MSE News: Autumn Budget 2021: Universal Credit cash boost confirmed for millions of workers

MSE_Helen_K

Millions of workers on Universal Credit will get a cash boost by 1 December, Chancellor Rishi Sunak has announced in his Autumn Budget. The taper rate, which is the amount Universal Credit payments are reduced by when you're in work, will fall from 63% to 55%. In addition, the amount households with children or a limited capacity for work can earn before they're hit by the taper rate will rise by £500/yr...

Read the full story:
'Autumn Budget 2021: Universal Credit cash boost confirmed for millions of workers but £20 uplift won't return'

If you haven’t already, join the forum to reply.

seatbeltnoob

I thought we're not supposed to talk about UC policy, my thread on UC taper was deleted for this reason.

Anyway, since you've brought it up.

I think the UC taper change is just giving with one hand and taking with another.

the £20 per week increase during covid (works around £86 per month) is effectively awarded to those in work under the revised taper system. Those who are not working will not benefit from it.

Can't really moan about this policy as someone who is on UC. I am quite surprised this is brought in by a conservative government.

They obviously expect some serious inflation going on in the next few months.

Spoonie_Turtle

seatbeltnoob said:

I thought we're not supposed to talk about UC policy

It's news relevant to the board and will help people understand why they suddenly get more UC, if they are affected by it. 

Not quite sure where you saw the invitation for discussing our views on the policy change.  (And let's be honest, most discussions that do happen here tend to be instigated by people unhappy with a policy and are rarely constructive - presumably part of the reason for the rule.)

Muttleythefrog

Another nail in the coffin for sick, disabled and out of work

calcotti

Muttleythefrog said:

Another nail in the coffin for sick, disabled and out of work

..and carers

seatbeltnoob

It's going to cost the treasury quite some for workers. You can have a couple, both working on minimum wage full time and still have a UC award.

Say mum and dad both work 35 hours on minumum wage bringing in £1358 a week. (take home works out £1229 pcm)

So after tax total income for both is £1229 EACH.

note: Universal credit website is down at the moment so I can't get the standard allowance with housing costs. IIRC it's around £350.

The difference in taper for this working family will mean they are £168.64 better off.

Nobody even campaigned to have the taper revised. I don't know what the situation is. People were lobbying to make the £80~ standard allowance increase permanent for all.

it's obvious the reduction in taper will help a lot of working people. It miight even give some UC to those who weren't entitled to any UC! It's going to cost the treasurey more money to increase payments to working UC credits.

But it's completely unfair to people who are unemployed, seeking work or on sickness benefits who just can't go out and earn a few bob to supplement their income.

As a self employed person who gets some universal credit, I can easily earn a bit more money to help pay for christmas by doing extra jobs. If I was a parapalegic I couldn't do anything and I would have to make ends meet by doing without central heating for a few hours or skipping meals.

Spoonie_Turtle

seatbeltnoob said:

As a self employed person who gets some universal credit, I can easily earn a bit more money to help pay for christmas by doing extra jobs. If I was a parapalegic I couldn't do anything and I would have to make ends meet by doing without central heating for a few hours or skipping meals.

What an utterly bizarre (and thoroughly wrong) assumption.  May I refer you to people such as Arthur Williams, Sophie Morgan, Dame Tanni Grey-Thompson, Ade Adepitan, Frank Gardner, oh, and the farmer in our village who became paralysed last year and still works on the farm now that he has suitable wheels.  Far from 'can't do anything'.

*I'm not holding these people up as an example of 'every paraplegic person can definitely work' because everyone is different, but rather to show that no condition or injury automatically leaves people completely incapable.

calcotti

seatbeltnoob said:

Nobody even campaigned to have the taper revised. 

Many organisations have said the taper rate is too high ever since it was introduced. Even Ian Duncan Smith, the prime architect of UC, has always said it was too high but the rate was imposed by George Osborne.

kaMelo

Spoonie_Turtle said:

seatbeltnoob said:

As a self employed person who gets some universal credit, I can easily earn a bit more money to help pay for christmas by doing extra jobs. If I was a parapalegic I couldn't do anything and I would have to make ends meet by doing without central heating for a few hours or skipping meals.

What an utterly bizarre (and thoroughly wrong) assumption.  May I refer you to people such as Arthur Williams, Sophie Morgan, Dame Tanni Grey-Thompson, Ade Adepitan, Frank Gardner, oh, and the farmer in our village who became paralysed last year and still works on the farm now that he has suitable wheels.  Far from 'can't do anything'.

*I'm not holding these people up as an example of 'every paraplegic person can definitely work' because everyone is different, but rather to show that no condition or injury automatically leaves people completely incapable.

I couldn't agree more, in fact hopefully this is one positive to come out of the pandemic.
There is a labour shortage, employers are going to have to widen their view when looking for new talent and maybe look upon disabled people more favourably than they have done when considering applications for jobs.

Many disabled people are very capable, qualified and want to work, the pandemic has proven that given the right circumstances, for example those with mobility problems, remote working is a viable option.

Of course not everyone can work but  I don't see how helping those in work a bit more is a "Nail in the coffin" for those who can't. It's not a zero sum game. People live complex lives and one policy change can have a positive or negative effect depending upon your circumstances. For those in the groups mentioned earlier there is extra support available over and above the standard rate. It will never be enough, it never has been and never will be but the suggestion that helping working people is detrimental to those who can't is just not correct.


.

sammyjammy

calcotti said:

seatbeltnoob said:

Nobody even campaigned to have the taper revised. 

Many organisations have said the taper rate is too high ever since it was introduced. Even Ian Duncan Smith, the prime architect of UC, has always said it was too high but the rate was imposed by George Osborne.

Thats right, the taper was never supposed to be so high, this is one of the reasons why IDS resigned from SoS for DWP when they upped the taper to save money which is one of the things that turned it from Welfare reform to what it is now

NedS

sammyjammy said:

calcotti said:

seatbeltnoob said:

Nobody even campaigned to have the taper revised. 

Many organisations have said the taper rate is too high ever since it was introduced. Even Ian Duncan Smith, the prime architect of UC, has always said it was too high but the rate was imposed by George Osborne.

Thats right, the taper was never supposed to be so high, this is one of the reasons why IDS resigned from SoS for DWP when they upped the taper to save money which is one of the things that turned it from Welfare reform to what it is now

Absolutely. The whole design premise of UC (besides simplifying the benefit system by rolling 6 benefits into 1) was to financially encourage and reward work, something which the previous "legacy" benefits (JSA) failed hopelessly at.

UC does that, and now it does it even better, so I consider it a very welcome change