Benefits, self-emplyment, "gainful employment" and "minimum income floor"?

HappyMJ

AG47 wrote: »

Can I just confirm, is it only after the first year you are expected to make NWM per hr?

Most people make a loss first year trading while you set up?

Yes and that can be extended...but with some difficulty. Just easier to accept the figure at NMW rates and leave it at that.

Gavin234

So what happens when you are stil not making that much profit after a year? Do they force you to close the business? Doesn't sound good for the economy,

FBaby

Gavin234 wrote: »

So what happens when you are stil not making that much profit after a year? Do they force you to close the business? Doesn't sound good for the economy,

They can't force you to close a business. It means that you won't be entitled to tax credits any longer, so will need to consider another mean to support yourself, maybe by then if you are confident that the business will take off with just a bit more time, looking at a bank loan the way to go.

Marktheshark

Has anyone found the actual legalisation that makes this lawful yet ?
The Minimum income threshold and refusal to tax credits if not met.
I have heard of "rules" but rules are not law and they as statutory instrument can only act within the present legalisation.

HappyMJ

Gavin234 wrote: »

So what happens when you are stil not making that much profit after a year? Do they force you to close the business? Doesn't sound good for the economy,

They'll assess your universal credit claim as if you were earning NMW. You might put down you earn £2,000 a year. they'll change that figure to NMW*30*52 = £10,140 and calculate your entitlement on that figure.

You'll still get UC just not as much.

rogerblack

HappyMJ wrote: »

They'll assess your universal credit claim as if you were earning NMW. You might put down you earn £2,000 a year. they'll change that figure to NMW*30*52 = £10,140 and calculate your entitlement on that figure.

You'll still get UC just not as much.

Unless your notional earnings due to the MIF take you out of UC.

Icequeen99

blondebubbles wrote: »

Isn't the minimum income threshold for UC rather than TC?

Tax credits are only using qualifying hours x NMW to do compliance checks, not simply to decide who can claim. Tax credit legislation allows for any claim to be checked.

I think BB has hit the nail on the head - as with other threads this one is confusing tax credits with universal credit. The rules are different for both.

However - both have legislation. TC just amended their legislation so that it requires self-employed people to be doing work on a commercial basis with a view to the realisation of profit and that it is organised and regular. That is all - it says nothing further about minimum income or anything that is UC.

UC have legislation around the minimum income floor - it is the UC Regulations 2013 - i think reg 57 - 62 (but that is top of the head I haven't checked the numbers)

IQ

NYM

Marktheshark wrote: »

Has anyone found the actual legalisation that makes this lawful yet ?
The Minimum income threshold and refusal to tax credits if not met.
I have heard of "rules" but rules are not law and they as statutory instrument can only act within the present legalisation.

It's part of the Welfare Reform Act 2012... Welfare Reform Act...
Statutory Instruments (SIs) are a form of legislation which allow the provisions of an Act of Parliament to be subsequently brought into force or altered without Parliament having to pass a new Act.

Mersey_2

That's very true, NYM. Although SIs go much further than you suggest.


Grayling altered the Employment Tribunal right/threshold from 1 year to 2 years' employment by SI, ie without any vote in the Commons at all.


It is an abuse, but a lawful one, until reform takes place.

Marktheshark

The facts as I see them is the "updated legalisation" does not set a minimum income floor for tax credits.
People speak of "they changed the legislation" .
Nobody can find or quote the wording that would apply.

Like Workfare, they are acting outside of legalisation if they sanction people on wtc that do not meet income thresholds.
I beg to be proven wrong, Playing the devils advocate.
It does not exist and that is what sets out is legal and illegal.