Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11464300

For the lazy: Households where there is a parent who earns over about £44,000 and is in the 40% tax bracket or higher will no longer receive child benefit from 2013. It will not affect homes where no-one pays the 40% regardless of combined income.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

Sounds reasonable to me.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

Bah punctuation. Corrected :blush:

It was one of those 'Uncle Jack' phrases...

Agreed - obviously not ideal but in the current climate perfectly reasonable.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

When I heard this on the radio this morning, there was no indication that it would be based on the 40% tax limit, so I wasn't overly impressed as 44k isn't that difficult to reach for a combined salary (although I don't think that myself and Mrs Nug are quite there, due to her working part-time).

Having actually read a little more of the detail, I don't particularly have a massive problem with it, although I am aware that this may be because I'm not affected :shrug:

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

I don't think the proposed idea is arguable. It's common sense more than anything and it is the right thing to do.

As for the rest of the benefit reform, I don't know enough yet to comment. I don't see how for the time being it'll work. There's going to be 2 systems, one for the old claimants and one for the new, the computer systems for this sounds like a nightmare and the hassle for the staff to implement it sounds crazy. Still, we'll have to wait and see really.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

So couples who earn just under the 40% are exempt even though they could have a joint income of £70,000?

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

Just one point - how are they going to cope with people who change circumstance i.e. lose/change jobs, single parents getting married etc...

It could mean a lot of paperwork to keep tabs on the changes

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

Yeah it seems that way, doesn't seem right/fair really does it. They should do it as a joint income at a proposed cap / means tested.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

Means testing would wipe the savings out making the entire exercise pointless. The whole point is not doing means testing.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

Yeah I can understand that, and I can understand that someone on 44k isn't going to miss this benefit at all anyway, so it is just nit picking I suppose. A couple with 75k+ income keeps the amount but someone on 45+ won't is going to be argued even though it doesn't mean much to the people claiming it. Just saying it looks a bit odd that's all.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

With both parents working and earning to that level, chances are they will have child care costs - effectively contributing to employing someone else. So not worth worrying about.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

I would never have complained or thought it odd if any government had done this years ago..Always seemed crazy that higher earners got this benefit.

Though of course receiving it was one way that some stay at home mothers got their NI paid whilst they were full time carers for their children.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

Best thing I have heard from a Government for some time.

and a promise that no one will be better off on benefits than in work will be hard to achieve but if they do it - I might just vote Tory for the first time ever.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

Not sure how it currently works or how they're planning to do this but might continuing to pay CB to all with appropriately aged children then clawing it back via the tax system (as they do with benefits in kind from employers) from higher rate tax payers be the easiest thing to do? The mechanisms for so doing are already there and fluctuations in earnings could be allowed for very efficiently.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

Personally i think if someone is earning more than 44k a year then they don't need to claim benefits as they're already earning enough, those of us that still work our ass off for just 18k need them because we're only on 18k, so anyone moaning that they wont get benefits and they on 45k, do you want to swap jobs with me?

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

I wonder if they will finally see sense (and financial sense) and scrap the Road Fund Licence ?

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

It's not that black and white, wealth obviously is a combination of both income and outgoings, and the opinion here has universally been that it's a good idea.

I would swap jobs with you sadly 18k before tax wouldn't pay the rent on my 2 bedroom, living room barely large enough for the sofas and kitchen, no dining room, maisonette.

If you've a problem with the amount of money you make maybe your time would be better spent doing something to increase this rather than complaining about those with higher incomes, many of whom would have come from low paid homes and worked their way to where they are now.

Just a friendly suggestion from someone who at one point was doing 17-18 hour days door to door to get to this apparently super-wealthy 44k mark.

You're obviously not that impoverished and in need of welfare from the state on your 18k/year if you can afford 50Mbit, 2 V+ boxes, etc, so you get my point about it being about more than incomes.

---------- Post added at 10:29 ---------- Previous post was at 10:28 ----------

I am lost as to what that would do to bring down the fiscal deficit, could you explain?

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

In fact it is a joint income of nearly ninety-thousand pounds.

---------- Post added at 11:05 ---------- Previous post was at 10:31 ----------

I have a project manager who is due a raise. It will take him just over the high rate tax bracket. He and his wife have four children, one is at infant school, the second eldest is at nursery and the twins, who were born in April, are quite obviously at home being cared for by their mother. The raise he will have will bring him to about forty-five thousand pounds a year including the BIK values. It represents a raise of about three thousand pounds a year. A welcome addition to his income, now that he has a bigger than expected family. Now, he will lose over three thousand pounds a year in child benefit. He will be better off not having a raise at all. On the other hand, I have another PM who earns a little bit less; about forty thousand pounds and he is married to deputy headteacher who works in a junior school, she earns approximately thirty three thousand pounds and they three children, giving them a joint income of seventy-three thousand pounds a year. They get to keep their child benefit although, together, they earn more money than the first PM and his wife. Where is the fairness in that?

