My sister is so worried about tax credits in April '12

daviecol

smk77 wrote: »

I have a reasonably high earning and educated friend who doesn't know if he is going to have kids because of the cost. The loss in tax credits he would have got plus the loss in child benefit make it more likely that he won't. The result of this will be a couple less kids who would have been brought up in a good background with good chance academic success. That's exactly the type of child that this (or any) Government should be supporting because the future return far outweighs the £10 tax credits each week.

Do you know something, 20 years ago when my wife and I decided to have our first baby I didn't even know there was such a thing as child benefit, and there wasn't child tax credits then either.

We had children because we wanted a family, not to top up our income!

Murgatroyd21

Is this the correct forum for judgemental drivel?

gillianread

well i was posting saying they should word there letters better cos they r sending them out saying we r losing our 10 a week, but we're not as the rates r higher if u have more kids. this 3rd baby was a surprise as i had an abortion on 2nd march 2011 cos my baby had edwards T18, and then i got pregg in april, in the same week as the funeral . i dont get preg to get an extra 10 a week tax credits and 10 child benifit , wheres the sence in that it cost far more in nappys

Candy53

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

I personally find it quite unbelievable that people on £30k a year get Government money to bring up their family.

But your point and mine are both discussions for another forum......

Yes but they don't have that much to live on do they? I've always thought it's so wrong that the Government calculate things on everyones gross income. When all the tax and insurance is taken off that 30, or 31K, there's not alot left.

Candy

Charityworker

If I was on an income of £30,000 a year I wouldn't be so worried. Truth is me and my husband are on a COMBINED income of £5058 per year. Getting tax credits was a way for me to be better off working, come off jsa and be better off in work. Now I will be better off back on jsa. The government seem to be taking money from people already struggling.

Spendless

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

I personally find it quite unbelievable that people on £30k a year get Government money to bring up their family.

But your point and mine are both discussions for another forum......

When the married mans allowance stopped in 2000 an allowance for those with children came in from 2001. That stopped in favour of the current system from 2003. When the current system came in my BIL stopped getting the additional tax allowance for having kids so his wages were down £40 a month, whilst my sister suddenly received £40 a month in her bank account as she's made a claim for tax credits. They weren't any better or worse off than before it was just a re-jigging of money. The £40 a month that some posters are referring to is what was called the family element and that is what is being changed.

The £40 a month in the days we were receiving it covered a broad range of income. Hubbys wages went up a lot in a relatively short space of time but we were still within the income range of receiving £40 a month (£545pa). I am really surprised at the posts mentioning a much higher amount than £40 per month as I really thought that was only if you had a larger number of children than 2 or 3 or if there were disabilities in the family or high childcare costs. Perhaps the amounts were changed in the last few years, we had a couple of years of overpayment - due to a surprise one off bonus DH received towards the end of the financial year, followed by me finding work, followed by the amounts changing last year so we no longer receive anything.

daviecol

Murgatroyd21 wrote: »

Is this the correct forum for judgemental drivel?

No it's so spongers can extract the maximum out of the system

sunnyone

gillianread wrote: »

well i was posting saying they should word there letters better cos they r sending them out saying we r losing our 10 a week, but we're not as the rates r higher if u have more kids. this 3rd baby was a surprise as i had an abortion on 2nd march 2011 cos my baby had edwards T18, and then i got pregg in april, in the same week as the funeral . i dont get preg to get an extra 10 a week tax credits and 10 child benifit , wheres the sence in that it cost far more in nappys

Can someone translate this into English?

No wonder there are so many kids leaving school that cant read and write.

tescobabe69

sunnyone wrote: »

Can someone translate this into English?

No wonder there are so many kids leaving school that cant read and write.

Certainly, "I am responsible for bringing up the generation you are paying for," innit.

Murgatroyd21

daviecol wrote: »

No it's so spongers can extract the maximum out of the system

Claiming entitlement is sponging? Working for an employer who pays less than the government calculates is necessary to maintain a basic standard is sponging? Speak to Vodafone, Goldman-Sachs, Phillip Green and co then come back here with this nonsense.