MSE News: Summer Budget 2015: Millions to face benefit cuts

poppy10_2

bloolagoon wrote: »

I don't see why you think you should have the same opportunities as some one who is wealthy. i certainly don't. My children have less than those who are wealthy because we know we aren't wealthy.

Too many people find this truth hard to accept.

StixUK

bloolagoon wrote: »

see comments above

I will not be losing more than £1,000 based on the figures from the calculator provided on this website.


Benefits will not be taken into the £30k as it stands.


I actually think that my loss will actually be a little less if the Housing Benefit rules still apply in the same way as my reduction in tax credits will reduce my overall income therefore increasing my entitlement to extra HB, but I do not envisage that being the case for long.

StixUK

zagfles wrote: »

Just to clarify - that's max CTC, income can be higher (sometimes a lot higher) and still get CTC but reduced by the taper.

Yes and a quote that proves that some people who you don't expect to have CTC do actually get it.


Family friend earns £35k, one parent working, 2 kids, still gets £2 per/week in CTC. Low but still getting something from the state.

StixUK

I come to the end of this debate within this thread now as I feel that we will all end up going around in circles and there will nothing to gain from either side.


I have not stated that your incomes should be taxed per se to bring it below my total income and to pay for me, that maybe the message I have conveyed though.


You have constantly criticised my choice to have 4 children, I accept that. But you think £33,000 is enough to live on. I challenge you to do it when you have no choice but to change it, if you can put yourself in that position.


Yes I do think you are attacking the wrong person here, I claim benefits but you seem to be forgetting the perspective of all the people above you in income level that earn more than enough that is needed to a luxurious lifestyle, so much so that it become gluttonous and greedy.


You are also very short-minded from the comments I have read on here and you feel that you have all done the reliable and sensible things and you have it planned out and can combat issues when they arise. If it goes wrong for whatever reason, would you be happy to claim off the state or would you be a martyr and carry on regardless.


Whilst the people at the very top of corporations are earning mega bucks, and yes paying some tax but getting a tax break that'll make them better off I will feel no guilt as we are supposed to be living in a fairer Britain.


The people who earn the money, work hard, pay tax and pay more tax than the people earning less in the country. That is how it should be because it is not that one person at the head of the corporation/business that made the money, it is all the people underneath them they aided them in that journey, they deserve a fair standard of living and the ability to live a lifestyle that is representative of an advanced first world economy.


It is not until you require the systems that are in place, that you realise how much the basic support network has been torn apart and you are treated like someone putting a burden on the system.


Where you find the Billions of pounds that are missing I do not know, but you don't reduce corporation tax, you don't increase the 40% tax threshold and you don't increase the living wage to something that is still 64p per/hour lower than the recommended living wage, you raise it immediately to the £7.84 that is required and you raise it every April by the recommended living wage as provided by the commission. Ban zero hour contracts. Increase the availability of full time jobs, especially in retail and the service markets so that employers pay more Employers NI.


A separate problem has been created by allowing pensioners to work past the normal retirement age as it has taken 300,000 jobs out of the economy that could have been provided to young workers and families that need a second income, not using it as a top up to their pension.


Bring back a higher tax rate for everyone earning over 100,000 as they don't really need that amount of money, they get their normal personal allowance like everyone else, that is classed as the minimum wage to live on, they get enough money, there is no need to earn past that amount apart from indulgence, this includes football salaries. I am sure there are plenty of workers that would do these above £100k jobs for less as they would be grateful for the income.


This does not remove their achievements in life, it supports a diluted spread of wealth, which can allow these people to earn enough money to get all the luxuries a human can require and it allows people at the other end of the scale to get some of those things but not to the same value. And it would also allow you, in the middle, to be better off as well.


I just hope that nothing happens to you that you criticise that means you have to rely on this system that is being slowly stripped away, but as it doesn't affect you, you cannot understand what impact it has.


You think I deserve to have my benefits cut fair enough, I think you deserve to open your mind to the possibility that not everyone is like you and that you seem to be attacking the people below you instead of the people above you. I'm a depressive and suffer from low self-esteem, so yes I defend myself profusely as sometimes the choices we make are not all conscious and they can be manipulated.


I am sure you are the type of people that suggest addiction is a choice not a medical imbalance in the brain, but hey free speech, you are entitled to those opinions.


