Minimum wage

HornetSaver

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Why should a Company be ashamed to say that something is unaffordable?

It shouldn't, provided that the statement is true.

wolvoman

Mistermeaner wrote: »

- An individual who games the system as much as possible to maximise their personal gain; e.g. a 'michaels' who for anyone who isn't aware uses salary sacrifice to maximise his pension contributions and minimise taxable income such as to maximise his receipt of in work benefits primarily based on the fact he has kids (e.g. child benefit, free meals, WTC etc)

I'm one of these - at least for 2015-16 anyway.

Having said that I just paid £40k in SDLT, so the government are still getting their fair share from me.

mwpt

wolvoman wrote: »

I'm one of these - at least for 2015-16 anyway.

Having said that I just paid £40k in SDLT, so the government are still getting their fair share from me.

I am mostly ignorant on how working tax credits and child tax credits and so on actually work, but I was under the impression that if you had a certain amount of "money" you were no longer eligible. Am I incorrect on this, or if not, I'm wondering how someone who just bought a £970000 house can possibly be justified receiving any form of benefits?

mwpt

mwpt wrote: »

I am mostly ignorant on how working tax credits and child tax credits and so on actually work, but I was under the impression that if you had a certain amount of "money" you were no longer eligible. Am I incorrect on this, or if not, I'm wondering how someone who just bought a £970000 house can possibly be justified receiving any form of benefits?

Anyone know? If I have assets worth that amount of money, could I claim WTC and CTC etc if I minimise my monthly income?

michaels

mwpt wrote: »

Anyone know? If I have assets worth that amount of money, could I claim WTC and CTC etc if I minimise my monthly income?

afaik your ppr is never considered as an asset for any benefit entitlement calculation (except for residential care for the elderly). Also tax credits are not capital assessed but when replaced by uc they will be.

Thrugelmir

HornetSaver wrote: »

It shouldn't, provided that the statement is true.

I'm a firm believer that good employers will value their employees. As it's the employees that make the business successful not just the owners.

HornetSaver

Thrugelmir wrote: »

I'm a firm believer that good employers will value their employees. As it's the employees that make the business successful not just the owners.

I agree.

Unfortunately, not all successful businesses are good employers (though for balance let me say that many are, including some of those that employ a lot of people at the lower end of the pay scale), and not all good employers are successful businesses.