[Closed] Child allowance threshold feel done over

Junkyard.

Plenty of good nurses, teachers, police officers, paramedics etc tipping into the 40% tax band.

Most registered nurses and paramedics are on NHS band 5 which if you work 24/7 shift pattern gives a salary of roughly 25-35k...if you take on a speciality, get promotion into band 6 you should be earning in excess of 35k...with overtime this can rise exponentially.

There are a few exceptions, some people in band 6 working solely mon-fri and no nights lose some pay....most of us working weekends, nights and a few OT shifts a month earn 40k+ each year, my end of year P60 thing has had my annual earnings as circa 45k for the last few years....so yes the higher rate of tax does affect nurses, paramedics, teachers etc.

How long have the shops been open?
What do they sell?

No higher rate taxpayers should be getting Child Benefit.
I think what irks the OP is the unfair way it is implemented.
Take a set of neighbours, both with the 2 kids. Once pair earn £49,999 each. In the other pair, one earns £60K and the other stays at home looking after the kids. The first family earn almost £100K and get £1800 child benefit. The second family don't get any.
Taking it away from both families would be much fairer.

Not saying it's right , but the first family contribute significantly more then the second.

What bugs me is when self employed folk who actually earn a lot, but account little profit still get £700 per month in tax credits, just plain wrong.

From the op's point of view, clearly he should vote conservative and protect the interests of the we'll off (not somthing I would condone).

Tax should be on total wealth not income. £50k doesnt go far in todays ecomony if you havent had the luxury of riding the property wave.

If you're earning over £50k just do a salary sacrifice, if your company allows it, into your pension to reduce salary to £50k - depends how much over you are and how much you can do without.

I think some you should get off yoir high horses here. The OPs wife could be working full time and if theyve got a couple kids in childcare that could be up to 2k month (mine was and still is 1.4k a month) that doesn't leave much to spend on new cranks. In that circumstance the child benefit would been significant contribution to disposable income.

Regardless of total household income, £50k is a metric ****-tonne of money for one person to earn.

I'd hope I wouldn't begrudge the extra tax I would pay if I was paid that much, but it's unlikely I will get paid that. Ever. So I guess It's the price we (you) pay for keeping the people who don't earn that much in health and education so they can sweep your streets, clean your shitters and all the other unsavoury jobs that you don't do.

And I don't do Apple or Starbucks, and Amazon rarely.

EDIT

£50k doesnt go far in todays ecomony if you havent had the luxury of riding the property wave.

Property wave? I wish. Bought in 2011 only because we could afford the deposit from an inheritance. £50k (even joint) would go a ****ing long way to an Aluminium Capra for me. Or proper uPVC double glazing or some other shit I didn't need.

couple kids in childcare that could be up to 2k month

£50k is a metric ****-tonne of money for one person to earn.

Not really but it's a good wage for most for sure. Six figures is a high income IMO but it's all down to assets really - those without a mortgage can feel rich on £30k but if you're young with a family and working in London £50k isn't going to feel that great.

couple kids in childcare that could be up to 2k month

Would getting an AuPair not be cheaper?

+benefits is what anyone I know who's has one rings true (usually ends in messy divorce proceedings)

teethgrinder - Member
Regardless of total household income, £50k is a metric *-tonne of money for one person to earn.

I'd hope I wouldn't begrudge the extra tax I would pay if I was paid that much, but it's unlikely I will get paid that. Ever. So I guess It's the price we (you) pay for keeping the people who don't earn that much in health and education so they can sweep your streets, clean your shitters and all the other unsavoury jobs that you don't do.

And I don't do Apple or Starbucks, and Amazon rarely.

EDIT

£50k doesnt go far in todays ecomony if you havent had the luxury of riding the property wave.
Property wave? I wish. Bought in 2011 only because we could afford the deposit from an inheritance. £50k (even joint) would go a * long way to an Aluminium Capra for me. Or proper uPVC double glazing or some other shit I didn't need.

Wow, we have the whole bitter aspect of this thread summed up in one post there.

Inheritance eh - you get a silver spoon and still so bitter 😉

Out of interest, what's your job? Genuine question

If the OP could outsource the kids then he'd have much more disposable income and less stress plus no more annoying tax/benefit threshold problems
Result

Btw: parents who moan about the cost of parenting are delusional, WTF did you expect?

