Tax Credits Help Please

shedboy94

zagfles wrote: »

What if you haven't paid any tax, are they benefits then? Or what if you've paid a bit of tax but not enough to fund your expensive cancer treatment, does it become a benefit then? What if you've paid more than enough tax to fund your tax credits and child benefit, do they then stop being a benefit?

I believe they are indirect benefits. The last part is just ridiculous because you are never going to be earning a low enough income to receive Tax Credits and also pay tax that not only covers the tax credits but also contributes to all the other services you would use at the same time.

zagfles

shedboy94 wrote: »

I believe they are indirect benefits. The last part is just ridiculous because you are never going to be earning a low enough income to receive Tax Credits and also pay tax that not only covers the tax credits but also contributes to all the other services you would use at the same time.

Rubbish. I know a single parent on about £50k who gets a small amount in tax credits (due to childcare costs for 2 pre-school children), pays maybe £22k in tax/NI/CT/VAT/excise duties and gets £3k or so back in tax credits & ch ben, they don't use £19k worth of services.

Or if you want to spread it over multiple years, before they had kids (& split) the couple earned well over £100k between them for a long time (maybe 10+ years) so they've paid easily enough tax to cover any tax credits and benefits they get plus almost certainly the cost of any services they use.

Pedent

BigAunty wrote: »

It's amazing how many people post on this forum that they aren't getting any benefits, just tax credits and child benefit...

It's also amazing that people draw such a sharp distinction between cash benefits and public services. Someone who receives publicly funded education or healthcare is receiving from the state just as much as someone who receives JSA or WTC, yet they don't seem to face the same stigma.

princessdon

zagfles wrote: »

Rubbish. I know a single parent on about £50k who gets a small amount in tax credits (due to childcare costs for 2 pre-school children), pays maybe £22k in tax/NI/CT/VAT/excise duties and gets £3k or so back in tax credits & ch ben, they don't use £19k worth of services.

Or if you want to spread it over multiple years, before they had kids (& split) the couple earned well over £100k between them for a long time (maybe 10+ years) so they've paid easily enough tax to cover any tax credits and benefits they get plus almost certainly the cost of any services they use.

That is the blurred line though isn't it? where for some it is a Tax Credit as per the original intention and others it is a benefit (replacing child section of IS or JSA). And of course a combination of both where they pay a tiny proportion in Income Tax as a ratio of Tax Credits received.

BigAunty

Pedent wrote: »

It's also amazing that people draw such a sharp distinction between cash benefits and public services. Someone who receives publicly funded education or healthcare is receiving from the state just as much as someone who receives JSA or WTC, yet they don't seem to face the same stigma.

Yes, probably because 99% of the population receive these services in contrast to benefits and they are seen as ones that benefit society more greatly, a better return on investment - healthy and educated people.

BigAunty

zagfles wrote: »

... That's because the whole point of calling them "tax credits" was to try to take the stigma away from being "on benefits" which some snobs have.

But people know full well that some households get the 'credit' of 'tax' without having paid a bean in tax so it gives the impression of being a tax rebate when paying into the system is not a prerequisite of receiving them.

I've always considered them to be poorly titled, though good on the govt if they want to reduce stigma...

zagfles

princessdon wrote: »

That is the blurred line though isn't it? where for some it is a Tax Credit as per the original intention and others it is a benefit (replacing child section of IS or JSA). And of course a combination of both where they pay a tiny proportion in Income Tax as a ratio of Tax Credits received.

Yes it's very blurred - that's the point, everyone gets "benefits" from the state in one form or another and virtually everyone pays into the state though various taxes.

Someone who is getting a lot in tax credits and paying little tax now could have been paying a lot of tax earlier in their life and getting little back. Or the child the tax credits is supporting could repay their tax credits many times over when grow up and get a good job.

zagfles

BigAunty wrote: »

But people know full well that some households get the 'credit' of 'tax' without having paid a bean in tax so it gives the impression of being a tax rebate when paying into the system is not a prerequisite of receiving them.

I've always considered them to be poorly titled, though good on the govt if they want to reduce stigma...

Yes it's pure spin, but that's how this discussion started. The govt wanted a benefit-like payment which they didn't want to actually call a benefit. Because getting a "credit of tax" is more acceptable to the more dim members of society than getting a "benefit", even if the two amount to exactly the same end result.