📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

Husband an Expat overseas

Options
1151618202123

Comments

  • kb92830
    kb92830 Posts: 120 Forumite
    clemmatis, why do you think she is trolling, I asked exactly the same questions 3 years ago. I wasn`t trolling then so why do you assume she is now. The information you get given in these situations seems unbelieveable especially when you listen to the news etc. Perhaps she was just asking for clarification.
    Look. I think the OP's trolling. But her posts taken at face value show no evidence of need.

    Equally her posts show no evidence of not needing.
  • kb92830 wrote: »
    Equally her posts show no evidence of not needing.



    Seriously you truly believe that? words fail me
  • clemmatis
    clemmatis Posts: 3,168 Forumite
    kb92830 wrote: »
    clemmatis, why do you think she is trolling, I asked exactly the same questions 3 years ago. I wasn`t trolling then so why do you assume she is now.

    I don't know exactly what your posts said, kb. Something about the tone and content of her posts, taken together, makes me think she is trolling; that and the fact that a simple glance at this forum shows that a number of posters a. bash benefits claimants and b. bash people who, for example, spend more than they think reasonable on food. (There have been food-spending trolls in the Debt-Free Wannabe forum here!) Surely a new poster would browse the forum first?
    Equally her posts show no evidence of not needing.

    It depends on what you mean by not needing:

    I/We can live off our savings, my investment income and or my husbands income. That is not the issue it is determining a "household income" which is not adequately defined by those seeking a number.

    Our houses are paid for
  • FBaby
    FBaby Posts: 18,374 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    It's amazing how people are happy to bypass moral grounds for legal rights when it suits them, yet play the whole morality against legal rights when it doesn't.

    The OP admitted that they moved because they morally didn't agree with the amount of tax they had to pay. If rights are above moral grounds, when did she accepts it and bypassed looking at other ways around it?

    Finding out that you can do something doesn't become obligation to do so if it goes against your moral grounds.
  • kb92830
    kb92830 Posts: 120 Forumite
    We have both only ever worked as professionals in the private sector and paid for everything ourselves. A Labour introduced 50% tax rate is not reasonable for anyone to have to pay, so yes we did not complain but we did move overseas in 2009 to avoid the mess that was to come and is still coming.

    She never stated that a moral view prompted her actions. All she stated was that she didn`t agree with a legal decision and therefore made a choice. Nothing illegal, just a clever decision to avoid a punitive tax. The issue is here is not what the OP did, but why she did it, and the simple answer to that is that progressive goverments have played Robin Hood for too long, robbing the rich to pay the poor and just because somebody has had the good fortune to be lucky in life why should they subsidise others to an unfair level. Perhaps this and subsequent goverments should look at how they can achieve a higher contribution level from everybody rather than the lucky few and then perhaps the benefit system would be fairer overall.
  • clemmatis
    clemmatis Posts: 3,168 Forumite
    edited 14 January 2013 at 2:31PM
    Some quotations from the OP's posts -- bold added
    We moved to Saudi and Dubai. As far as I understand it is not a crime to move overseas and return from time to time.
    I am now back in the UK with our 3 children and wish to complete the normal tax, benefits admin as required.

    My children have gone to private schools in Dubai for the past 3 years,... they get holidays and they travel home to the UK with me for them. ...

    If you do your homework on HE applications and simple case law my eldest son is a UK resident and will pay home fees when he starts in the Autumn.
    My husbands residency is outside the UK. However we have already established with my sons university of choice that he is UK resident and entitled to domestic or home fees. But this is again not well understood by many expats.

    A home student is one who has been ordinarily resident in the UK for three full years before the first day of the academic course. As I said earlier, that the schools are outside the UK (one child is now in a UK school, it seems, anyway) does not matter if a parent is resident here; for a child to be deemed ordinarily resident here for three full years, their parent/s must have been ordinarily resident here for that time.

    I doubt the OP has been so resident... .
  • FBaby
    FBaby Posts: 18,374 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    kb92830 wrote: »
    She never stated that a moral view prompted her actions. All she stated was that she didn`t agree with a legal decision and therefore made a choice. Nothing illegal, just a clever decision to avoid a punitive tax. The issue is here is not what the OP did, but why she did it, and the simple answer to that is that progressive goverments have played Robin Hood for too long, robbing the rich to pay the poor and just because somebody has had the good fortune to be lucky in life why should they subsidise others to an unfair level. Perhaps this and subsequent goverments should look at how they can achieve a higher contribution level from everybody rather than the lucky few and then perhaps the benefit system would be fairer overall.

    That's what I said. She did nothing illegal, but she did it to avoid a legal duty imposed on them that she morally didn't like.

    I too feel that my partner and I pay too much taxes and have everything taken from us. I accept it with reluctance. However, it wouldn't come to my mind a second to claim benefits aimed at people struggling to support themselves because of some loophole I managed to find because morally, I would feel very dirty doing it knowing that it was never intended for people like me in the first place (and rightly so). The fact that I think I give too much in taxes doesn't mean that I think it is right to take from those who receive it who are genuinely in need of it.
  • kb92830
    kb92830 Posts: 120 Forumite
    Fbaby
    However, it wouldn't come to my mind a second to claim benefits aimed at people struggling to support themselves because of some loophole

    You are missing the point, they are aimed at whoever is legally allowed to claim them. You may not like this fact but it is written in statute. This is not a loophole. Rather than everybody attacking the OP you should be demanding action from the goverment, they and they alone are responsible for spending your hard earned cash irresponsibly.
  • FBaby
    FBaby Posts: 18,374 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    kb92830 wrote: »
    Fbaby
    You are missing the point, they are aimed at whoever is legally allowed to claim them. You may not like this fact but it is written in statute. This is not a loophole. Rather than everybody attacking the OP you should be demanding action from the goverment, they and they alone are responsible for spending your hard earned cash irresponsibly.

    We are going around circles.... Benefits are not AIMED at every single person who can claim, they are aimed at those who are in need of them. If it happens that they missed unusual circumstances so that some people who don't need them are able to claim, it doesn't mean it was aimed at them in the first place.

    Or are you saying that whoever wrote the rules of various benefits, as well as those who signed them, made a conscious decision to include anyone with a partner earning a fortune abroad supporting their family in the same category as single parents, even if they receive an income via their partner that is say 10 times above what a single parent without a partner earns? What would be the rationale behind this decision?
  • Kb92830, thanks for reading my actual question and understanding where I was coming from.

    I asked what I acknowledged was a simple question that may have a complex answer.....and the abuse followed....all I did was defend myself.

    Morality is for individuals themselves to determine and not impose on others whatever their view.

    The troll references, scrounges references etc. where pointless and lacked any credibility.

    I follow the law to the letter and believe all should pay what is due and receive what is due.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 351.2K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 453.7K Spending & Discounts
  • 244.2K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 599.3K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177K Life & Family
  • 257.6K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.