CSA unfit for purpose

Disillusioned_with_Agency

If you have any knowledge of the CSA, you will appreciate after all the tax payers money put into it over the last 18 years or so they have still not got their act together and both parents with care and non resident parents including qualifying children suffer because of this. Surely an agency that is composed of an application team, a calculation team, a change of circumstances team, an investigations team (who I understand uses information provided by HMRC to them), an enforcement team and a financial team. Perhaps there are other teams also on the fringe of those above which would include a complaints team and possibly a DNA team. Every couple of years they change their way of working which usually in most cases does'nt work. Billions of pounds have been wasted on this Agency. Surely, the best method would be to have payments taken through tax coding on gross pay not net pay and by HMRC? There would be no need for all of the above teams. e.g. 8% for the first child, 10% for the second child and for three or more children say 12%. When changes of circumstances are calculated invariably they generate an arrears amount which is not the fault of the Non Resident Parent, yet the NRP is penalised by this. With maintenance taken through the codings the correct amount would be taken directly from the employees salary, and if his/hers wages fluctuate or if there is a non regular bonus this would be reflected in the deductions taken and payed out. Apart from a small national team dedicated to processing DNA queries, the Agency could be abolished saving tax payers millions upon millions and there would be no persecution of clients as there is today. I would wecome any comments this posting may bring good or bad.

karenx

What would happen to self employed NRP's then?

Disillusioned_with_Agency

The same that happens now. HMRC would have their figures, the same as the Agency is given by them and the percentage would be applied. This would be determined over all firms/companies the NRP operates or gets financial reward from. Not just the one company they may have informed the CSA of, which I understand is normally the case. HMRC can impose an order on them to make regular payments, that if they don't they will be subject to penalties or even forfeiture.

PreludeForTimeFeelers

Disillusioned_with_Agency wrote: »

Surely an agency that is composed of an application team, a calculation team, a change of circumstances team, an investigations team (who I understand uses information provided by HMRC to them), an enforcement team and a financial team. Perhaps there are other teams also on the fringe of those above which would include a complaints team and possibly a DNA team.

There's New Client Team, Client Services, Debt Enforcement and Legal Enforcement.

PreludeForTimeFeelers

Disillusioned_with_Agency wrote: »

The same that happens now. HMRC would have their figures, the same as the Agency is given by them and the percentage would be applied. This would be determined over all firms/companies the NRP operates or gets financial reward from. Not just the one company they may have informed the CSA of, which I understand is normally the case. HMRC can impose an order on them to make regular payments, that if they don't they will be subject to penalties or even forfeiture.

The CSA currently use tax return information, which by default is all of an NRP's companies.

The only problem with using HMRC figures for self-employed NRPs is that they don't have to declare their earnings for quite a while after starting trading, so what would the CSA use in the meantime?

PreludeForTimeFeelers

Disillusioned_with_Agency wrote: »

When changes of circumstances are calculated invariably they generate an arrears amount which is not the fault of the Non Resident Parent, yet the NRP is penalised by this.

All NRPs know what the calculations are - if they have a payrise then they know that their payments will go up, surely the onus is therefore on them to start keeping more money aside, even if it were to take the CSA another month or two to do a calculation? I think that a lot of NRPs find it easy to blame the CSA for their arrears.

Disillusioned_with_Agency

There are many situations when payments go down as well as up. Unfortunatly, when a change of circumstances under the present system is done whether pay goes up or down arrears are normally generated. By having the maintenance payments taxed at the source of employees pay, the NRP would be treated fairly if earnings went up or down. It would also mean no disruption to maintenance received by the parent with care for the qualifying children. If a change of circumstances is done at present there would be a delay in payments to the parent with care because of rescheduking of their account. It is in my opinion a disasterous, unfair and and unreasonable system that operates today.

Disillusioned_with_Agency

QUOTE=PreludeForTimeFeelers;
The CSA currently use tax return information, which by default is all of an NRP's companies.

The only problem with using HMRC figures for self-employed NRPs is that they don't have to declare their earnings for quite a while after starting trading, so what would the CSA use in the meantime?

I believe the CSA currently use what is known as the ASHE survey which simplistically is average earnings in a specific area for a specific trade. *I believe this is a government department survey* So I don't really see why this should not be incorporated into a calculation.

cosmic-dust

The CSA sadly destroy's families. If only I could turn back time.

PreludeForTimeFeelers

The future scheme which is hopefully launched next Autumn involves closer working between HMRC for calculations, but not for collections.

The CSA will be able to access an NRP's taxable income straight away, so won't need to gather wage slips/forms from employers. The tolerance levels for change of circs will increase, so there will be no increase in child maintenance unless the gross income goes up or down by about 25%, meaning most people will have one assessment for the whole year.

Disillusioned_with_Agency

That as far as I am concerned does not go far enough. The main problem for parents with care and qualifying children is the collection issue. In one way what you have stated is a part of what I initially proposed. But not far enough and the taxpayer is still footing the bill for what is a needless organisation.