I'm interested to see what these shops are and the potential to generate income come May. If the op's wife is onto a winner the family allowance won't matter so much. No sour grapes here by the way.

Inheritance - Fairly sure Dad and Uncle would still rather have their parents, and I'd rather have the grandparents than a mortgage. Though we'd still be paying rent to someone who owned more than one house, no doubt (see property boom)

Job - North East Pharma. I guess £50K goes a bit further up here.

Bitter - Nah. I live in Northumberland.

Anyway, you lot have been too lazy in the last year. Average earnings have gone down, so it looks like I'll hit the threshold for paying back my student loans for the first time. Poor me.

Jesus there are some very sour people on here. Is it envy or just pure stupidity and not being able to read?

OP - Can you negotiate with your co. to limit the bonus to keep below the threshold? Certainly companies I have worked in have done this before. Other options, include increase pension or take out salary sacrifice schemes.

Back off the OP. He pays higher rate tax and ££ contributes more to the state than those being rude contribute. In addition I inagine there's a few taking from the state in credits etc because its what they are entitled to than those who are taxes more. Not saying that's wrong but don't bregudge someone who pays far more in tax than some pissy twenty odd quid. It was a question of how does it work?

The response is probably due to "feel done over" written by "hardupdad" on an excellent wage.

I feel done over as in the first post says. My neighbours, both on 45k (total income £90k) get to keep their £1700 child allowance yet me on on £50k has to pay it back. Maybe I wouldn't feel done over if it was fairer.

Also to all the haters, £20k of this is bonus. For the past 5 years with economic down turn I have been under £30k. It's a sales role and you have to take the tough with the smooth. I doubt next year whilst paying back the allowance I will hit the same bonuses.

Edit: and the hardupdad bit is a name from when I was new dad feeling pretty hard up. How do I change my name on here to something more current

Haterz won't understand.

My old bestmate bought a new 911 for cash then got rid after a month. I don't hate any aspect of his wealth.

If you worried about your neighbours income less you might be happier.

Hard up - obviously people have responded on here think they are owed a living and tax credits, where as if they worked harder they too could have earned decent money.

There appears to be a real problem in the UK with people disliking people who work hard and then try to keep the money they earn as opposed to people who don't work as hard but then get envious towards people whoe earn more.

I think a more relevant example of the inequality of the CB system would be myself and a lady I used to work with.

At the time the caps came in, she earned 30k, and her husband earned 25k. I earned roughly the same, but as a sole earner.

We both had similar mortgages, live in a similar areas, had two kids of the same age in school. In fact, to all intents and purposes, the same circumstances.

I had to take a £1200 pay cut.

Anyone here fancy a £1200 pay cut? No, didn't think so.

I never moan about not getting it, [b]because I agree, when you have incomes in this range, you don't really need it.[/b] But it should be equally applied on family income, not the sole highest income. I believe the reason it isn't done like this, is that the costs of recovery and assessing the entitlement on joint incomes would exceed the amount saved by not paying it, so that's why it's not done.

Admittedly the system is flawed, and OP, you don't 'deserve' it any less than the couple on £99,999.

Whether you 'need' it isn't really for others to judge - if you are back down to £30k household income next year and maybe you have some debt to fund the shops??? then it's not a 'fantastic' wage.

You've got off your arse and obviously worked hard last year and with your wife, have seemingly tried to make a better life for yourself by starting a business, creating jobs and helping the economy grow.

Do you 'need' or 'deserve it any less than Wayne and Sharon who sit at home drinking Stella, smoking tabs and knocking out a dozen snotty nosed little scrotes, who are never going to contribute anything to society?

I often wonder what the ones that moan about being on poor wages on here actually do to try and change their situation if they begrudge high earners so much.

Read this:

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/household-income/the-effects-of-taxes-and-benefits-on-household-income/50-years-of-the-effects-of-taxes-and-benefits-analysis/sty-taxes-and-benefits-on-household-income.html

I'm with the OP on this one what's fair about one person earning 50-60k getting taxed on child benefit yet 2 couples earning 2x49k not getting taxed?

