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

[Grandad.Malky]

I reckon this will lose the coalition votes big time.

 

They have made their bed ……….. marry in haste repent at leisure.

[milquetoast1]

So, a family which has only one bread winner and who is just into the 40% bracket loses the benefit yet a couple who are both working and earn just under the threshold each will still get it....how is that fair?

 

It's supposed to be child benefit, not some reverse income tax, or money towards a holiday/car.

 

Two incomes of £30k is always going to be better than one income of £44k from a tax point of view, but from a time point of view I would rather my partner earn the £45k and me stay at home and look after the kids.

 

So to answer your question, a family where both parents work is more likely to need extra financial assistance towards child care than a family where one parent earns £44k+.

 

At the end of the day child benefit was always supposed to be totally separate to income. It has now been decided that we can no longer afford that system, but the system that replaces it has to be simple, anything else would make it more expensive to admin than any savings made.

[mj.scuba]

Same old Tories ripping off the poor again! Makes you sick!!!

 

I see they want to up spending by £60m in the NHS for cancer screening as well.....what are they thinking of?

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11461495

 

Same old-same old from the toffs, ripping of the poor and taking the bread from the down-trodden workers mouths!

 

How dare they invest in Health Services. That will upset the Tory caricatures by the lefties.

[Noob]

Just lie on the form and keep claiming. I intend too.

[Bedders]

Someone who earns £44,000 isn't poor.

 

It's called Irony!

[A.B.Yaffle]

At last the tories have done something fair by axing child benefit for people who earn over £44,000

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

 

They always announce the least controversial cuts first, in the hope that people won't notice other details in their policy. You won't be so happy when you see your benefits reduced, Craig. They have already said they are going to make sure that people aren't better off on benefits than they would be in work!

[boyfriday]

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.

[Bedders]

While they are feeling generous perhaps they make a donation towards keeping Wednesday out of the courts.

 

I think they are trying to right financial mismanagement from poorly run administrations.....unfortunately we've had a downward spiral of that at Wednesday for the past 10 years inspite of very good crowds for the leagues we've been in.....but pray-tell I digress from the subject by the OP.

[evildrneil]

Although I'm not sure they have the mechanics right I don't think that child benefit should be a universal benefit.I also think that child benefit should be a single pay out - maybe in the order of £50 per week dropping to £30 when the first child is of secondary school age? - irrespective of the number of children in the family.

[milquetoast1]

Any high earner who still wants to receive child benefit can always ask for a pay reduction to £43,999 or whatever is required.

 

Better still, take some unpaid leave to take your salary down, and spend some quality time with the kids.