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

It does seem strange that joint income is not taken into consideration, as does the fact that there's no tapering. I'm guessing that the reason is that administration is a lot easier and therefore cheaper this way.

On balance, I think this is a good move though.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

[QUOTE=Flyboy;35103118]In fact it is a joint income of nearly ninety-thousand pounds.[COLOR="Silver"]

£37,401 * 2 is not 90,000, or wasn't when I went to school.

Linky.. http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/rates/it.htm

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

The cutoff is £44k, not £37k.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

So is it 44k or 40% as it anit roughly anything.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

I think the point of this is to try to be fair to 99% of the population - there will always be exceptions.

If we don't do anything because of outliers/exceptions, we'll never do anything (and I am not being specific to Child Benefit)

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

It would also very much depend on tax allowances. £37,401 + £6,475 = £43,876

---------- Post added at 11:38 ---------- Previous post was at 11:37 ----------

Seeing as well over one million families will be affected by this, it is a lot more than just one per cent of the population.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

Affected, or affected negatively?

OK, then 4-5%.......

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

I, the same as Ignit have worked my sweaty little fingers to the bone, doing 12-16hr shifts on top of the education / quals I needed to grab a fair share of the pie, and I don't see as a one earner that I should be out of pocket while my slightly less paid work mate and his misses who jointly earn loads more are not..

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

The only reason this wasn't done earlier was political with parties not wishing to lose votes from mainly middle-class areas, often marginal for both Labour and Conservative. I always thought the argument that it guaranteed an income for mothers verses abusive/negligent husbands was hogwash - this move confirms it.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

I think you'll find it is closer to twenty per cent of families.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

What's your definition of a family? I think there's a few more than 5 million families in the UK.

Edit: According to the Beeb it'll affect 1.2 out of the 7.7 million families currently receiving child benefit which is ~15%.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

Well that is hardly the five per cent mentioned by Wayfair and fifteen is most certainly closer to twenty than five is. ;)

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

About time, but why wait till 2013? 2011 sounds better to me.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

Yes, but it's 15% of families currently receving CB which is not the entire population. So 5% of the population seems a fair estimate ;)

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

A few years ago the inland revenue made a mistake with one of my employee's PAYE. He was paying higher rate tax when they weren't taking account of certain allowances. This went unnoticed for about two years. If they make mistakes like this again, will they repay unpaid child benefit as well? I doubt it.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

That is a pretty absurd confluence of events you have concocted though. :erm: In the event that someone is mistakenly taxed at 40%, and somehow doesn't notice he is being taxed at 40% for two years, and is claiming child benefit which is then stopped (surely that might rise a red flag in the reduced salary doesn't?) then you hypothetically suggest that benefit won't be paid?

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

Actually, it's pretty certain the employee would notice being incorrectly taxed at 40% if his child benefits were stopped. Good diagnostic!

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

I have not "concocted" anything. He had income form other sources and assumed it was those that caused him to exceed the higher rate tax threshold. If UI remember correctly, the inland revenue had not accurately taken account of tax credits paid for share dividend. When the mistake was rectified it was discovered that his total income was below the threshold for higher rate tax.

Another example could be highlighted by paying pension contributions via a carry forward/carry back process. Which could have the effect of reducing ones marginal tax rates, over a seven year period. Which would mean that someone who is rich enough to maximise their pension contributions, for those years, will be given a bit of a boost by having their child benefit paid. Whereas someone who is not as wealthy, will have theirs cut.

---------- Post added at 12:33 ---------- Previous post was at 12:29 ----------

Have you ever tried to get HMRC to rectify mistakes before? It isn't easy.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

Just goes to show you can't please everyone or get things absolutely right I guess. Cases like this will be a small minority of those impacted. The vast majority will be people like me who don't have a legitimate complaint to make at all.

