• Due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software, some users were "banned" when they tried to change their passwords at the end of February. This does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you were affected by this, please us viua the Contact us link in the footer.

UK To means test child benefit


DCon

Well-known member
Joined
May 5, 2009
Messages
5,901
The UK will not pay child benefit to earners above £44,000 a year, from 2013.

Any chance of FF/Greens doing something similar here?

The Chancellor said Britain can no longer afford universal benefits for the best-paid as it battles its budget deficit.

So from 2013, no household where anyone earns more than £44,000 a year will be eligible for child benefit.

"For higher rate taxpayers, we're going to withdraw this," he told ITV's Daybreak. "It's a tough but fair decision."

He added: "It's just not fair to ask someone who's on £15 or £20,000 a year to be paying for the child benefit of someone who's on £50,000 or even more."

"At any other time, I wouldn't do this. But Labour left us with a heck of a mess."

The Government is also looking at cutting other benefits that currently aren't means tested including winter fuel allowance, and free bus passes.
Child benefit to be withdrawn from middle classes - Telegraph
 


DCon

Well-known member
Joined
May 5, 2009
Messages
5,901
Bazza Andrews just on Newstalk says we need to "look at" child benefit payments in Ireland.

Says 2013 is 3 or 4 years away (?)
 

HarshBuzz

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 28, 2008
Messages
11,934
good, we should do it here too!

I'd lose 3600 p.a. if this was means tested but it seems like the fair thing to do - middle class families should not get this SW handout

bang, good saving there straight away.

Next on the block = all forms of property related tax relief
 

Bow tie

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 30, 2010
Messages
351
Jesus, all I need to hear this morning. Some one on 15k isn't paying my Child benefit, I am, out of my own tax take. After the benefit, I pay 19% tax.

It's also going to cause people to withdraw their children from childcare if you are within a certain band, as it will be more worth you while to stay at home. Then more jobs are lost in the childcare sector, and a certain proportion of the worker leaving jobs will not be backfilled. So, more people availing of benefits and even less tax take.

Finally, the UK also have good free healthcare system in the NHS, and properly subsidised childcare. If I can have both those, maybe I could manage this.
 

gijoe

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 26, 2010
Messages
15,377
It will not happen here because we just do not have the integrated tax and social welfare systems to do it. Plus it would act as an incentive to the self-employed to keep their incomes artifically low. I know that if I was earning in excess of €50k pa as a self employed person with 3 kids that I would cut my income in order to receive close to €6k pa in tax free money from the State.
 

euroboy

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 8, 2008
Messages
323
Whatever about means testing, the 3rd and subsequent child shouldn't get more than the first and second as is the case now.
 

orbit

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 5, 2008
Messages
701
The problem here is that because it's so generous, withdrawing it suddenly will push a lot of (otherwise productive) families over the edge. It'll have to be part of this 4 year framework business, where it is changed gradually.

The UK proposal (as reported this morning) is ridiculous though. A single cutoff at the high rate of tax creates an absurd anomaly where lots of people will be looking for salary cuts to get below the threshold.
 

HarshBuzz

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 28, 2008
Messages
11,934
The problem here is that because it's so generous, withdrawing it suddenly will push a lot of (otherwise productive) families over the edge. It'll have to be part of this 4 year framework business, where it is changed gradually.

The UK proposal (as reported this morning) is ridiculous though. A single cutoff at the high rate of tax creates an absurd anomaly where lots of people will be looking for salary cuts to get below the threshold.
I'm sure it's not beyind the wit of the extremely well-paid mandarins at the DoF to work out a solution :rolleyes:

the principle should be this though; middle-class families should not get SW handouts. SW handouts should only go to those that really need them. Start from that point and work out the details.
 

Cassandra Syndrome

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 23, 2009
Messages
16,908
Won't work. It should be done on a case by case basis and staged, not completely absolute on £44,000. Somebody earning £43,000 with children has no incentive to be more productive and earn more and that creates a double negative for society.

