Breaking News: £1000 married tax allowance

TruckerT

zagfles wrote: »

Though there is of course the inconsistency that unmarried couples won't benefit yet they'll still be treated as a couple when it comes to benefits.

My wife and I are still married and although we remain very good friends, we haven't lived together for more than ten years, and in all our financial affairs we are both regarded as 'single'.

I am no longer a taxpayer, but my wife does pay some tax on her pensions. I wonder if she would be able to claim this 'marriage' allowance?

TruckerT

grizzly1911

£200 might just fill up the car twice.

Loughton_Monkey

grizzly1911 wrote: »

£200 might just fill up the car twice.

Not mine.

But £200 won't change my life. They'll probably take away the heating allowance to compensate.

Masomnia

I reckon it'd be more than an energy price freeze for 18 months would save you (depending on wholesale price changes obv).

For the average family anyway. If you have a pool to heat and gin and tonic to chill it may be a different story.

Loughton_Monkey

Masomnia wrote: »

.....For the average family anyway. If you have a pool to heat and gin and tonic to chill it may be a different story.

Quite right. Call me anything you like, but not "Average".

Well done!

michaels

Can we just confirm it applies to all couples and 'married' is just a bit of media mischief making?

chewmylegoff

michaels wrote: »

Can we just confirm it applies to all couples and 'married' is just a bit of media mischief making?

What's your definition of a couple? Reports seem to suggest that it will only be available to people who are married or in a civil partnership. And obviously no-one gets it if one of the "couple" is a higher rate tax payer. So "rich" working couples don't get it but asset rich pensioners with decent pensions do.

TruckerT

chewmylegoff wrote: »

What's your definition of a couple? Reports seem to suggest that it will only be available to people who are married or in a civil partnership. And obviously no-one gets it if one of the "couple" is a higher rate tax payer. So "rich" working couples don't get it but asset rich pensioners with decent pensions do.

I guess a single person living with a single parent of the same sex (possibly as a carer?) will be able to enter into a civil partnership or a marriage in order to be able to claim the marriage allowance?

It is probably illegal for a son to marry his mother, but I doubt whether the legal system has yet got around to banning a father from marrying his son.

TruckerT

Loughton_Monkey

chewmylegoff wrote: »

What's your definition of a couple? Reports seem to suggest that it will only be available to people who are married or in a civil partnership. And obviously no-one gets it if one of the "couple" is a higher rate tax payer. So "rich" working couples don't get it but asset rich pensioners with decent pensions do.

Just read the report, and learned that there is no "extra" £1,000 tax allowance at all. Just the ability to transfer it. So (like me) if we both have income >£10K-ish then transferring is of no value. [Am assuming that I would not be allowed to transfer it simply to avoid one of the couple going into the higher rate band.]

BobQ

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Then you maybe surprised the majority still aspire to marrying one day. May help bring some needed much needed cohesion and stability to society. Particularly when the focus far too often is on minority groups and interests.

I agree it may help provide more cohesion but so would banning one parent from working so they could look after their children, and few would advocate that.

I just find it absurd that the party that advocates less state interference in our lives uses taxation to impose its values on a population which (rightly or wrongly) is getting married less and less.