Victimisation of the people on any kind of benefit was the election winner for the Tories, yet they held back the specifics until now. It is wrong on so many levels and so deceptive and deceitful, but they support free markets and privatisation. Free markets - hmmmm let me see, the banks lent millions of pounds to the sub-prime market completely unregulated and it destroyed the global economy, yet it was the fault of the poor people who have been pressurised over decades to aspire to home ownership and they couldn't control their desires because unfortunately it is human nature to acquire resources and become greedy and self-centered as you only protect your own. Oh it turned out they couldn't sustain/afford the repayments on their homes and they are getting repossessed/in arrears and of course it is their fault because they were stupid enough to believe that the dream would last forever.


Tell the banks and loan companies to stop taking into account any form of benefits completely and only decided loans and mortgages on earned income only...watch the growth of this economy disappear overnight, come on as benefits is not a guaranteed income anymore, it should never be taken into account for any kind of finance agreement.


Of course, lets keep people in rental properties from private landlords as the state should never rent out properties to the public. This way the people who have the access to enough money and liquidity can prosper from the people that can't afford to buy as renting is so expensive. So let's see a private individual or company will benefit from higher rents, hence why they will want the house building programme restricted, to choke supply, to increase prices, to boost profits.


Social housing is the sole biggest economic driver for the UK and should be encouraged. A boom in social housing with affordable rents will benefit everyone and allow people to feel a sense of pride and raise families with a sense of security that is shared by people that can afford to buy their own properties. This way any housing benefit that is due is paid to the local council who can then reinvest it into local initiatives, better housing, better maintenance, etc etc - it won't go into private landlords pockets and that is good in my opinion as it keeps the money as much as possible in the local economy and local area.


Scrap child benefit, a stupid benefit that can now by merged with the tax credits system, that will save 12.2 Billion as you wouldn't require a completely useless and archaic department to be still operating, wasting money. A plan that should be considered before cutting lower income benefits.


OMG simple solutions to these supposed problems espoused by this corrupt Tory government. All these things that would actually not affect the poor first and would still save money and improve life for the most needy.


But, I am too short sighted and trying to protect my manufactured situation, which I was too stupid to get myself into. Yeh I forgot, I am one person, I share the same air as you, I use them same sewer system as you, I may have even used the same £5 note as you.


You are no better than me because you earn more or class yourself as more sensible or responsible than me. And for those that desecrate my decision to have more children and think its laudable that it I was given money to do so.


https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Baby_bonus&redirect=no


Baby bonuses exist in many places to incentivise people to have children, the tax credits system and grants we received when we had our children give you some idea of the value placed on children. If you want to restrict the number of children born remove all benefits associated with having children.


You people forget that this system has been around for 16 years and has never once had a restriction as great as this on it. So people are given money to help raise children and then a few years down the line it is taken away from them with minimal warning, people have committed to finance agreements based on this income and I don't ever remember hearing on the news any particular details of tax credits being affected in benefit cuts. The first real detail happens when the budget is announced, that is to the normal person on the street who just listens to the BBC news stories and not much else.


It is typical of this government. Raise IPT by £12 per year but cut tax credits bills by hundreds and thousands per year. A Phased decline would have been more tolerable, if he can take 5 years to get to a decent living wage, he could of tapered the tax credit reduction over 5 years, even just frozen the whole lot as that would have stifled the normal inflation rises that we get and equal a real terms decrease in the benefit.


I will always wonder why at the same time of tax credits decreasing;


the personal allowance was raised, but benefitted only people not in the tax credits system


AND


the threshold for paying 40% was raised, benefitting only the people who don't claim tax credits.


It leaves a bitter and sour taste in the mouths of the people that claim these benefits


£75 cut for you Mr Benefit Claimant


£12 rise for you Mr High Earner


lest we not forget the abolition of the 55% tax rate for super high earners and the changes in Inheritance Tax that benefit the richest the most.


The system that prays more and more on the unemployed, disabled, working class but somehow represents an increase for the middle and upper classes.


I'm confused by that and that is my final word on the piece.

FBaby

Yes I do think you are attacking the wrong person here,

I personally haven't attacked you at a person, I have attacked your mindset and views on benefit entitlement.

you seem to be forgetting the perspective of all the people above you in income level that earn more than enough that is needed to a luxurious lifestyle, so much so that it become gluttonous and greedy.

Greedy? How about enjoying what you believe you deserve? You as a family chose to have 4 children with only you working. For whatever reasons, despite having a degree, putting you ahead to most people, you are still on a low income. You wife made the choice not to concentrate on work experience/education before having children.

