How the hell do the “poor” survive???!?

Rest assured, TJ will be along soon to set you straight on that one.

poly – Member
I don’t think they have anyway of “joining” my tax records with my wifes (which then leads to a question of how they will police the Child Benefit claim?).

The tax system used to work on the basis of couples and transferable allowances. However, that opens up a whole new can of worms regarding the definition of what is a couple.

But tbh as we are both self-employed we can make sure that we earn just below whatever the right ‘amount’ is, it’d be stupid to do anything different.

Yeah I am seeing that scenario evermore clearly these days – it is quite easy to shift money out of ‘profit’ to minimise tax exposure and to get more benefits.

I feel like I am doing something wrong but at the end of the day why not? It is 100% legal.

One thing that is coming out of this thread is that more money does not equal more rich.

Another is that those who strive for more money above everything else are very poor.

I do object to the fact that their next door neighbours both earning £40k each (family income of £80k, with two personal tax allowances deducted from it meaning a take home pay of roughly 60k per annum) will still be entitled to the benefit. That probably seems even more wrong to his neighbour where one parent earns £80k and takes home just 53k…

Ah – it is just good old politics of envy then? I have huge sympathy for the poor bloke only taking home £53k – how will he survive without CB? Where do I send the food parcels?

pretty sure that more money does mean more rich SBZ. Anyway lets test this scientifically why not give me say £500 per month and I will let you know if I feel richer and you can let me know if you feel poorer…i am on the edge of my seat with excitement to just know the answer

A shame, as a lot of the time he[TJ] gets stick for saying things which are right in the wrong way.

True but plenty just want to attack him DS does seem to be a bit upset and trying to argue for not much reason and dragging the thread all over the place to achieve this..i had no idea the kill file thing upset you so much

Reducing consumption is one way of reducing CO2 emission, but by no means the only way, killing half the population is another.

Jesus wept you got worse would we reduce C02 because 50% use less than 100% you are just arguing about method to reduce consumption now.
DS you are abright fella why you doing this

Food for a family of 4, or maybe more accurately a weekly supermarket shop (inc cleaning stuff, bog roll, whatever) probably about £100 a week.

i reckon circ £50 tbh but veg is so much cheaper than meat, cheeses etc and you can never eat out

How the hell do the “poor” survive???!?

They do what you do but with less money

I’ve just done the maths and my 40% taxable earnings+payrise won’t add up to the £1752.40 CB I will receive.
So, in order to be better off financially I’ll have to ask the boss to cut my salary and NOT give me a payrise.

I love this country.

how terrible to be trapped in poverty with the other top 10% of earners. At least you dont need to live like stig and in a dump like those less well of than you who cannot afford a 1 k mortgage , every cloud eh 🙂

No, you’re right. I’ll just slog my guts out like normal for a pay freeze until the kids turn 18 while RPI and interest rates all go up without me. Fun fun fun.

At least you dont need to live like stig and in a dump

Not even Daz would get his whites that white if he lived in a dump…

so what you are saying then is that by having less money you will be less well off…what a revelation this is to you and most forum users.

Yes it is poor for you obviously but you cant plead poverty though i would not expect you to be happy about this

So, in order to be better off financially I’ll have to ask the boss to cut my salary and NOT give me a payrise.

Can’t you do a salary sacrifice? Probably want to pay the extra into a pension.

Ah – it is just good old politics of envy then? I have huge sympathy for the poor bloke only taking home £53k – how will he survive without CB? Where do I send the food parcels?

Hold on, isn’t *this* politics of envy?

I’m not trying to plead poverty. I’m saying I resent the fact that in order to keep up with RPI and the current fiscal status quo I’ll have to ask for a pay cut.

I’m selling the kids… problem solved, and I’d be better off all round.

Mudshark – way ahead of you

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/specialist/cycles_bus_passes.pdf

unfortunately the big cheese isn’t 🙁

Hold on, isn’t *this* politics of envy?

😀

Though strictly speaking it’s not – I’m not suggesting the rules should be changed to penalise him just because he’s better off, without there being any benefit to other people.

Can I just do a quick summary for those who don’t get it. The aim of this change is to save money (which could be used to support the less well off). Not to penalise people who earn more. Applying it on a means tested basis to all those who take home more as a family than a single earner higher tax payer would cost more to implement than the extra amount it would bring in over doing it this way. Therefore it would save less money. Dual earners who are both just below the threshold get lucky.

Maybe should just be counted as taxable income.

Can I just do a quick summary for those who don’t get it. The aim of this change is to save money (which could be used to support the less well off). Not to penalise people who earn more. Applying it on a means tested basis to all those who take home more as a family than a single earner higher tax payer would cost more to implement than the extra amount it would bring in over doing it this way. Therefore it would save less money. Dual earners who are both just below the threshold get lucky.

