Tories scrapping child benefit for people who earn over £44,000

[Suffragette1]

No it won't be. Apparently there will be a tick box to declare if you are a higher rate tax payer.

 

However, as it's being presented at the moment it's a fillet steak of an idea that looks like a dogs breakfast. It's to be hoped that somebody pulls their finger out and tidies it up because the double income household factor makes it appear ridiculous.

 

Indeed, it's ludicrous (and unfair) that a couple on 40k each will keep their child benefit.

[Suffragette1]

Just wondering if it's still the case that if your on I.S. the child benefit is deducted from your award ?

And wouldn't it be better to keep it universal for the first two children only no matter what your income

 

Also women who gave up work still had their NI contribution paid whilst they were in receipt of child benefit, presumably on the assumption that they were not working to raise a family.

[Agent Orange]

Not sure if this has been mentioned, but I am just watching a debate on the introduction child benefit cuts for high earners. What seems unfair in this introduction, a single parent earning £44,000 per annum will lose child benefit for his/her children. However, a couple earning £43,000 per annum each, will still qualify child benefit.

 

To me, that sounds grossly unfair. I know there has to be a threshold but I really can't get my head around this.

[Suffragette1]

Not sure if this has been mentioned, but I am just watching a debate on the introduction child benefit cuts for high earners. What seems unfair in this introduction, a single parent earning £44,000 per annum will lose child benefit for his/her children. However, a couple earning £43,000 per annum each, will still qualify child benefit.

 

To me, that sounds grossly unfair. I know there has to be a threshold but I really can't get my head around this.

 

I agree, it's ridiculous (and said so in # 122, which was prompted by Tony's post). This is clearly a cost cutting exercise in terms of the administration that a full means test would necessitate; it's far easier to just apply it across the board to households with one person in the top two income tax brackets.

[sarasen92]

I imagine the £44,000 is the total household income

 

is this the case? is it houshold income?

[trail master]

So, under gov plans announced today a family with an income of 44 grand loses their family allowance. Exactly how does this encourage people off long term benefits?

[trail master]

You're not. You're just the most penalised, over taxed & first in line when they line up the cash cows to shake down to pay for the feckless unemployed who churn out yet more illiterate, unwanted children.

 

By rights I've paid for half of Rotherham over the years.

 

Good point , well made swan.The very people who are getting off their backsides each day and paying the taxes that keep the country running are a soft target while others are churning out kids for a living!!!!

[sarasen92]

why not say you can only get child benefit for two kids?

[trail master]

It's a step in the right direction, and addresses the indiscriminate application of state funds in this way. I've always believed it's wrong that a family with 3 children and a household income in excess of £100k pa received the same child benefit as a working single parent of 3.

 

Too many people with dependent children use the money to subsidise their Tuscan holidays and Rioja consumption, anyone in that position doesn't need it in my opinion.

 

don't forget the other end of the scale BF where it is used to subsidise stella and bensons consumption .

[CorkerSWFC]

Not be many benefits stopping in England then....