So much for encouraging family values and one parent stay at home whilst other out providing for the family.

My MP claimed it wasn't practical to means test both partners. Bollocks.

I rang HMRC to try and stop child benefit, but what I hadn't fully appreciated was that bike to work and share scheme contributions took my salary below the threshold so the told me to keep it!

Jesus there are some very sour people on here. Is it envy or just pure stupidity and not being able to read?

I think it's lacking the desire/ability to earn enough to pay 40% tax. 🙄

We lost child tax credits a few years ago, and I mistakenly posted in here about it. However my income is under 50k so I reckon I'll be ringing up to see what the man owes me for a change!
Plus the Mrs is part time so as to be with the kids when needed.
Edited twice for clarity!

OP - Can you negotiate with your co. to limit the bonus to keep below the threshold?

That approach makes little sense. The benefit limitation is £1 benefit reduction for every £100 over the limit, no point in giving up £100 bonus to save a quid. A salary sacrifice makes more sense. Use it as an excuse for a bike to work scheme 😉

My neighbours, both on 45k (total income £90k) get to keep their £1700 child allowance yet me on on £50k has to pay it back.

*IANAA

This year I'm earning minimum wage because of all the perks having a no stress, no worry, 35hr a week job allows me.

My ambition and ability will see me through just fine when I make the change, again. Some people are snobs, some jealous. Mrs. C works a 4 day week for about 10k more than me. We are very happy.

but what I hadn't fully appreciated was that bike to work and share scheme contributions took my salary below the threshold so the told me to keep it!

Childcare vouchers are a good one for keeping it under too 😉

Why should you be labelled a benefits cheat? If your applying for something and the government agree and say your qualified for it?

Who's at fault the person applying? Or the government for having the policy?

Got them Childcare vouchers too, forgot about that!

Got them Childcare vouchers too, forgot about that!

Nice to see the normal odious right wing muppetts are in the house.

U is jus jelus

Thats right. I sometimes do wish I had sufficient moral fibre to realise that I am superior to those who pay less tax than me.

Who here has said they're superior?
Asking a genuine question about benefits makes you superior to everyone else?

think it's lacking the desire/ability to earn enough to pay 40% ta

often wonder what the ones that moan about being on poor wages on here actually do to try and change their situation if they begrudge high earners so much.

Hard up - obviously people have responded on here think they are owed a living and tax credits, where as if they worked harder they too could have earned decent money.

And you wouldn't like to earn more cash?
The ability - will your job allow you one day to reach the higher tax threshold?
Or will you have to get promoted/change career?
Some prefer their job as it is so will have no desire to change. There's nothing wrong with that at all.

thats your interpretation of my post and lacks the crucial “ 🙄 “
as a higher rate taxpayer who grew up on a council estate/free school meals etc i applaud anyone who gets on and increases their earning potential (if thats what they desire) mine was purely a byproduct of chasing a dream (i applaud anyone who does that too)
i dont care what people earn i know all sorts of earners but certainly don't judge them by their pay packets.

its fun to watch those who are jealous on here get eggy though.

Some just don't see the endless pursuit of money as the be all and end all.

The jealous/bitter/envy thing is so lazy, which is interesting from all these go-getters.

You have lost me iolo, whats your point?

[quote=Freester ]My MP claimed it wasn't practical to means test both partners. Bollocks.

You've costed out how much it would cost to assess household income as opposed to just doing it as part of the standard single person's tax process? No, didn't think so.

Yes, it is unfair. No, people earning that much don't need it. However ISTM that whinging about somebody with higher household income than you getting a benefit you don't isn't all that different from people complaining that you earn too much, which you don't seem to like either. Looking at it totally logically, it's not the people earning 55k as a single earner who should be most upset that families with a household income of 90k are getting paid child benefit, yet you don't generally see the lower income families who are struggling to make ends meet complaining about it, just the relatively well off upset that some other people are better off then them.

For those missing the point, I'm not at all bothered about you earning lots more than me - good on you - just not sure you should be getting upset about how much the state gives you.

So if you put a smilely on a post and say something what it means is you dont mean it?

