Chat Forum
[closed]
Child benefit cuts
-
Posted 1 year ago #
-
Isn't it from 2013 and I hope they don't assume something like 40k joint income is high earners.
Posted 1 year ago # -
I am just inside the high rate, by a wafer thin mint, wife is no where near. I guess we loose it.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Isn't it from 2013 and I hope they don't assume something like 40k joint income is high earners.
"Child benefit is to be axed for higher rate taxpayers", looks like another lopsided approach.....
If that's correct then 2 earning 30k each will keep it but one earning 45k loses it. Weren't they spouting something yesterday about the distortion of benefits being outrageous? (?sp)
Posted 1 year ago # -
Having children is a lifestyle choice - why should those who earn decent money get benefits because they've chosen to have offspring?
Posted 1 year ago # -
I'm really not very au fait with tax bands and higher and lower rates.. but I am aware that a truly low income family is on less than 10k joint earnings..
I always though that the benefits system was to help those that are most in need...?
Posted 1 year ago # -
Does a single earner on 45k a year really need benefits.? Or two folks on 30k each.?
Posted 1 year ago # -
Does a single earner on 45k a year really need benefits.? Or two folks on 30k each.?
**** yes, Its my slush fund for shiny bits
Posted 1 year ago # -
aP - Member
Having children is a lifestyle choice - why should those who earn decent money get benefits because they've chosen to have offspring?So they can raise the future generation that will fund your pension/healthcare when you're older maybe??
Posted 1 year ago # -
Does a single earner on 45k a year really need benefits.? Or two folks on 30k each.?
Yes, it helps to pay the school fees (puts on hard hat, hides behind sofa).Posted 1 year ago # -
Tory chancellor in redistritutative tax measure shocker.....
Posted 1 year ago # -
It's about time they scrapped it entirely...
Posted 1 year ago # -
Poor you, on just under 44K a year. Isn't that nearly double the average national wage, and 50% more than the average family income in the UK.
I mean you're kids a going to starve right?
Posted 1 year ago # -
Mumsnet will probably implode today.
Posted 1 year ago # -
BBC - "He confirmed the cut would hit homes with a single or two high earners. But families with two parents on modest incomes - which might add up to over £44,000 - will keep the benefit."
aP - Member
Having children is a lifestyle choice - why should those who earn decent money get benefits because they've chosen to have offspring?Fail. Who is going to look after you when you're old? Who will do your job once you retire?
Posted 1 year ago # -
Having children is a lifestyle choice
Having an espresso machine is a lifestyle choice, having children is pretty much fundamental to the survival of the human race
Posted 1 year ago # -
When I was earning a little over the limit, I certainly wouldn't have missed it.
I've got two children, and if you're going to hide behind the 'doing your bit for the human race' thing, you're a fool.
It is a lifestyle choice. Driven by biology I'll grant you, but its still a choice.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Having an espresso machine is a lifestyle choice, having children is pretty much fundamental to the survival of the human race
But keeping nike on their feet and driving them to school in the back of a bmw is a lifestyle choice. earning 45k is bloody well off and benefits for those earning that much is just buying votes, I am astounded that the tories are cutting middle class payouts, but its the only sensible thing they have come up with so far.
Posted 1 year ago # -
based on current benefit rates, first child entitles everyone to £1055.60, any other child is worth £696.80 per year.
Why high rate taxpayers need this government subsidy is beyond me!I do think they should have made it a gross household income threshold, like tax credits. Anyone applying for tax credits has to supply household income figures so its information already collected. Not sure on the limit though, as it will always seem unfair to those just above it
Posted 1 year ago # -
regardless of high/low tax & lifestyle arguments I cant help they are tragetting the wrong people
They should remove it completely for the 3rd + child
Its the people that have never worked a day in their life and pop out another kid just so they can get more benifits they should go after
There is a family round our way with 9 kids, they rake in about £55k in benifits and have 2 huge council houses between themDid seem a hasty and ill thought out announcement though
2x£43k or 1x£45k - who gets, who doesnt?Posted 1 year ago # -
Having an espresso machine is a lifestyle choice, having children is pretty much fundamental to the survival of the human race
I've got two children, and if you're going to hide behind the 'doing your bit for the human race' thing, you're a fool.
It is a lifestyle choice. Driven by biology I'll grant you, but its still a choice.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Did seem a hasty and ill thought out announcement though
2x£43k or 1x£45k - who gets, who doesnt?I would almost guarantee this will not fly. Equivalent to a pay drop of greater than £3k to a higher rate taxpayer with 2 children. Now the family with both parents at work are doubly advantaged over a family with one parent at home, tax break and child benefit.
Posted 1 year ago # -
There is a family round our way with 9 kids, they rake in about £55k in benifits and have 2 huge council houses between them
I don't imagine they have much of a life, do you?
