Child Benefit cuts

b4rkie

Hi All,

After a flurry of activity in Oct/Nov around the child benefit cuts, it all seems to have died down.

I am just wondering how many people out there are upset about the unfairness of it, in terms of the broad assumption that higher earners are better off?

Before I get pummelled, let me explain. I fit into the 50-60k bracket and will face losing part of the child benefit payment. That's fine - if we need to dig deep then ok. The problem I have is that other households can keep it if their salaries are below 50k. In other words, 2 earners with 30k each keep the benefit but one earner getting 60k loses it.

The Government is making an assumption that higher earners have the broadest shoulders, but it's not always true. One earner on 60k is already on less net income because of the higher tax bracket.

I spoke to my MP about this and have been basically fobbed off. I didn't say I wanted to keep the benefit, but just that it should be fair.... you can't use a single income as a true indication of family income. I feel like my children are being punished for my wife staying at home to raise them.

I am being told that I am part of a small minority in this situation.... is that REALLY the case? Are our voices too small to be considered?

I would appreciate anyone's views on this, and what if anything you have done to try and get your voice heard.

B.

miduck

If you use the search function, this has been discussed countless times, and the time to speak up was months ago.

zagfles

IMO the govt are playing political games with this. The policy of "taking child benefit off the "rich" is massively popular - over 80% support. They want people to constantly whinge about the unfairness of it, because it keeps a massively popular policy in the headlines.

The numpty Sun readers types, who will never earn anywhere near £50k in their lives, won't hear the detail of your whinge, they won't understand it or want to understand it, they'll just hear the "rich whinging about losing benefits". They'll think "diddums, my heart bleeds" before turning to page 3 to read what Molly, 22, from Blackpool thinks about quantitave easing.

As above it's been discussed loads of times. Instead of complaining, which won't do any good, read about the ways to avoid losing child ben (eg pension contributions).

his_wife

we loose child benefit too, although my husband is classed as an high earner, he has his "first" family to support too, so my children loose out again!!

I once worked out, my neighbour is on benefits with the same amount of children as me, and with all prescriptions, rent , dental fees etc taken into account, and after, we have taken off ni contributions, now lack of cb and tax, they are better off than what we are,,, what a great system.

I am sure i read somewhere, that, two people in the same house hold could both earn 40,000plus each and wouldnt loose it. Yet one person earning over, would. Its an absolute farce.

princessdon

his_wife wrote: »

we loose child benefit too, although my husband is classed as an high earner, he has his "first" family to support too, so my children loose out again!!

I once worked out, my neighbour is on benefits with the same amount of children as me, and with all prescriptions, rent , dental fees etc taken into account, and after, we have taken off ni contributions, now lack of cb and tax, they are better off than what we are,,, what a great system.

I am sure i read somewhere, that, two people in the same house hold could both earn 40,000plus each and wouldnt loose it. Yet one person earning over, would. Its an absolute farce.

Two people can earn £100k and still get full entitlement

poppasmurf_bewdley

princessdon wrote: »

Two people can earn £100k and still get full entitlement

Which is plainly ridiculous. Benefits are supposed to enable people to keep their heads above water in times of difficulty, not to provide an extra top up for those already in very comfortable circumstances.

princessdon

poppasmurf_bewdley wrote: »

Which is plainly ridiculous. Benefits are supposed to enable people to keep their heads above water in times of difficulty, not to provide an extra top up for those already in very comfortable circumstances.

Agreed but that's the reality

b4rkie

thanks all, some great points and comments.

To echo what's been said, it's the unfairness of it all really. A family on 100k can still get it, yet one earner on 50k doesn't. I'd be much more supportive if it was fair.

I contacted my MP (Dave Willetts) and to be fair he accepted it wasn't right, but argued that it would cost a fortune to make it fair. Doesn't really help me though!

I'll take the advice and look to see how I can mitigate the loss. Osbourne is hell bent on this, and there's no way we can change his mind.

schoolrunmum

If understand correctly, yes earners of 100k can still get it, but will pay tax equivalent to it = no cost to taxpayers?? You can still get CB if you earn squillions, you just have to declare it on self assessment and pay tax on it....

Icequeen99

schoolrunmum wrote: »

If understand correctly, yes earners of 100k can still get it, but will pay tax equivalent to it = no cost to taxpayers?? You can still get CB if you earn squillions, you just have to declare it on self assessment and pay tax on it....

No, the point being made is that two people each earning £50,000 (so 100,000 in total) would not be subject to the tax charge, whereas one person earning 60k would.

IQ

[Deleted User]

personally i would abolish CB for all households where income exceeds £30,000,and would only pay it for the first 2 children