.

Some of us look like we're going to lose £2500-00 per year and now I know where it's going.

Crooked or what!!!!!:(

Dognobs

Speak to your boss and explain, They may be able to pay you in a form of non cash bonus or pay you 1 penny under the threshold. I would love to be in a position where I was earning that much money I do 3 jobs and don't earn that much I also have 3 children and only get child benifit, I have no debt other than my mortage, I think you may have to look at what you spend money on if you need this extra money, You have MADE A CHOISE FOR YOUR WIFE TO STAY AT HOME, She could get a cleaning job 2 hours a day when you are home, I work at ASDA there are ladies there who just work on saturdays. I can't see what the problem is. Or you could just get a new job.

Poppiesrarara

My issue is that 'they' have moved the goalposts to take money off nearly a million of us. Not only did they decide to take it off 40% taxpayers but they also reduced the threshold. As for my wife going to work, as I work over 60hrs per week and stay away from home quite a few nights each month so it's nice to have time with my family at weekends.
I supose I could try and become an MP then they could be paid to come and see me!
As for MAKING A CHOISE (try CHOICE - ever heard of spellchecker!) FOR MY WIFE TO STAY AT HOME please don't judge my circumstances when you know nothing about my family and their needs.

FBaby

moomoomama27 wrote: »

Everyone has to expect to make sacrifices to help the country get back on it's feet. £41k a year is hardly the breadline, and if it is then the ''parents'' have made very bad choices along the way, or are living well beyond their means.

No, not everyone, why isn't DLA being sanctioned the same way? DLA is supposed to be awarded to help the person suffering from a disability pay for essential items in relation to their disability (just like child benefits is to help with costs directly associated with the children), yet, a family could be earning £100K and still receive DLA. Surely it is the same principle?!

melly1980

Dognobs wrote: »

Speak to your boss and explain, They may be able to pay you in a form of non cash bonus or pay you 1 penny under the threshold. I would love to be in a position where I was earning that much money I do 3 jobs and don't earn that much I also have 3 children and only get child benifit, I have no debt other than my mortage, I think you may have to look at what you spend money on if you need this extra money, You have MADE A CHOISE FOR YOUR WIFE TO STAY AT HOME, She could get a cleaning job 2 hours a day when you are home, I work at ASDA there are ladies there who just work on saturdays. I can't see what the problem is. Or you could just get a new job.

Anyone want to answer my question.

Why should a family who has 3 kids and earns 30K per year end up with more income than a family with 3 kids and earn 42K a year?

Why should a family with 3 kids and a single income of 42K not get child benefit but a family with 2 x 21K earners get it (making them ~400 - 500 per month better off).

Anyone got an answer to these little musings of mine? It isnt about the OP getting a cleaning job. The question is why the f0ok should they have to get a 2 hr a day job when people lower down the pay scale are being made richer for free.

zagfles

ffacoffipawb wrote: »

Not sure it has to be "just".

Someone on £80k a year could salary sacrifice £50k (maximum allowable) into a pension so they only "earn" £30k as far as HMRC are concerned, well in basic rate tax territory and also child tax credits territory too.

I'd be wary about the tax credits implications of a large salary sacrifice, see https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/3114240

pipscot

melly1980 wrote: »

Why should a family with 3 kids and a single income of 42K not get child benefit but a family with 2 x 21K earners get it (making them ~400 - 500 per month better off).

A family with 2 x 21K incomes would also be better off due to the 2 personal tax allowances but that's another discussion....:)

To be honest, I think a lot of the issue here about the people losing child benefit is not whether they can afford to do so (that obviously depends on their individual circumstances) but about the fairness of the policy. It's clearly unfair and discriminatory to families with single earners or where 1 partner earns much more than the other.

The government said they wanted to support families but clearly they want to support some families more than others

melly1980

pipscot wrote: »

A family with 2 x 21K incomes would also be better off due to the 2 personal tax allowances but that's another discussion....:)

Id included that in my 400 - 500 difference

pipscot wrote: »

To be honest, I think a lot of the issue here about the people losing child benefit is not whether they can afford to do so (that obviously depends on their individual circumstances) but about the fairness of the policy. It's clearly unfair and discriminatory to families with single earners or where 1 partner earns much more than the other.

The government said they wanted to support families but clearly they want to support some families more than others

absolutely.

If it was tapered away from me in a gradual manner I would have no issue. My only issue is with there being a definate boundary where if you earn 100 quid a year more you can lose thousands of pounds and make you worse off than people who earn less than you. It doesnt take an awful lot of common sense to see that is wrong.