Aracer, thats about right (although not just those just below the threshold two people on 25k each are still better off than one on 50!).

AFAIK they haven’t actually worked out how to implement this yet in a practical way that would be any cheaper than having a single houshold income threshold, so it remains to be seen if HMRC for the first time ever can make a process efficient and effective and get a net saving!

The chancellor said today: “But the principle that it’s not fair to ask someone who’s earning say £20- or 25,000 to pay for someone who’s on £80- or £100,000 to get child benefit is one that I think is very important.” Ignoring the worrying fact that the chancellor seems to have no grasp on the fact that the lower earner pays considerably less tax than the higher earner and would be entitled to the same level of CB – his ‘political point’ makes sense. But under the “new rules” an household earning 45k will be subsidising one earning 80k, indeed so will a household with two minimum wage earners (a combined income (before tax) of 25k per annum). he didn’t reply to my letter pointing this out when he first announced it so I doubt he cares now either!

two people on 25k each are still better off than one on 50!

They already are, under the current tax system.

The tax system used to work on the basis of couples and transferable allowances. However, that opens up a whole new can of worms regarding the definition of what is a couple.

Druidh, there were some murmurs about reintroducing such an approach. Interestingly the benefits systems has managed to overcome the issue of when are a “couple” a “couple”, but of course that is usually about reducing payments because someone’s spouse/partner is expected to support them rather than rely on the government.

I’ve just done the maths and my 40% taxable earnings+payrise won’t add up to the £1752.40 CB I will receive.
So, in order to be better off financially I’ll have to ask the boss to cut my salary and NOT give me a payrise.

Yes, for one year maybe, but next year when you get another payrise will you not be better off if it’s that close for you?

Had the same discussion with my missus, she’d be ‘worse off’ for a year, then better off for the rest of her working life…

So, in order to be better off financially I’ll have to ask the boss to cut my salary and NOT give me a payrise.

That’s the key here, isn’t it? How would you feel morally?

The chancellor said today: “But the principle that it’s not fair to ask someone who’s earning say £20- or 25,000 to pay for someone who’s on £80- or £100,000 to get child benefit is one that I think is very important.”

Whoa, stop there!

Ok lets actually read the he’s just said.

That a low-earning tax-payer should not be subsidising a higher earning tax-payer.

One example leaps out, but they’ll be hundreds more; what about winter fuel allowance – currently paid to 500,000 higher-rate paying pensioners?

Yes, for one year maybe, but next year when you get another payrise will you not be better off if it’s that close for you?

Had the same discussion with my missus, she’d be ‘worse off’ for a year, then better off for the rest of her working life…
Or indeed the current trend is to lower the 40% tax threshold (to offset the intended plan to get the personal allowance up to £10k) in which case even without subsequent payrises you may cross the boundary. Increased pension contributions, childcare vouchers or a new bike on B2W etc might be away to temporarily mitigate the effect.

br – yes but high earning pensioners typically vote tory.

I have to say I didn’t realise winter fuel allowance was paid to people overseas until today. WTF – we are giving away money to people who don’t even want to live here!

I’ve just done the maths and my 40% taxable earnings+payrise won’t add up to the £1752.40 CB I will receive.
So, in order to be better off financially I’ll have to ask the boss to cut my salary and NOT give me a payrise.

I love this country.

warning, this is a shameless troll:

would that be the same country that’s been giving you £1752/year to help pay for your kids despite the fact that you’re already doing quite nicely for yourself?

that country?

why not be grateful that you’ve been allowed to ride the gravy train for so long?

or, maybe you’re right, you deserve even more help, why not try life in sweden?

(it’s very nice)

willard – Member

I’m just going to take issue with the definition of the word “elite”. To be honest, top 10% doesn’t really sound elite. Top 1% sounds more elite. Like championship compared to premier league, or world’s best armies or something.

Also, how do you measure richness? Is it disposable income or income earned? If you took on a big mortgage to ensure your wife and kids had a permanent roof over their heads, and that took up a large share of your [sole] income, would that make you rich? Even if you couldn’t afford to go on holidays, or drive anything but a beat up fourth hand car that you had to fix yourself?

I’m willing to bet you would not feel rich in that situation. Level maybe. Struggling possibly. Not rich.

This is me…I don’t feel rich by any means. Perhaps if you live outside the South East or bought a house in the mid ’90s, yes. But I also don’t feel I deserve to receive benefits.

The chancellor said today: “But the principle that it’s not fair to ask someone who’s earning say £20- or 25,000 to pay for someone who’s on £80- or £100,000 to get child benefit is one that I think is very important.”

The chancellor is a **** moron. Someone earning 80-100k a year is subsidising pretty much everyone else through their higher rate tax contributions.