You seem to be consciously and actively looking for faults with this? I'm sure there will be plenty of scenarios that can be concocted, doesn't change that it has to be done and kudos to this coalition for, again, taking a difficult decision instead of delaying it or simply throwing money at issues.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

I don't doubt that, but I don't think it's an argument against removing child benefits for high earners.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

A figure of 1.2 million families who will be affected is being estimated - but how many of those are single income earners, just over the limit; that is the figure we need to assess the (negative) impact, not the gross figure of 1.2 million.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

DVLA calculated many years ago that revenue lost by non-payment of Road Fund Licence fees could be recouped by scrapping the Tax Disk and by adding just 1p or so per litre to petrol and diesel (at rates of that period). No way to dodge the revenuer then, plus those who drove more, or whose cars guzzled more fuel, automatically paid more. The way was then open for the replacement of the Tax Disk with a combined MOT/Insurance disk, issued by MOT stations and insurance companies. Plus costs of chasing Untaxed drivers fell to zero, increasing overall income to DVLA, thus to HMG.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

How many of the remaining five million families will be dual income earners, each earning an average of twenty-five thousand pounds a year? A good deal more than those single earners, earning more than forty-four thousand.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

It seems to me there are two issues here: One is whether high earners should receive CB. The second is whether there should be a difference between single and dual income families. I think the answer to both should be 'no'. Unfortunately the answer to the second question presently is 'yes'. It's still better than doing nothing at all though. This move will mostly affect high earners, as there will be dual income families amongst those affected as well.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

No idea but it's irrelevant. This is being done to cut the structural deficit by lowering the welfare bill not to redistribute wealth. With that in mind it's as fair as it's possible to be while still achieving its' aim.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

So, those who have a joint income of eighty thousand pounds, should be treated more favourably to those who have an income of only forty-five thousand? To a family of four or five, forty-five thousand is not being rich. It is the net equivalent to two people earning twenty-one thousand pounds each. Something that an office administrator, teacher, nurse, call centre worker or shop manager would earn

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

As said: the implementation is not necessarily fair, but the move itself is good in my opinion. Over a certain income individuals should not be looking at the state (or tax benefits) to support their children. And if you can't afford it you shouldn't have four or five children. Ideally, this would be tapered and looking at joint income. I think there is something to be said for avoiding the administrative cost of doing so though.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

You can sit and make up "what if's" until the cows come home, fact is they are in the minority. For the majority, this change will not be an issue. Ive never understood why everyone got CB regardless of their income.

Hell, I wish I was earning enough in the first place to be affected by this !

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

But why should a couple, who earn nearly ninety-thousand pounds a year, be treated better than those who earn less? I can see self-employed people fiddling their incomes to balance their earnings more equally, with their partners, to make sure that neither of them earn more than the high rate threshold. It will remove incentives for people to earn higher incomes, reducing potential growth in the economy and lowering tax revenues. If a self-employed person has earned forty-three thousand pounds by March, he is not going to want to earn anymore, becasue he will lose his child benefit. How will they manage self-employed people? Typically, their incomes are not calculated until the end of the tax year. If the previous year they earned less than the higher rate threshold, will they have to repay the child benefit for that year? If they can't repay it, will they be sent to prison?

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

Just scrap kids...then no issue. :D

I am then hoping that the apes manage to take over the world

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

This is not a question about whether the state support the children of those who earn a middle income, this is about those who earn less, paying more than those who earn a high income. Then Boy George still has the audacity to continue to quote bad Disney teen movies.

As for your comment about affording children, that is a bit silly and a very stale cliché isn't it.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

I think it is about whether the state should support the children of higher earners, and I think the answer is 'no'. You can argue over what you consider high earners, but the principle seems sound to me.


No it's not. Why do you think it is? In fact, I think there is a case to be made for abolishing child benefits after the second child.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

Great, so you're going to completely ignore Ignition's point about the structural deficit by simply re-stating your position.

Way to advance a discussion. Not.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

Okay then, why don't they go after those who earn a higher joint income, rather than those who earn a modest single income?

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

Because the purpose of the exercise is to cut the structural deficit, not usher in a new age of wealth redistribution.

The moment you go beyond a basic check on whether there's a higher-rate taxpayer in the household, you're in to means-testing territory. Means testing processes do not save money, they cost money.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

I'm guessing it's because 1. It is cheaper to administer and 2. In reality there won't be that many with 'a modest income', as many families where one of the partner earns over £44k will be on dual incomes as well.

As said earlier, the measure is crude, but it's crudeness makes it cheap, and the general purpose of the measure is in the right direction. On balance therefore, I think this is a good move.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

I should add that, until my recent spell of unemployment, I was earning enough to have been caught by this new measure, and as a single earner with my wife looking after then children as a full time mum.

However we used to look at our bank statement monthly and boggle at the amount being paid to us for the simple fact that we decided to have three kids. The money was nice to have, but we certainly didn't need it.

