If they TAX Disability benefits(DLA/PIP/ESA)How much £ to lose? Tax calculation Help!

nannytone_2

as it stands, household income has no effect on disability benefits.
but what you say is that someone om income related benefit should be taxes at the same rate as someone with an 100k a year household income.
is that more fair then?

dori2o

billywilly wrote: »

As I pointed out before and nobody gave me a straight answer.

Do you think it is right if the household income is say £100,000 pa that they should receive DLA/PIP/AA at the same rate as someone who is just about managing to scrape a life together on IS/ESA?

Surely it is only fair that if you have that level of income you should use it to pay for the extras that your disability creates and not be able to claim any additional income/benefits?

Both Cameron and Brown set themselves up as poor examples when they each claimed DLA for their children. They had enough surplus money to cover the costs without recourse to public funds.

And then what about those that don't have these 'extra' costs? Should they still entitled to an award in the same way and for the same amount as someone whose award doesn't come close to matching the 'extra' costs?

So exactly what level should this ceiling be set at?

You cannot seriously suggest that it be set at household income. Why should my wife be responsible for paying for my additional costs? It must, if at all, only be based on the claimants income.

Then there is the case of whether or not additional costs are incurred.

You may suggest that some have absolutely no additional costs, but then it depends on what you consider to be additional costs.

When you actually sit down and tink about it there are many things that you wouldn‘t naturally consider to be additional costs.

For example, I consider the costs incurred in maintaining my home to be additional, for the sime reason being that prior to my disability I did all the mantenance work on the house. I now have to pay someone to do that for me. That is a cost that I have incurred due to my bodies inability to perform those tasks.

The additiona costs incurred when I had hand rails etc fitted (which the council refused to pay for).

The same with my parents. They consider the gardener that they now employ every 2 weeks to be an additional cost, as prior to their health issues they would have done all the gardening themselves with no need for help.

I consider the costs of having my shoping delivered to be an additonal cost as I would previously have done the shopping myself without a problem.

I consider the reduction in salary due to being physically unable to work full time as I did previously to be an additional cost.

This along with Non-NHS funded treatment, non prescribed medications, special diet, medical sundries (TENS pads/conductors/wires, Acti-Patch, surgical tape, etc), additional fuel costs, and many other smaller items all adds up very quickly.

I spend much more than the HRM I receive in additional costs and I doubt I am alone.

Even those with limited additional costs will have some, it would be very very difficult to say anyone has no additional costs at all.

The only other option is to have people prove their ditional costs which isn‘t all tht simple to do, especialy if some of their costs are for items which do not provide a receipt.

It would also be vastly more expensive to run such a system than it would ever save, and so the existing system, whilst not perfect, is the most cost effective.

GlasweJen

Dori2o I applied to have my access to work grant renewed (transport) and they just ignored it, we are 12 months down the line and I've still not been renewed. MP hasn't managed to get anywhere with them and I can't appeal as no decision has been made, the whole thing is a nightmare

dori2o

GlasweJen wrote: »

Dori2o I applied to have my access to work grant renewed (transport) and they just ignored it, we are 12 months down the line and I've still not been renewed. MP hasn't managed to get anywhere with them and I can't appeal as no decision has been made, the whole thing is a nightmare

Ive heard similar from other people I speak to who have acces to work funding. Not all of them for transport. A colleague of mine has AtW help to pay for a sign language translator. This costs a significant amount of money but the funding allows him to remain in work, or at least it did. He‘s been off work for the past 3 months as they have withdrawn the funding.

This is going to become a much more common issue over the next few years.

However, we know there will be some in society, and on this forum, who will see this as a good thing despite the fact it ultimately prevents someone who wants to work from working.

billywilly

dori2o wrote: »

Ive heard similar from other people I speak to who have acces to work funding. Not all of them for transport. A colleague of mine has AtW help to pay for a sign language translator. This costs a significant amount of money but the funding allows him to remain in work, or at least it did. He‘s been off work for the past 3 months as they have withdrawn the funding.

This is going to become a much more common issue over the next few years.

However, we know there will be some in society, and on this forum, who will see this as a good thing despite the fact it ultimately prevents someone who wants to work from working.

In terms of government net spending, was the funding greater than the tax and NIC contributions made?

billywilly

dori2o wrote: »

So exactly what level should this ceiling be set at?

You cannot seriously suggest that it be set at household income. Why should my wife be responsible for paying for my additional costs? It must, if at all, only be based on the claimants income.
Maybe because you are married and are expected to support each other?

When you actually sit down and tink about it there are many things that you wouldn‘t naturally consider to be additional costs.