Posted 1 year ago # -
Yet another, work hard, stress yourself out to do better than others and you get a kick in the nads for your trouble. Hell, why doesnt everyone just give up work completely, and let the motivated suckers pay the bill. All I hear about are dodgers who earn all their money tax free cash in hand, have two council flats as they dont declare themsleves together, one of which they sub let and have now just bought at a massive discount. Ive been child free for 40 years, and have just had my first 4 weeks ago. Have always been employed or tried to make own businesses work, paid an absolute mint in tax, now am self employed and pay an obscene amount in tax every month, and due to health problems, we had to have IVF, which we had to pay for. Dental treatment I have to pay for, as no dentists around will take on NHS patients. Ante natal classes, none available in the evenings for people who actually work for a living, so had to pay a private midwife to take us through the process.
Your right I dont really need the money, but its the principle of the thing that galls me, just another reason to under achieve. Like the great unwashed of this country need any more excuses to do that!
Rant over, coffee.......
Posted 1 year ago # -
Come on now people! Not so long ago there were howls of protest that Gordon Brown was "spending money we don't have" on unnecessary benefits.
Now you have George Osborne exercising the fiscal responsibility you all demanded and what do we hear - howls of protest. Presumably, the idea was they'd stop spending money on everybody else, rather than you.
Bear in mind that George will feel your pain - they've banned champagne at this year's Conservative party conference.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Your right I dont really need the money,
This.
Posted 1 year ago # -
[I once met a black man] Dave will suffer too, he has kids
Him & Gideon are sharing your suffering
Posted 1 year ago # -
Fail. Who is going to look after you when you're old? Who will do your job once you retire?
Have you ever been to a nursing home? your carer will be a filipino. You find very few brits willing to work for the money in a care home, and next time you winge about how expenisve the fees are, think what they would be if the staff actually earnt a living wage.
As for when you retire, probably be outsourced to China or India, so no need to worry.
Posted 1 year ago # -
I'm really not very au fait with tax bands and higher and lower rates.. but I am aware that a truly low income family is on less than 10k joint earnings..
Well since that's barely minimum wage for one..., it certainly is truly low.
Posted 1 year ago # -
@ scottyjohn - are you suggesting the reason I earn less than 45k a year is down to laziness?
Posted 1 year ago # -
It doesn't matter who you vote for, if you are on an average, or slightly above average salary, expect to bear the brunt of tax rises - ALWAYS!
This is because people like you form the overwhelming majority of people who pay into the revenue's coffers.
People with high incomes don't feel any significant pain, but policy usually favours them and they can afford accountants to help mitigate their liabilities. As wealthy people are usually high acheivers, they are well equiped to swerve paying and as they are a minority, the revenue generally leave them alone. E.G. Loosing child benefit when you earn £100k is an irrelevance!
This issue is all about how much you have left each month for discretionary spend. A poor person has pretty much none, a middle earner has a little and a top earner has masses. As percentage, the loss of a benfit for a middle earner has a big impact. Neither of the other two groups sees any difference. The low earner sees no change and the high earner sees no change worth considering.
It's those at the bottom of the scale who won't ever have to stump up. They will qualify for everything. There's no incentive for these people to save money or even to keep working. Take a family on a low income in a small dwelling. If they are working, they won't have much spare cash, they won't be able to pay much in tax, but they have kids to educate, need medical care etc just like any other family do. Then imagine the breadwinner loosing his job. They'll get their rent/mortgage interest paid, council tax paid and umpteen benefits bringing their income up to the same (or more) than when the household was economically productive.
A third of your taxes goes on this!
Tax is never fair and middle earners will always have to pay more than their fair share. What I vote for is a party that avoids piling on debt for wasteful non-commercial causes and therefore higher taxes - simple!
Posted 1 year ago # -
work hard, stress yourself out to do better than others
Why would you make that choice!? Work hard to provide for your future and family maybe...
At least your choice seems to have given you a brilliant outlook on life though... I'm guessing that you take your coffee very strong with no milk and some salt..
Posted 1 year ago # -
Im not making suggestions about anyone in particular, but from my side of the fence, there are elements in society who take the p*ss.
I am aware that I have been very lucky in a lot of ways, and that without that luck I may have been earning far less than I am currently. Although my business runs on 3 months contracts, so I could easily be in trouble in a few months.Posted 1 year ago # -
This is because people like you form the overwhelming majority of people who pay into the revenue's coffers.
I think you will find that far more people earn less than 45k than above that amount, and pay far more in tax and ni contributions as a group.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Sorry all, but we get Child Benefit for our 2 kids, the bottom line is we don't need it and therfore shouldn't get it.
Would be happy to see this go to more deserving places
Posted 1 year ago #
Topic Closed
This topic has been closed to new replies.