I aspire, in my new life as a self-employed person, to get back to that level of income, and I will not resent the removal of child benefit when I do.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

Do you have any statistics to back that up?

It can't be much more expensive than the one they are going to use to identify those who pay tax at a higher rate.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

Do you have any statistics to back that up?

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

I would speculate that the Chancellor, along with the DWP, have a better idea of the costs of these things than yourself.

This is far more controversial if you fancy a go at it.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

No I don't, but it makes more sense than, many families where one of the partner earns over £44k will be on dual incomes as well. Besides, such information it is not so much statistical, as it is practical.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

No I don't. You seem quite keen on quoting a family with two people earning £40k each though. How many of those are around?

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

So, how do you know that, many families where one of the partner earns over £44k will be on dual incomes as well?

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

It makes more sense to you because you are ideologically opposed to the Party that forms the majority of the coalition government. In the absence of facts to back up your assertions, you simply see things the way you want to see them.

It's a pity you weren't such a vocal cheerleader for redistributive reform all those years ago when Gordon Brown was busy hooking the middle classes on tax credits.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

I don't. Just as you don't know how many people fall into your fictional example. The moment one of the families in your example gets a pay rise of £5k they fall into my example. Whether the number is high or not, we both have the same problem.

As I have said many times now, the measure is a tad crude, which is unfortunate. The basic principle though is sound in my opinion, and I fail to see how anyone that considers himself left of centre can oppose it.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

What "fictional example?" :confused:

This has nothing whatsoever to do with left/centre/right. You and others are the ones making those comparisons. This is about what is fair and right. How can it be fair that the rich are given preferential treatment over those who earn less.

I can guarantee you that there are more families earning an average of twenty-one thousand pounds a year each, than there are earning forty-four thousand pounds as a single income.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

But this is not about giving the rich preferential treatment. It's about taking money away from the rich. Surely that's a good thing?

Quite. And I can guarantee you that the earnings potential of the single income 44k family is higher. Chances are that they are fairly well educated, with a well educated spouse.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

But, yet again, the more rich are having less taken off of them, how is that a good thing?

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

Because the aim of the exercise is to save maximum cash with minimum outlay.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

So, the rich get off and the poorer still has to pay more.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

Unfortunately, some rich people will be better off than some less rich people. These less rich people are still well off by general measures earning nearly twice the median salary without taking a potential second income into consideration. Not ideal, but generally a good thing as generally the wealthy will be losing a subsidy at minimal administrative cost. It seems you're the only one that opposes it, and I'm surprised by it given your general left wing leanings.

Frankly, I suspect that Chris has hit the nail squarely on the head regarding your motivations for your opposition.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

As HM Revenue and Customs is responsible for the payment of Child Benefit and controlling our Taxes it should be relatively cheap and simple to implement this proposal as it stands.

Obtaining the information to enable combining partners income however would be a completely different matter and would launch a raft of problems. For the extra number of individuals it would effect I predict it would not be a cost effective option at the moment.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

I see no problem with this at all my brother who earns well over £44,000 has said for years it was stupid for him to recieve this benefit and he has never spent it i believe it has gone into a bank account for the kids when they grow up. We have to cut something, somewhere and if all some are going to do is oppose every cut purely because they don't like the party that HAS to make them i can only wonder how the hell they think we would have survived another five years of labour.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

I have not mentioned any political party, others have done that, whilst trying to defend this plan. This is less to do with party politics than it does with knee-jerk, ill-considered badly planned and unfair policies

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

It is odd the standards you seem to be applying here. I don't recall these standards being applied to the nearly 180 tax rises in the previous 13 years. Must just be me being inattentive :shrug:

Regardless this isn't knee-jerk, it's obviously been considered, it's not ill-considered either. As many have said this policy is to be as fair as possible while reducing deficit. From that angle it is perfectly well considered. To make further effort to make it fairer would have made it pointless as the means testing would have been expensive.

It's politically unpopular, no-one likes having money taken from them, but it's necessary. With that in mind I :shrug: at it and get on with things. Your prerogative to try and pick holes in it, however there are many things that you could have picked holes in but have chosen not to - any wonder party politics is raised as an issue?

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

They should now go further.

If they announced that child benefit would now be stopped after the second child they'd have me whooping and cheering.

Then we'd see and end of some of these feckless families with 13 kids that we pay for. The state should pay for the first two, after that if you want any more pay for them yourself.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

26k/year per household benefit cap will probably take care of that one.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

I think a very substantial portion of the populace would not regard someone earning £44k as "poorer" (imho).