I chose to finish my education and gain some reliable experience before deciding to have children. My partner and I decided to continue to work full-time despite the cost of childcare, despite the demand of the job/baby. We couldn't afford to stay where we were so moved to a cheaper area. That meant him continuing to travel for 5 hours each day to do his full-time job, which at the time, was only around the average UK salary (so huge cost travelling). I travelled 3 hours every day to go to mine from the time baby was 6 months old. I paid for the childminder. I too earn just a bit over the UK average. We managed to get a mortgage, but with all those costs, trust me, we were MUCH worse off than you. Add to this my baby who didn't sleep through the night until she was 3, waking up each night 2 to 3 times.

Life was hell. Exhausted, stressed, and little income left to enjoy any luxuries but.... all this paid off after 15 years and I now earn more than 3 times what I did then (despite having another child).

Now you tell me that people like me don't deserve their luxuries and that we are just greedy? Have you ever considered the sacrifices that these 'greedy people' had to make to be where they are? My situation is far from unusual but people like you don't see that side of it, they focus on what we have accomplished without looking at what we had to do to get there.

For years, people like me have felt frustrated with cuts that affected us only (I am worse off now despite a promotion than I was 3 years ago), so yes, it is satisfying that it is now the turn of those who have seen their income increasing every year so far.

You are also very short-minded from the comments I have read on here and you feel that you have all done the reliable and sensible things and you have it planned out and can combat issues when they arise. If it goes wrong for whatever reason, would you be happy to claim off the state or would you be a martyr and carry on regardless.

I have considered everything that could go wrong. I have considered what would happen if I was made redundant, sacked, fell ill or disabled and have ensured that in all those cases, I would be ok. How about you?

You people forget that this system has been around for 16 years and has never once had a restriction as great as this on it. So people are given money to help raise children and then a few years down the line it is taken away from them with minimal warning, people have committed to finance agreements based on this income and I don't ever remember hearing on the news any particular details of tax credits being affected in benefit cuts

And you think that people who don't rely on benefits never have sudden events in their lives that mean that they have to face a cut? Really? Never had to readjust their lives to match their lifestyle to their income? I shared how my DP and I had to do that ourselves when you first child was born for the only reason that we couldn't continue to afford where we lived.

I'm confused as to why you seem to have concluded that you will never be able to increase your salary. Everyone with half a brain and a lot of willingness can do so, so why not you with a degree and work experience behind you?

Londonsu

StixUK wrote: »

I come to the end of this debate within this thread now as I feel that we will all end up going around in circles and there will nothing to gain from either side.


I have not stated that your incomes should be taxed per se to bring it below my total income and to pay for me, that maybe the message I have conveyed though.


You have constantly criticised my choice to have 4 children, I accept that. But you think £33,000 is enough to live on. I challenge you to do it when you have no choice but to change it, if you can put yourself in that position.


Yes I do think you are attacking the wrong person here, I claim benefits but you seem to be forgetting the perspective of all the people above you in income level that earn more than enough that is needed to a luxurious lifestyle, so much so that it become gluttonous and greedy.


You are also very short-minded from the comments I have read on here and you feel that you have all done the reliable and sensible things and you have it planned out and can combat issues when they arise. If it goes wrong for whatever reason, would you be happy to claim off the state or would you be a martyr and carry on regardless.


Whilst the people at the very top of corporations are earning mega bucks, and yes paying some tax but getting a tax break that'll make them better off I will feel no guilt as we are supposed to be living in a fairer Britain.


The people who earn the money, work hard, pay tax and pay more tax than the people earning less in the country. That is how it should be because it is not that one person at the head of the corporation/business that made the money, it is all the people underneath them they aided them in that journey, they deserve a fair standard of living and the ability to live a lifestyle that is representative of an advanced first world economy.


It is not until you require the systems that are in place, that you realise how much the basic support network has been torn apart and you are treated like someone putting a burden on the system.


Where you find the Billions of pounds that are missing I do not know, but you don't reduce corporation tax, you don't increase the 40% tax threshold and you don't increase the living wage to something that is still 64p per/hour lower than the recommended living wage, you raise it immediately to the £7.84 that is required and you raise it every April by the recommended living wage as provided by the commission. Ban zero hour contracts. Increase the availability of full time jobs, especially in retail and the service markets so that employers pay more Employers NI.


A separate problem has been created by allowing pensioners to work past the normal retirement age as it has taken 300,000 jobs out of the economy that could have been provided to young workers and families that need a second income, not using it as a top up to their pension.


Bring back a higher tax rate for everyone earning over 100,000 as they don't really need that amount of money, they get their normal personal allowance like everyone else, that is classed as the minimum wage to live on, they get enough money, there is no need to earn past that amount apart from indulgence, this includes football salaries. I am sure there are plenty of workers that would do these above £100k jobs for less as they would be grateful for the income.