A couple earning £50,000 could be poorer than a couple with £20,000 if they are top heavy on debt obligations.

its just another example of the statist agenda to push us further down the road to serfdom.
 

orbit

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 5, 2008
Messages
701
I'm sure it's not beyind the wit of the extremely well-paid mandarins at the DoF to work out a solution :rolleyes:

the principle should be this though; middle-class families should not get SW handouts. SW handouts should only go to those that really need them. Start from that point and work out the details.
That principle is fine and dandy in theory. But at the end of the day, child benefit is money coming in the door to make ends meet, for most people.

I'm just trying to head off the inevitable nonsense, where people seem to "know" that it's actually being spent on private education, or post leaving cert holidays for the brats, or whatever.
 

HarshBuzz

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 28, 2008
Messages
11,934
That principle is fine and dandy in theory. But at the end of the day, child benefit is money coming in the door to make ends meet, for most people.

I'm just trying to head off the inevitable nonsense, where people seem to "know" that it's actually being spent on private education, or post leaving cert holidays for the brats, or whatever.
personally we just throw it in the pile

we don't need it and neither do the majority of families earning 50k+ a year. It's nice to have but we can't afford 'nice to have' any more.
 

HarshBuzz

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 28, 2008
Messages
11,934
Sigh! :roll:
why are you sighing? :confused:

it's either that or just chop it in half

personally I'd prefer to see it going to families that genuinely need it
 

orbit

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 5, 2008
Messages
701
why are you sighing? :confused:

it's either that or just chop it in half

personally I'd prefer to see it going to families that genuinely need it
if you were to stop CB for families (with 3 children) earning 50K, that is equivalent to cutting their pre-tax income by nearly 25%. Do you still think they don't need it?

[edit]Im not saying it shouldn't be cut. I'm just saying stop saying people don't need it.
[edit edit]I'm not even saying that it shouldn't be cut more for higher earners ...
 

Upfront_1979

New member
Joined
May 19, 2010
Messages
4
How do you define don't need it? Working out the sums and it looks like my Wife would have to give up work if we lose the CB payments. If this came in we would only be spending our money on food and bills. How does that benefit the economy? The only way this could be done is through a means test based on disposable income as otherwise those who have larger mortgages, negative equity etc, who are the ones most likely to have young kids, will be bearing the brunt of it.
 

HarshBuzz

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 28, 2008
Messages
11,934
if you were to stop CB for families (with 3 children) earning 50K, that is equivalent to cutting their pre-tax income by nearly 25%. Do you still think they don't need it?
define 'need'
 

Cassandra Syndrome

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 23, 2009
Messages
16,908
Its also a deterrant for couples to have kids. More statist tyranny.

It used to be 1 income per family was suffice to support a family comfortbly, now everyone has to slave for the elite.
 

Interista

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
4,145
Not to be pedantic, but when allowances will be cut off above a certain income level, is it accurate for the OP to refer to this as 'means testing'? I thought means testing involved studying each family's financial circumstances individually on a case by case basis, rather than simply setting a strict cut-off point.
 

timetochange

Active member
Joined
Jun 10, 2009
Messages
149
Website
www.facebook.com
why are you sighing? :confused:

it's either that or just chop it in half

personally I'd prefer to see it going to families that genuinely need it
You see I don't think Child benefit is a hand out, its an investment in our future, it shows we value children and we need children so they can work and pay taxes to cover pensions,health care when we all get to an age were we need it. its all part of the Horizontal equity
we cant do as the UK has announced today! we don't have the details! never mind the fact that in the UK they have free education, health care, childminding and tax credits

so when you compare CB here is not so great! its being used now to keep food on the table, bills paid for all families not just those on lower incomes or SW.
removing it from a certain group will have huge negative consequences for the economy! push working mothers (whom pay tax) out of work! they in turn remove their children from child care, job losses in that sector.
never mind the fact as we really going to make children pay for the mistakes of others.
I'm sure there are better ways of saving money, a fairer tax system for a start!
here is a paper out lining why Child benefit should not be touched!
PS I am not a high earner my DH is retraining with FAS so hopefully he can get a job soon. so I know that they will probably cut again like they did last year yet I still disagree with means testing or taxing CB
http://www.childrensrights.ie/files/ChildrensRightsAlliancePositionPaperChildBenefit130709.pdf
 

New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top