Minimum income floor

calcotti

Icequeen99 wrote: »

Some council schemes have duplicated the MIF rules, so it isn't necessarily just a by-product of using UC information. IQ

Interesting to know.

OP should check their local authority rules by looking up the scheme rules on their local authority website.

My local authority scheme says that for claimants in receipt of UC the CTR award will be based on the income used by UC. By implication therefore if the MIF is applied to UC this will impact CTR - even though there is no specific reference to MIF.

Bohomofo79

I hear you and am in no way expecting for the taxpayer to subsidise our business. As stated I have never claimed any benefits in my life and have paid taxes all of my adult life.

I just find it unfair that (in a backhanded way) local councils as well as NHS business authority are applying the MIF.

And what really winds me up is that neither organisation seem to understand my question whereas people on this forum understood me immediately.

I will escalate this via a complaint as I'm concerned that professionals are not able to understand nor answer a simple question and point me to the policy that contains the answer (I've checked their websites which does not refer to this issue).

tomtom256

The MIF is in effect an assumed income, as UC is a non-passported means tested benefit, most if not all agencies will use the assumed income as actual income just like UC does.

My understanding is that it was always intended to do this, to prevent the state subsidising people who are not actually earning anything from their self employment. but where stating they where for a large amount of tax credits.

calcotti

Bohomofo79 wrote: »

.I will escalate this via a complaint as I'm concerned that professionals are not able to understand nor answer a simple question and point me to the policy that contains the answer (I've checked their websites which does not refer to this issue).

All councils should have their CTR scheme rules on their website. These are very long legal documents. My local authority scheme runs to 300 pages. I would expect there to be something in the scheme about what information is used - but I haven’t the patience to look!

sheramber

Bohomofo79 wrote: »

I hear you and am in no way expecting for the taxpayer to subsidise our business. As stated I have never claimed any benefits in my life and have paid taxes all of my adult life.

I just find it unfair that (in a backhanded way) local councils as well as NHS business authority are applying the MIF.

And what really winds me up is that neither organisation seem to understand my question whereas people on this forum understood me immediately.



I will escalate this via a complaint as I'm concerned that professionals are not able to understand nor answer a simple question and point me to the policy that contains the answer (I've checked their websites which does not refer to this issue).

But you are expecting the taxpayer to support your business if you are claiming UC. Similarly, it is the taxpayer who is paying for subsidised NHS costs and subsidised council tax.

calcotti

Despite my earlier comment I have looked through my local scheme and the policy is clear

“(1) In determining the income of an applicant—
(a) who has, or
(b) who (jointly with his partner) has,
an award of universal credit the authority must, subject to the following provisions of this paragraph, use the calculation or estimate of the amount of the income of the applicant, or the applicant and his partner jointly (as the case may be), made by the Secretary of State for the purpose of determining the award of universal credit.”

Icequeen99

calcotti wrote: »

Despite my earlier comment I have looked through my local scheme and the policy is clear

“(1) In determining the income of an applicant—
(a) who has, or
(b) who (jointly with his partner) has,
an award of universal credit the authority must, subject to the following provisions of this paragraph, use the calculation or estimate of the amount of the income of the applicant, or the applicant and his partner jointly (as the case may be), made by the Secretary of State for the purpose of determining the award of universal credit.”

That's interesting - but i'm not sure it is entirely clear (or perhaps I am over thinking it). For example, would it be after the work allowance has been applied?

IQ

calcotti

Icequeen99 wrote: »

That's interesting - but i'm not sure it is entirely clear (or perhaps I am over thinking it). For example, would it be after the work allowance has been applied?IQ

I would read it as the headline amount but it’s an interesting question!

Icequeen99

calcotti wrote: »

I would read it as the headline amount but it’s an interesting question!

Some other legislation, like free school meals, links to the earned income amounts in certain parts of the UC Regs. This is less specific but arguably open to some interpretation.

IQ

Spoonie_Turtle

Icequeen99 wrote: »

That's interesting - but i'm not sure it is entirely clear (or perhaps I am over thinking it). For example, would it be after the work allowance has been applied?

IQ

Surely the income they count is the same regardless of other elements and work allowances? Those are separate parts of the UC calculation, as it were - the income is the same, but what they do with it (i.e. how much they take off, if any) is what differs. I'd have thought, anyway.

E.g. to meet the NHS criteria, one must have a net income of less than £400-and something, but work allowances and other elements don't affect that - *except*, of course, where the MIF has been applied and UC substitute that amount for the income part of the benefits calculation.


It's things like this and the 'every overpayment is recoverable even if it's due to a catalogue of official errors' that make me understand why UC is so controversial. 'Draconian' springs to mind sometimes, honestly!