This does not remove their achievements in life, it supports a diluted spread of wealth, which can allow these people to earn enough money to get all the luxuries a human can require and it allows people at the other end of the scale to get some of those things but not to the same value. And it would also allow you, in the middle, to be better off as well.


I just hope that nothing happens to you that you criticise that means you have to rely on this system that is being slowly stripped away, but as it doesn't affect you, you cannot understand what impact it has.


You think I deserve to have my benefits cut fair enough, I think you deserve to open your mind to the possibility that not everyone is like you and that you seem to be attacking the people below you instead of the people above you. I'm a depressive and suffer from low self-esteem, so yes I defend myself profusely as sometimes the choices we make are not all conscious and they can be manipulated.


I am sure you are the type of people that suggest addiction is a choice not a medical imbalance in the brain, but hey free speech, you are entitled to those opinions.


Victimisation of the people on any kind of benefit was the election winner for the Tories, yet they held back the specifics until now. It is wrong on so many levels and so deceptive and deceitful, but they support free markets and privatisation. Free markets - hmmmm let me see, the banks lent millions of pounds to the sub-prime market completely unregulated and it destroyed the global economy, yet it was the fault of the poor people who have been pressurised over decades to aspire to home ownership and they couldn't control their desires because unfortunately it is human nature to acquire resources and become greedy and self-centered as you only protect your own. Oh it turned out they couldn't sustain/afford the repayments on their homes and they are getting repossessed/in arrears and of course it is their fault because they were stupid enough to believe that the dream would last forever.


Tell the banks and loan companies to stop taking into account any form of benefits completely and only decided loans and mortgages on earned income only...watch the growth of this economy disappear overnight, come on as benefits is not a guaranteed income anymore, it should never be taken into account for any kind of finance agreement.


Of course, lets keep people in rental properties from private landlords as the state should never rent out properties to the public. This way the people who have the access to enough money and liquidity can prosper from the people that can't afford to buy as renting is so expensive. So let's see a private individual or company will benefit from higher rents, hence why they will want the house building programme restricted, to choke supply, to increase prices, to boost profits.


Social housing is the sole biggest economic driver for the UK and should be encouraged. A boom in social housing with affordable rents will benefit everyone and allow people to feel a sense of pride and raise families with a sense of security that is shared by people that can afford to buy their own properties. This way any housing benefit that is due is paid to the local council who can then reinvest it into local initiatives, better housing, better maintenance, etc etc - it won't go into private landlords pockets and that is good in my opinion as it keeps the money as much as possible in the local economy and local area.


Scrap child benefit, a stupid benefit that can now by merged with the tax credits system, that will save 12.2 Billion as you wouldn't require a completely useless and archaic department to be still operating, wasting money. A plan that should be considered before cutting lower income benefits.


OMG simple solutions to these supposed problems espoused by this corrupt Tory government. All these things that would actually not affect the poor first and would still save money and improve life for the most needy.


But, I am too short sighted and trying to protect my manufactured situation, which I was too stupid to get myself into. Yeh I forgot, I am one person, I share the same air as you, I use them same sewer system as you, I may have even used the same £5 note as you.


You are no better than me because you earn more or class yourself as more sensible or responsible than me. And for those that desecrate my decision to have more children and think its laudable that it I was given money to do so.


https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Baby_bonus&redirect=no


Baby bonuses exist in many places to incentivise people to have children, the tax credits system and grants we received when we had our children give you some idea of the value placed on children. If you want to restrict the number of children born remove all benefits associated with having children.


You people forget that this system has been around for 16 years and has never once had a restriction as great as this on it. So people are given money to help raise children and then a few years down the line it is taken away from them with minimal warning, people have committed to finance agreements based on this income and I don't ever remember hearing on the news any particular details of tax credits being affected in benefit cuts. The first real detail happens when the budget is announced, that is to the normal person on the street who just listens to the BBC news stories and not much else.


It is typical of this government. Raise IPT by £12 per year but cut tax credits bills by hundreds and thousands per year. A Phased decline would have been more tolerable, if he can take 5 years to get to a decent living wage, he could of tapered the tax credit reduction over 5 years, even just frozen the whole lot as that would have stifled the normal inflation rises that we get and equal a real terms decrease in the benefit.


I will always wonder why at the same time of tax credits decreasing;


the personal allowance was raised, but benefitted only people not in the tax credits system


AND


the threshold for paying 40% was raised, benefitting only the people who don't claim tax credits.