All mods are **** 😉

Doesn't the availability of tax credits etc just ensure that wages are kept low as its an artificial way of subsidising pay?

Its not often I agree with aracer but his post makes a lot of sense

I'm now trying to decide if I should be upset or pleased by that.

[b]anagallis_arvensis - Member [/b]
often wonder what the ones that moan about being on poor wages on here actually do to try and change their situation if they begrudge high earners so much.

It's a genuine question - if someone is happy with their lot and are living the life they chose, then great.

If someone trudges along through life, bemoaning their situation and being bitter towards others in a better situation, then I wonder what they have done to try and change their circumstances.

Whilst I appreciate many people may be a victim of circumstance - redundancy, family constraints, hit by the recession, whatever - there will still be plenty who could, but won't help themselves and just choose to be bitter.

It wasn't aimed at any one individual in particular and there's no superiority complex in play.

Just add a 😉 and we know we dont mean any of it anyway 😉

Good grief the vitriol and self serving guff from some on here is truly disgusting. Couple of points, we're all greedy not just the rich, the rich for whatever reason are just better at accumulating wealth.

people with higher incomes, they earn that money, someone else (the employer) thinks they earn that money and pay it. To make generalisations about whether people need that level income or deserve is no more intelligent then labelling all people on low incomes as scroungers and lazy.

50k is a nice income but not ridiculously wealthy. The higher rate threshold has come down massively, if it was at the same relative value as when it was introducex it would be over 70k.

The tax system is ridiculously organised, the whole thing about it being easier to administer on higher rate earners was rubbish, they were quite capable of assessing both incomes for tax credits. It was done purely as a populist measure so the Tories could start to erode a universal benefit sacred cow with minimum kick back. From the reaction on here it clearly worked, wake up and think for a change.

Finally should households earning more than 50k get any benefits, probably not, I don't know what the threshold should be but its probablynot greater than that, it probably should be a lot less . A healthy society is one where the majority are able to contribute not the minority as it is now. This is as much about managing the costs of living, controlling borrowing to stop rampant hose price inflation, ot taxing basics such as fuel so ridiculously, as it is about boosting income through redistribution which just leads to an upward cycle of tax and benefits which is ultimately unsustainable.

I still think he's more fed up with the fact his mrs isn't bringing any money in and he's having to shoulder it all.

😉

I'm with the OP on this one what's fair about one person earning 50-60k getting taxed on child benefit yet 2 couples earning 2x49k not getting taxed?

Eh? Are we in a parallel world now where the new definition of [b]'tax' [/b]is 'the government don't give me free money'?

[quote=stumpyjon ]The tax system is ridiculously organised, the whole thing about it being easier to administer on higher rate earners was rubbish, they were quite capable of assessing both incomes for tax credits.

Yeah, because that the tax credit system is universally acknowledged to be well administered and lacking in expensive bureaucracy.

Thats right. I sometimes do wish I had sufficient moral fibre to realise that I am superior to those who pay less tax than me.

Dont know
How much tax do you pay?

I wish I didn't.

I don't

Whats the threshold for 40% income tax?

I'll swap jobs with you gladly

Who me? Plenty of jobs for science teachers going if you want one. I like mine I'll keep it thanks.

So if I earn 20k I can be bitter and twisted about people who pay more tax into the system?

Wow. Ok- think of those poor teachers etc.

Madness. Someone on 20k only pays tax on 10k(?) Of that. Factor in two kids, credits etc then really that bitter person is costing the likes of the OP.

On 50k how much is tax?

BTW I don't earn (earn being the right word as he's not given it for free) any near the OPs wage. I just hate inverted snobbery on stw sometimes.

[quote=hora ]So if I earn 20k I can be bitter and twisted about people who pay more tax into the system?

Well it seems if you earn £50k you can be bitter and twisted about people who earn £90k and get child benefits (but still pay more into the system than you), so fill your boots.

Anagallis- sorry I meant the op

Could you try that again hora your point is lost on md

Great thread - especially equating responsible savings via pensions (the most sensible way to save) with benefit cheating.....

Anagallis- sorry I meant the op

You dissin my job!!!!

