individual taxing but combined for benefit assessment

sebastianj

When you are a couple, any benefits 'pension credits, hb' are assessed on your joint income but for taxation purposes, it is individuals who pay their taxes.

So a person in a relationship with just enough income to be above any benefit threshold, not only loose out on any benefits but also pays tax as an individual, as the other half has very little income.

But if they separate?? It does not seem fair, or does it?

sebastian

CLAPTON

'needs based benefits' are assessed on your situation.
It is generally thought to be more expensive living on one's own that living as a couple.

What has fairness got to do with it?

sebastianj

The state can at least make it easier on someone if they are carrying another person and not make it difficult to live togather, this is common sense, I think.
sebastian

CLAPTON

sebastianj wrote: »

The state can at least make it easier on someone if they are carrying another person and not make it difficult to live togather, this is common sense, I think.
sebastian

I'm not taking sides here but
either one takes the view that everyone should be given the same irrespective of needs or one doesn't.

So should everyone be give child allowance, housing benefit, council tax benefit, DLA etc etc irrespective of their income their needs and family situation or should there be a needs assessment?
Once you say that there only some people should be given state handouts then one has to have some sort of needs assessment. Whether you live with some-one or not is clearly an important factor that determines your living standard and hence needs.
Yes, of course the benefit culture does indeed have unintended side effects, does encourage undesireable behaviour etc but that's how it is.

AirlieBird

sebastianj wrote: »

So a person in a relationship with just enough income to be above any benefit threshold, not only loose out on any benefits but also pays tax as an individual, as the other half has very little income.

But if they separate?? It does not seem fair, or does it?

Or a couple with a combined income of £99,998 (each earning £49,999) gets to keep their child benefit while a lone parent with an income of £99,998 has to give it back.

It does not seem fair does it?

Mikeyorks

sebastianj wrote: »

if they are carrying another person and not make it difficult to live togather, this is common sense, I think.

My wife earns nothing ....... the same sum she has earned for many years. Primarily because we decided, at an early stage, she would stay at home and look after the child + the house. And mainly 'me' - she would add.

Why should anyone - 'state' or otherwise give her 'benefits' for that lifestyle choice?

sebastianj

What i am saying is there should be parity, either they combine the income for every thing , taxes, benefits etc or nothing. Like Airliebird says, that issue will also sorted out.
Mikeyork, your wife should be given an income +bonuses for bringing up a family who will contribute to taxes in the future, I think Cameron and co. should look at this very soon.
sebastian

mildred1978

sebastianj wrote: »

What i am saying is there should be parity, either they combine the income for every thing , taxes, benefits etc or nothing. Like Airliebird says, that issue will also sorted out.
Mikeyork, your wife should be given an income +bonuses for bringing up a family who will contribute to taxes in the future, I think Cameron and co. should look at this very soon.
sebastian

So everything should be on the never never? Give out money now and (hopefully) get it back from the child in the future?

I can see why the Treasury aren't beating a path to your door!

mildred1978

I do think that where only 1 partner works, for childcare reason or whatever, the working partner should be able to use the spare tax-free allowance though.

CLAPTON

sebastianj wrote: »

What i am saying is there should be parity, either they combine the income for every thing , taxes, benefits etc or nothing. Like Airliebird says, that issue will also sorted out.
Mikeyork, your wife should be given an income +bonuses for bringing up a family who will contribute to taxes in the future, I think Cameron and co. should look at this very soon.
sebastian

would you still support this even if it meant that the main beneficiaries are rich people with stay at home partners and the main losers are low income people on benefits

sebastianj

No, I am not saying that, there should be an income threshold and opportunity for all citizen to earn or get that.
Poorer in the sodiety should be protected otherwise the community does not survive. What i am suggesting is that people who have worked all their lives find that what ever pension they have is being taken away in taxes etc.
sebastian