It leaves a bitter and sour taste in the mouths of the people that claim these benefits


£75 cut for you Mr Benefit Claimant


£12 rise for you Mr High Earner


lest we not forget the abolition of the 55% tax rate for super high earners and the changes in Inheritance Tax that benefit the richest the most.


The system that prays more and more on the unemployed, disabled, working class but somehow represents an increase for the middle and upper classes.


I'm confused by that and that is my final word on the piece.

BIB about pensioners working after pension age is unfair and incorrect.


Firstly there is no guarantee that a young person will get a job vacated by a retiree, I know of at least 5 people who retired this year whose employers have decided not to replace them but to use it as an excuse to trim their workforce by absorbing the job..


Pensioners working and earning a wage pay more tax as their pension is added to their wages for tax purposes, the only thing they don't pay is NIC, but as a pension is based on the NICs they paid when they worked it would be unfair and discriminatory to make them pay unless their pension increases to reflect the extra NICs, for instance I will get £1.72 a week added to my future state pension for every year I pay full NICs until I retire (under current second state pension rules) so if I work after pension age and still pay NICs I would expect my pension to rise by the same amount.


And why the @@@@@ should someone be compelled to give up work once they reach a certain age, we have age discrimination laws in this country for a reason.


Pensioners cant win can they? retire on the pension they have worked and paid in for over 30 years to qualify then they are taking the bulk of the welfare budget whilst expecting young people to pay for it.


Continue working, continue paying in then they are stealing jobs from these same young people.

Blue22

StixUK wrote: »

I come to the end of this debate within this thread now as I feel that we will all end up going around in circles and there will nothing to gain from either side.

You have constantly criticised my choice to have 4 children, I accept that.

I hope my post wasn't interrupted as criticism, it certainly wasn't meant to be. I just wanted to highlight the perspective of a higher earning family.

As you say it was your 'choice' to have 4 children and you have said how much your children have enhanced your life but you have to accept that that choice comes at a price in terms of time, money and sacrifice.

I could of been a millionaire had I not had children but I wouldn't have changed it for the world.

StixUK wrote: »

But you think £33,000 is enough to live on. I challenge you to do it when you have no choice but to change it, if you can put yourself in that position.

Is £33000 enough to live on for a family of 6? I suppose other families of 6 could ask the same question. The unemployed family asking if £25000 is enough to live on or the family working 24hrs at minimum wage who ask if £29000 is enough. Would you want those families to have exactly the same as you? And if they did get the same would you go to work?

StixUK wrote: »

Scrap child benefit, a stupid benefit that can now by merged with the tax credits system, that will save 12.2 Billion as you wouldn't require a completely useless and archaic department to be still operating, wasting money. A plan that should be considered before cutting lower income benefits.

I have to disagree with this and it wouldn't save 12.2 Billion as you would still be paying it out to many in the merged benefit.

You seem to think that tax credits are your friend, but I would suggest from the frustration that comes through in your posts show that they are anything but and that they have left you effectively impotent (excuse the terminology)

You come across as a loving Father who wants to do your best for your family but isn't it tax credits that are stopping you? I'm sure you know, that even if you were to be given a pay rise of several thousand, you would only see a few hundred extra in your wallet because of the withdrawal of tax credits. You and millions of other families have become trapped by tax credits.

I would do the opposite to your suggestion, scrap child tax credits and merge them with child benefit. I would pay a fixed universal sum for every child (it could be capped at a certain number of children but that is a different debate) and that would be yours regardless of what you earn. You or your wife would then have the power to improve your families circumstances and the Chancellor would gain in tax revenue.

Good luck to you and your family

starM

Icequeen99 wrote: »

£2534

You will lose £1233 because of the change of the threshold and then 7% of your earnings over £6420.

Your new award is

Basic WTC 1960
Couple element 2010
30 hour 810
Child x 2 5560
Family 545

TOTAL 10885

Reduction for income (25000-3850)x48% = 10152 leaving entitlement of 733.

This year you should be getting around 3267.20.

IQ

Thanks for this. Does this mean from Apr 2015 I will get £56 every 4 wk?

It is a huge difference from £3267.20 to £733. Got knows how I will manage from Apr 2016.

bloolagoon

starM wrote: »

Thanks for this. Does this mean from Apr 2015 I will get £56 every 4 wk?

It is a huge difference from £3267.20 to £733. Got knows how I will manage from Apr 2016.

You are joking right about not managing?

evenasus

bloolagoon wrote: »

You are joking right about not managing?

Maybe their Buy To Let property rental income may help.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5231186