For example, I consider the costs incurred in maintaining my home to be additional, for the sime reason being that prior to my disability I did all the mantenance work on the house. I now have to pay someone to do that for me. That is a cost that I have incurred due to my bodies inability to perform those tasks.
I have always had people do the work on our house from building, repairs, window cleaners and gardening. To me being disabled it makes no difference.

The additiona costs incurred when I had hand rails etc fitted (which the council refused to pay for).
If they were required and were reported on by Social Services that for safety reasons and you being able to continue living there they would have paid for them.

The same with my parents. They consider the gardener that they now employ every 2 weeks to be an additional cost, as prior to their health issues they would have done all the gardening themselves with no need for help.
As above we have always had a gardener. If we touch anything green it dies.

I consider the costs of having my shoping delivered to be an additonal cost as I would previously have done the shopping myself without a problem.
Our daughters' do our shopping, have done for years. One has a 15% discount card at one store which reduces our food expenses

I consider the reduction in salary due to being physically unable to work full time as I did previously to be an additional cost.
Our benefit income & pensions and all of the add on extras, gives us a net income of around £27,000 a year which is more than ample.

This along with Non-NHS funded treatment, non prescribed medications, special diet, medical sundries (TENS pads/conductors/wires, Acti-Patch, surgical tape, etc), additional fuel costs, and many other smaller items all adds up very quickly.
That may be the case for some, but we don't have those extra costs. As for hospital travel, we claim it back from the hospital including the car parking fees.

IThe only other option is to have people prove their ditional costs which isn‘t all tht simple to do, especialy if some of their costs are for items which do not provide a receipt.
You ask for one. Even our window cleaner and gardener are paid by cheque which is receipt enough.

It would also be vastly more expensive to run such a system than it would ever save, and so the existing system, whilst not perfect, is the most cost effective.

So you are happy that people with a household income of say £100,000 a year are getting the same level of financial support for disabilities as you are?

dori2o

billywilly wrote: »

So you are happy that people with a household income of say £100,000 a year are getting the same level of financial support for disabilities as you are?

What I‘m saying is that its very hard to set a ceiling at any level without it adversely affecting anyone.

There will be some who have an income of £100k who can afford the additional costs, but then there will be some who due to other financial constraints cannot.

The fact that you and other may have always paid for home maintenance/gardeners etc means nothing. Everyone is different. Prior to my disability the only trade I had ever paid for in my home was an electrician and by brother is a plumbing/heating engineer. Everything else, from painting/decorating to building walls, installing bathrooms and kitchens, general maintenance, doing the garden was all done by me and would always have been done by me given I have the benefit of having had the experience of doing this for most of my life given my whole family is/was in the building trade and I have a background in engineering.

You may have daughters who can do the shopping for you, my kids are not yet old enough to do that weekly shop for us, therefore that is another cost I suffer. Plus I wouldn‘t put the burden of having them have to do my shopping onto their shoulders, it‘s simply not fair to expect your children to do this. They will have their own lives and their own problems to contend with without having to worry about my shopping.

The council round here refused to install the hand/grab rails.

I am unable to claim back Hospital/medical transport costs and therefore I sufer this cost.

Not all costs are the same for everyone and until you recognise that then your opinions on who is and isn‘t deserving means nothing.

tomtom256

billywilly wrote: »

So you are happy that people with a household income of say £100,000 a year are getting the same level of financial support for disabilities as you are?

Why shouldn't they?

Are you saying only the poor or unable to work should be given help with their disabilities and the rest can just deal with it in their own way?

billywilly

dori2o wrote: »

Not all costs are the same for everyone and until you recognise that then your opinions on who is and isn‘t deserving means nothing.

I do actually recognise that some disabled people do have extra costs, but by the same token, many others don't.

Surely there has to be a method by which the money available is actually targeted at those who can prove that they have reasonable extra costs.
Although I am fortunate, not only for my family but also because my disabilities do not incur me any extra cost, I do feel that it shouldn't be the case that everybody gets the same financial support. I wasted my DLA money.
Additionally if the household has enough money coming in from other sources to pay for these extra costs, I do not think it right that they too should get the same financial support as those that are on a limited income.

And on that subject, I have never understood why being on a means tested benefit entitles you to not only the disability benefit, but a premium on top because you get that disability benefit. Effectively in my case when I had DLA, we not only had the DLA and my wife her AA, we were given another £122 a week on top because of them.

billywilly

tomtom256 wrote: »

Why shouldn't they?

Are you saying only the poor or unable to work should be given help with their disabilities and the rest can just deal with it in their own way?

Yes I am, - direct the funding to those in need.

And if the household has that level of income surely they will not need the £100 extra a week that PIP pays. By all means test all benefits.