I did a university course entitled "the British tax system" many many moons ago. The detail it went into generally proved that the starting point "to be fair a tax system must be progressive and related to the ability to pay" was never respected. And that in the real world lower income earners pay a high proportion of their income in tax. Those that pay the lowest proportion of their income in tax are the wealthy who have high unearned incomes.

When I was in business in France I paid 52% of my earned income in tax and obligatory social security payments. On my unearned investment income I used perfectly legal strategies to pay almost no tax just using French investments in France. Things have changes a little but it's still earned income that is most taxed.

When the poor spend their money they spend more of it on things that are highly taxed than the rich. They use transport to get to work which if they use a car means paying for one of the most taxed goods/services there is. They need to dress, communicate... all high VAT gods and services. Live somewhere? You pay more tax per m2 on small properties.

The whole system serves to keep the poor poor and help the rich get richer. The solution is a more progressive tax system but that is very hard to apply as the wealthy are the most mobile. There's always some financial rogue state to welcome them.

So what can we do? Vote of course, and probably further left than you think you should. And use what little economic power you have wisely. Never visit Switzerland or buy anything Swiss for example.

I think teaching is an admirable job, I doubt I'd have the patience for it

How progressive do you want it to be? When did you adjust your tax behaviour Edukator? .

If you can't afford children don't have them. Having children is a choice. It annoys me that people make that choice expecting others to foot the bill.

Those that pay the lowest proportion of their income in tax are the wealthy who have high unearned incomes.

I guess that would probably include the director of a chain of retail stores that chooses to defer taking money out of the business in anticipation of future renumeration through dividends at a reduced tax rate, rather than choosing to receive a wage from the company/shops they own?

If you can't afford children don't have them. Having children is a choice. It annoys me that people make that choice expecting others to foot the bill.

If you can't afford a bike to cycle to work on, don't buy one. Buying a commuting bike is a choice. It annoys me that people make that choice expecting others to foot the bill through bike to work schemes.

Done it myself Ninfan. When I was in business there was a tax reduction on profits reinvested in the capital of the business (this benefits society in general as it makes businesses more resistant to hard times and reduces the number going bankrupt at the first minor downturn). If you closed the business within three years you had to pay the reduction to the tax man, after that it was simply the capital of the business owned by the shareholders (us) with no more tax to pay if the business was sold or closed allowing the owners to recover their capital.

Wasn't cycle to work scheme a Labour invention?

We can only afford to have one child. If I dropped salary drastically and played the numbers I could have a second. Quid's in!

If I'd adjusted my behaviour because of tax I wouldn't have chosen to live in the most taxed part of a town in the most taxed country (I think) in Europe, teamhurtmore. Paying taxes is just part of being a (good) citizen. I make informed choices and wouldn't knowingly pay more tax than necessary.

I don't go out of my way to avoid tax either or get upset about paying it, I just try to understand the system and play within the rules. Sometimes the government wants us to do things that are in the general interest and uses the tax system to create an incentive. I've benefited from tax incentives to produce renewable energy and drive a less polluting car. Sometimes I ignore an incentive; in France it's a financial disaster if you only have one child but having two or three (bingo!) is much easier. Some people have three to get all the extra benefits and earlier retirement but we just wanted one.

The Tax System - Explained With Beer
Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to £100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:
The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay £1.
The sixth would pay £3.
The seventh would pay £7.
The eighth would pay £12.
The ninth would pay £18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay £59.
So, that's what they decided to do.
The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. 'Since you are all such good customers,' he said, 'I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by £20. 'Drinks for the ten now cost just £80.
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the £20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?'
They realized that £20 divided by six is £3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.
And so:
The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid £2 instead of £3 (33%savings).
The seventh now pay £5 instead of £7 (28%savings).
The eighth now paid £9 instead of £12 ( 25% savings).
The ninth now paid £14 instead of £18 ( 22% savings).
The tenth now paid £49 instead of £59 (16% savings).
Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.
'I only got a pound out of the £20,' declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,' but he got £10!' 'Yeah, that's right,' exclaimed the fifth man. 'I only saved a pound, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I!' 'That's true!!' shouted the seventh man. 'Why should he get £10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!' 'Wait a minute,' yelled the first four men in unison. 'We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!'
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.