Change of circumstances

vodkaburner_2

Hi all,
I need some advice regarding CSA. I currently pay CSA for two kids from my previous marriage. The claim started in january this year. I remarried a few year ago and now my wife is expecting our new baby. The question is do I need to inform CSA that I have another child living with me (once it's born obviously)? Some CSA leaflets only say you need to inform them when there's a change to work related circumstances (like getting a job or losing a job) others want a change of any circumstances....which confuses me.
The reason I'm asking is because my wife isn't really keen on having her income analysed by CSA in connection with kids which aren't hers (no, nothing dodgy going on there, just why should it be included if the kids arent hers).
Another question is that I've recently started a job and me and my wife applied for working tax credits. The info from last year says they can take all of it into consideration if I earn more, half of it if we earn the same or none of it if my wife earns more which is the case with us. Is it still the same rule in 2013?
Any advice highly appreciated.
Thanks a lot

PreludeForTimeFeelers

Your case will be on CS2, so there is no change to the tax credits rules.

You don't need to inform them of your new child, when born, however it's financially in your interest to do so. They can't take this new child into account in your calculation unless they are told about it.

Your wife's income won't be requested.

vodkaburner_2

Thanks Prelude for the reply. I'm just wondering how it is my interest to inform them? If they add CTC and child benefit on top of my wage it will surely be a bigger ammount to use for calculating what to give to my ex, even with the reduction for the new child. Or is it just me being wrong?
Yeah, so I've heard that they don't calculate wife's income, but how do they know then if she earns more or not, and whether they can use some of ours WTC or not?
Sorry if these questions seem silly, but as much as I tried finding out reading all those csa leaflets, I can't find a simple answer.

shoe*diva79

You will get a 15% reduction for your new child before being assessed on the remaining 85% of your net pay.

DAREDEVIL78

Hi vodkaburner ,

I have just been assessed under csa2 rules after been on csa1 for 11 years, the calculation method is entirely different but heres a few things I have worked out about csa2 that may help you.

1. if you have one child to your ex you will pay 15% of your nett income weekly or monthly

2.if you have 1 child in your household you will get 15% of your nett protected / 20% if you have have 2 children and 25% if you have 3 children or more , these percentages protect your income before they take the 15% for the child to the ex.

3.if the child who lives with your ex stays with you at least one night per week/equating to 52 nights a year you will get a 1/7th reduction of your maintenance figure, 2/7ths for 104 nights per year and so on

4. as for tax credits as far as I am aware they can ALWAYS use either tax credits but if you and your wife work and you earn less than your wife then they class child tax credits as your wifes therefore don't use them in calculating a maintenance figure but I think I am right in saying they still use working tax credits regardless of who earns the most.

5. as for child benefit, once again I am sure this isn't taken into account to calculate a maintenance figure.

your situation sounds similar to mine , I find the use of tax credits unbelievably annoying, I know for certain I am paying 15% of my nett but also our tax credits are part of the equation.

as for proving that you earn less than your wife I am not sure how this is proved if they don't ever ask for your partners income details , I can only assume that if you claim this is the case at that point they will ask for proof of earnings for comparison reasons, maybe other members can advise better regards this particular subject.

finally my morals are I am responsibly willing to contribute to my childs upbringing beyond doubt but feel 15% of nett (especially AFTER deductions ) is too high, bearing in mind essential outgoings in your life are not considered. it can be crippling and in my case is .

hope this helps ?

shoe*diva79

To put another spin on it... Why should your child/children from your first relationship suffer the reduction you get for the children you went on to have later in your household now? Swings and roundabouts and the only way to make it totaly fair is to have no reductions for kids in your household and no use of chld tax credits.

shoe*diva79

Daredevil, you seriously think 15% is to high? Have you any idea how much it costs to raise a child? I am assuming you have a fairly low wage if you receive tax credits so if, for example, your take home pay is £200, you have a 15% reduction for a child living in your household meaning the assesment is carried out on £170. Of that, £25.50 goes to your first child ( assuming no overnight stays) and you keep £144.50. More if you have a further reduction for overnight stays.

Somyour first child has £25.50 and the children in your household £144.50. Not including any state benefits to either hosuehold. Who is the losers there?

DAREDEVIL78

With respect shoe*diva79 ,

i think what i meant to say was for some people (including myself) a maintenance calculation can be hard for some people to pay , surely it is circumstancial to a persons outgoings , a figure for me to pay could be hard to make but could be classed as do-able to someone else circumstances.

csa 1 used to take into account major outgoings ie mortgage etc then calculate maintenance, don't get me wrong , when i say outgoings i mean essential outgoings , not top tv packages or paying a loan for a top of the range car , i wouldn't class them as essential but mortgage/rent is a priority /utilities etc.

i think i could have typed it better what i meant, to put more detail into it is, if , after outgoings one person has more disposable income compared to the next then 15% of nett can seem acceptable to one but majorly tight to the other.

What happens if 15% figure just isn't there ?

i agree withyou that a child needs the sort of figure 15% may bring but people don't have an endless pot of money !

i have 2 children who live in my household so i do know what bringing a child up costs but in an ideal world my fulltime job would bring me £500 per week nett but it doesn't , which is what i mean by 15% to someone on £200 p/week can be harder to pay than someone on £500 p/week.

shoe*diva79

15% of £200 is £30. 15% of £500 is £75. A % is the fairest way to reflect peoples salaries.

If on £200 you cant find £30 (less if you take into consideration of the 20% discount you get plus overnight stay reductions) then I suggest you post a SOA on the debt free wannabe board. You dont have to be in debt to do so.

Can I ask, the 2 children n your household, are they yours, or your partners from a previous relationship?

DAREDEVIL78

REGARDS,

i have one child to an ex but my wife and i have an 8yr old and since have had a baby boy recently.

i agree to an extent that percentage is fair for a maintenance calculation but i have 2 discrepancy points.

1 . If it is fair to use %'s regardless of income then why (under csa2) do people on far lower incomes not pay percentages , for example if i earned £95 a week nett then i would be deemed under the flat rate for calculating where i would pay £5 total.

if its fair to pay based on %'s then why isn't it 15% of £95 which goes back to an earlier point meaning the lower the income the harder 15% seems to somebody but if i was on £500 nett 15% wouldn't seem so hard to take, like i said its circumstancial . i earn £210 nett but pay 15% but someone on £95 nett pays £5 flat rate , if %'s are fairest then surely everyone should be treat the same.

2. based on the children i would pay 15% for my child to my ex but the 2 children in my household would be calculated at 20% for the 2 equalling 10% per child , is that fair equal , is one child deemed to need more than the other , this is where there are some discrepancies.

with respect !

shoe*diva79

With respect Daredeveil, if you couldn't afford to pay for the child you already had, then maybe going on to have 2 more was a mistake.