Tax Credits / Step Children should my income count?

BigAunty

Sixer wrote: »

You made me go and check out the actual difference in rates!

So, for second and subsequent children in a workless household you get the max child element of CTC at £2,555 plus £13.40 a week in Child Benefit: £62.50 a week?

For the first child, you get £2,555 plus family element of £545, plus £20.30 in Child Benefit: £79.90.

This compares to £53.45 for JSA. In which case, the JSA claiming school-leaver couldn't replace CTC and CB even if they tried. Or about £100 for a 16-year-old's apprenticeship (less fares, etc). I can't see many kids wanting to hand over £62.50 out of that!

Golly.

Thanks for doing the maths.

From memory of the frequent posts on the matter of the withdrawal of CB/CTC when a child leaves education, I couldn't remember the specifics, only that many complained of a big drop in weekly income, not matched by what they could extract from their child or because they felt they should not ask for any upkeep from them.

It's even worse, I imagine, for those households who lose this chunk of CB/CTC to a kid that's a NEET so they don't get any college allowances or JSA or apprentice money.

From their perspective, they feel their costs are the same so why at the arbitrary age of X must a big pot of money be taken from them. There is resistance to budgeting for the drop, the parents are astounded that they have to make do and make their existing money go further. Many of the posters are shocked that there isn't another magic benefit that fills the vacuum, that their kid is supposed to be more self-supporting.

embob74

BigAunty wrote: »

From their perspective, they feel their costs are the same so why at the arbitrary age of X must a big pot of money be taken from them. There is resistance to budgeting for the drop, the parents are astounded that they have to make do and make their existing money go further. Many of the posters are shocked that there isn't another magic benefit that fills the vacuum, that their kid is supposed to be more self-supporting.

I think that when you are on a low income losing £60 a week can have a huge impact. Rightly or wrongly it is a shock to lose a quarter of your income.

embob74

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

If a family was living on benefits and the child was bringing in £100 per week, I would certainly expect a contribution of £50/60 for keep, and for the child to use the rest of their money for their clothes, fares and spending money.

A child should have to contribute when they are working but they should also have an incentive to go to work.
I knew somebody who used to charge her children a high proportion of their benefits and when they found work their contribution was lessened in comparison to their income. Made going to work appear a lot more beneficial :T

neverdespairgirl

clearingout wrote: »

Personally, I prefer to live in a country where there is a huge amount of freedom and tolerance of people to live the lives that they want to live. We should be proud that children don't go without (or shouldn't if their parents prioritize properly) and that we top up low wages to support this.

I agree. I am also proud to live in a country that makes sure all children are fed / housed / clothed etc.

I would personally restructure the benefits system in some ways, but not to change this at all. Rather, I feel that the benefits system as it is at the moment is too often a trap rather than a support.

Oldernotwiser

embob74 wrote: »

A child should have to contribute when they are working but they should also have an incentive to go to work.
I knew somebody who used to charge her children a high proportion of their benefits and when they found work their contribution was lessened in comparison to their income. Made going to work appear a lot more beneficial :T

That sounds very sensible.

It always amazes me when people (particularly in households with a limited income) allow their unemployed child to keep all/most of their JSA as pocket money. After all, it's given to the claimant to pay for food and bills and allowing a young person to have over £50 per week spending money is very little incentive to find a job.