Tax credits stopping in April 2012

kittikatele

I read this thread last night and I have to say I am appalled at how cruel and judgmental certain people have been, so much so, it has been on my mind all day.

When people are in this thread are asking for clarification or help, in return they have received what I would call abuse from certain people who seem to delight in other peoples woes. To my knowledge this discussion didn't ask the question do I deserve benefits or have I had toomany children?

It seems to me that most of the users who post these nasty comments have nothing better to do than read something that is obviously completely irrelevant to their own situation. What wonderful parentsand role models you all must be to boast about your own success. It is easy isn't it, to pass comment on people when you are sat behind your computer. What a fantastically full and fruitful life, you must lead do sit around and makepeople miserable all day.

The lady, who wrote about her situation and termination, did not deserve such cruel words about her grammar and punctuation. Nor do people who might be losing a part of their budget, deserve a slagging off for how many children they choose to have. I don't suppose you might ever put yourself in their place and think how you may feel to be so undeservedly judged by someone who knows nothing about you?

What a terrible reflection of what is a very informative website.

Shame on you all.

MissMoneypenny

ruggedtoast wrote: »

(I suspect I probably work longer hours than you do by the way)

I'll play, although you really should have asked me this in a pm.

I work a basic 10 hour day, five days a week. Sometimes I work 12 hour days. I also have a two hour commute to work. Just me to support on my wages now as my children are out working long hours too and can therefore support themselves. I'm mortgage free now of course, as I have worked all my life, so no housing costs.

So how many hours do you work and how many are housed and fed on your wages plus your tax credits?

kittikatele

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

I'll play, although you really should have asked me this in a pm.

I work a basic 10 hour day, five days a week. Sometimes I work 12 hour days. I also have a two hour commute to work. Just me to support on my wages now as my children are out working long hours too and can therefore support themselves. I'm mortgage free now of course, as I have worked all my life, so no housing costs.

So how many hours do you work and how many are housed and fed on your wages plus your tax credits?

Why are you asking this question? I think you are asking the wrong people, all these people seem to me to be just as hardworking as you not spongers.

Me, myself I have 3 kids all under 4. I work full time (I have since I was 17 and that's over 20 years ago) my husband looks after the kids (for no money or benefits) so we don't have to pay for child care. I don't know about anyone else but I don't live a fancy life. Why do you have a problem with people claiming a £44 tax benefit every month? It's hardly a benefit at least we are all contributing to the tax system.
£30k doesn't go a long way when your bills increase and food prices are high.

Why don't you go and badger the tax evaders of this country - the ones who earn the most & the big companies who move their money overseas.

Also please don't forget that some people have to do the crap jobs that no one else wants to do in this world and they certainly don't pay very well but at least its a job.

kaya64

stjman wrote: »

well said that person :T

I think you and wife deserve medals for working and supporting your children, I hope you get £1000 a month in tax /child credits you deserve it :cheesy:

choclover

stjman wrote: »

SweetUk....speak to HMRc again, I beleive the threshold may actually be £32k not the £26k earnings as they say in the letter.

It's 26k if you've only 1 child, and it's 32K if you've 2 children.

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/MoneyTaxAndBenefits/TaxCredits/DG_194914

choclover

Pepzofio wrote: »

Household income: £43k (£25k + £2k + £16k)
Minus £6420 threshold: £36,580 surplus income
41% of surplus: £14,997.80 reduction to Tax Credits award...

So, is this calculation right for me? We'll have no childcare that we can claim for, so I've taken that bit out...


Household income: £21,760 (Hubby £19000, Me £2760 (based on £5031 SMP(39 wks @ £129) + 5 weeks wages £730 - £3000 max deduction for maternity pay)*
Minus £6420 threshold: £15340 surplus income
41% of surplus: £6289 reduction to Tax Credits award

Max Award:

WTC
Basic Element £1920
Couple Element £1950
30hr Element £790 = £4660

CTC
Family Element £545
Child 1 Element £2690
Child 2 Element £2690** = 5925

WTC + CTC = £10585 - £6289 = £4296, or approx £82.61 per week or £330.46 every 4 weeks.

* My estimated income this year is £7400, so I'm not sure if they will take my new estimated income due to the new income fall disregard

**Baby's due in June, but just to get a rough idea I've done it for the whole year

Any ideas if this is about right? It seems a lot to me, we're currently getting £250 every 4 weeks, but as my income was not taken into account as I only started back at work in May, I think our award notice last year said from April we'd only be getting about £50 (obviously they don't know i'll be on mat leave and that by june will have another baby)

choclover

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

I work a basic 10 hour day, five days a week. Sometimes I work 12 hour days. I also have a two hour commute to work. Just me to support on my wages now as my children are out working long hours too and can therefore support themselves. I'm mortgage free now of course, as I have worked all my life, so no housing costs.

Lucky you! I don't mean this the wrong way but I suspect things are slightly different now bringing up children to when your children where young. My mum didn't have to work when my sister and I were younger as my dad's job was well paid, only going to work part time when we were both in school. They've been lucky enough to retire early, having benefited from my dad's generous company pension and the increase in house prices.

It's not like that now, women now have to work to pay for higher bills (mortgage, electric, gas, petrol etc), so childcare costs are inevitable if you're children are not yet at school or nursery.