From the Guardian

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

They are certainly poorer than those earning eighty-seven thousand pounds.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

And I don't earn as much as my friend who is a partner at E&Y, but I am not poor - you are playing with words, methinks, conflating "not as well off as" with "poorer".

btw, the Oxford Dictionary definition of poor is "lacking sufficient money to live at a standard considered comfortable or normal in a society" - do you honestly believe someone earning £44k per year is poor?

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

I do have to say that an anomaly that misses > 40% of the target is quite an anomaly...

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

Agreed - but the anomaly is a positive one for the families involved.

As an aside, loved Brendan Barber's comment (TUC General Secretary) no one is immune - except the 6.6 million families who are still going to receive child benefit.....

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

So, there are almost as many who will benefit as those who will lose out. But then these are government figures, so one can assume there are more than nine hundred thousand. It also goes some way to reinforcing my earlier point.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

So, do you think someone earning 44k is poor?

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

And the nine hundred thousand who will escape the cuts, even though they earn considerably more than the cut-off.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

Excellent - even more winners (but of course, not true, as they will be included in the 6.6 million).

Unless, of course, they feel "poorer" than their friends who earn more than them......

btw, you are making a unquantifiable case - I know quite a few people with only one parent working, who earns more individually than the joint income of many of our friends who both work and earn under £43k each.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

I never wrote that they are. But they are poorer than those earning eighty-seven thousand pounds a year.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

Yes, just like someone weighing 18 stone is slimmer than someone weighing 24 stone, but they are not slim - you are employing emotive words (poorer) inappropriately, imho.:dozey:

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

I presume you understand the meaning of the term "comparative."

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

I presume you understand the meaning of the term "emotive" - do you really think it is accurate to state that because I earn £80k a year less than my friend, I am poorer? I may not be as well off, but "poorer"?

(4 bed house in a upmarket suburb, two cars, a couple of holidays a year, two kids at Uni - must be a new definition of "lacking sufficient money to live at a standard considered comfortable or normal in a society" I hadn't come across before.....)

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

I am not "poor"..and I don't earn £80k less than my friends,..but if anyone earning that wants a friend, who they can say they earn more than..I am available for a reasonable fee, negotiable :D

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

I have never read such an obnoxious post in my life ,not for the first time have you bragged about your lifestyle and money .You have been lucky others including myself have had to take cuts in wages to remain in work ,i suggest you get back on planet earth with the rest of us lowly under 30k proles .My earnings have been upto 47k untill 2 years ago now they are down to 26k at best ,my wife works on minimum wage wearas previously she didn't need to how would you suggest anybody just increases their income ,i already do 12-13 hours a day

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

Wow, Flyboy, champion of the middle classes. I guess that means you're from the Blairite wing of the party, then. A disciple of David rather than an acolyte of Ed?

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

this would because it will most likely be based on previous years earnings (can't see any other way of doing it ,same as the tax credit system)since we are nearly half way through the 2010-11 year it will effectively be a immediate implementation

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

Again, with the partisanism. Why must you bring party politics into it? Surely you must see how unfair this method of reducing the deficit is. Yet again, it is the richer in society who win.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

In my opinion it is wrong to continue CB payments for houshold incomes of more than 44k,after all just about any benefit i can think of is based on household income not individuals income

---------- Post added at 19:05 ---------- Previous post was at 18:40 ----------


so why not build CB into the child tax credit system ?the structure (for better or worse;))is already there ,at least that way those who need it will get it

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

scrap all...if you can't afford a child..don't have them

lifestyle choice

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

seriously, you aren't serious are you ?

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

So no change then. when I was signing on, after 6 months I had to go through the whole signing on process again, all 40+ pages plus all the other paperwork they insisted on, even though nothing had changed in some of them.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

I am serious. I have never had anything, unless i could afford it, if i couldn't, I do without.

I take precautions, and i would not bring a child into the world, unless i knew i could support that child.

Too much whining about being supported by the state, you have the right to have a child, not a right to have the money.

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

What about accidentaly concieving through a failed contraceptive? abortion? i understand that nobody accidentaly has six kids but you have to allow exceptions

Re: Child Benefit Scrapped For Higher Rate Tax Payers From 2013
 

The reality is that many people on low income wouldn't be able to afford having children without CB. This is not only tragic for these people but would also be a burden on society in the long run, as society needs people to procreate, so their offspring can pay their taxes to pay their parents' pensions. So it actually makes sense to help people out in having and raising kids. Just not for the very wealthy and for those who want 10 imo.