I work part time in the local shop as the hours really suit. It means that we have limited childcare costs of probably a maximum of £19 a week, as hubby looks after our daughter when he gets home from work when I'm at work (I work 4pm-10pm 4 nights a week). Which is great as my job is minimum wage, like most part time jobs that mums have. Don't get me wrong, I'm not complaining about my situation, but even if I got a full time job paying £8 or £9 an hour, with childcare costs and travelling I'd be worse off, so for me working full time just isn't an option. Which is rather crazy considering the government would then be earning more in tax from us!

And once my children are grown-up like yours I'll happily return to full-time employment, infact I'm looking forward to it. But if I had the choice I wouldn't have a 2 hour commute to work - life's too short!

stjman

I called HMRc again last night after asking them to leave our claim open for 2012-2013 last week. I gave them our income for the current year along with child care costs and it looks like there will be an entitlement after April. although not at the levels of previous years because of our income increasing, this still shows people must not ignore the letter saying payments will stop after April. Call them, say you want your claim to continue and when you know you full income/childcare etc for year ending April 2012 tell them....they should then calculate any entitlement for the coming tax year.

It looks like HMRC are hoping people will look at the letter and not bother contacting them.....disgrace !!!!

MissMoneypenny

choclover wrote: »

Lucky you! I don't mean this the wrong way but I suspect things are slightly different now bringing up children to when your children where young.My mum didn't have to work when my sister and I were younger as my dad's job was well paid, only going to work part time when we were both in school.

You make your own luck. Parents use to plan and save before they had children to cover that first year after the child was born. Then they seemed to divide the childcare between them by one working evening and weekends until the mother returned to full time work just as you are doing, or fathers took second jobs. A lot of children had keys to their house, as their parents' were still at work when they got home.

Other mother's worked from home and started a small business. Most of my friends started a business and ran it from home; everyone is good at something.

choclover wrote: »

It's not like that now, women now have to work to pay for higher bills (mortgage, electric, gas, petrol etc), so childcare costs are inevitable if you're children are not yet at school or nursery.

It certainly isn't like that now.The mortgage rate was very high then, a lot higher than now. Most families could only afford 1 car. No free nursery places then either and no welfare payments towards childcare costs. Children didn't expect a bedrrom each financed by welfare or named brand clothes or shoes. Parents didn't expect to get the latest gadget, tv, have a nice car, or take a holiday every year, or have a little bit of money for themselves each week. Parents had the number of children they could afford on their wages.

Even the schools repeatedly showed the movie "Kathy come home" about a mother who tried to keep her family together, ran out of money; and ended up in a caravan and then had her children taken from her by the authorities. It was scarey, but the schools made it quite clear that we needed to work hard in school to be able to support our families. Some school children these days are well aware "the council will give me a house and money if I have a baby" and "more money if I have another baby".

You're correct, it's nothing like it was then. Working to pay for your own family use to be seen as something to be proud of and now you are seen as a mug if don't claim welfare.

choclover wrote: »

But if I had the choice I wouldn't have a 2 hour commute to work - life's too short!

I didn't make that clear, my fault. I have a 2 hour total travel each day; so 1 hour there and 1 hour back, on the train. That travel time is my favourite part as I get a chance sit and read books.

choclover

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

You make your own luck. Parents use to plan and save before they had children to cover that first year after the child was born.

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

It certainly isn't like that now.The mortgage rate was very high then, a lot higher than now.

Personally, I think house prices have a lot to answer to, while it has benefited my parents generation, young people of today need to save a massive amount for a deposit to buy a house and that's even if they earn enough money for a mortgage. I agree mortgage rates have been a lot higher in the past, however house prices were a lot lower and so even now mortgage repayments are a lot higher than they used to be. For example on the first house we bought, our mortgage repayments were only £250 a month - there's no way a young couple today could buy a house and have such a low mortgage payment, so to me it's no surprise that people are struggling to save money.

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

Most families could only afford 1 car.

No-one I know is a two car family, however there are households down our road that have two cars, but obviously I can't comment on what their financial situation is.

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

Children didn't expect a bedrrom each financed by welfare or named brand clothes or shoes. Parents didn't expect to get the latest gadget, tv, have a nice car, or take a holiday every year, or have a little bit of money for themselves each week. Parents had the number of children they could afford on their wages.

I don't agree with you here, I would never buy branded clothes for my daughter as they are total waste of money and her bedroom is not financed by welfare. We very rarely take a holiday and I can't remember the last time we had spare money to spend on ourselves.

Statistically, couples are having fewer children now then they were 100 years ago.

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

Even the schools repeatedly showed the movie "Kathy come home" about a mother who tried to keep her family together, ran out of money; and ended up in a caravan and then had her children taken from her by the authorities. It was scarey, but the schools made it quite clear that we needed to work hard in school to be able to support our families. Some school children these days are well aware "the council will give me a house and money if I have a baby" and "more money if I have another baby".

Never even heard of this film, and certainly was not shown it at school.

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

You're correct, it's nothing like it was then. Working to pay for your own family use to be seen as something to be proud of and now you are seen as a mug if don't claim welfare.

I agree to a certain extent, it annoys me that some people (I know some personally) that don't work, don't want to work, and claim massive amounts from the government in benefits for various things. However the people on this thread are all working (the OP was asking a question about the childcare element of tax credits, which you can only claim when you both work) and it's the government that decides who is entitled to such benefits, they decided that they wanted more mothers to get back to work which is why they help with childcare costs.

I'm sure the vast majority of people in this country at such stage of their lives needs government help, be it JSA, the state pension or even a stay in hospital. If you don't agree with the government you should vote for someone else or even write to your MP to complain, but there's really no need to come on this thread to tell people they shouldn't be claiming if they are entitled to it.