Taxpayer support

[999tigger]

Taxing people and then giving it back as credits is wrong.

It's bureaucratic nonsense.

 

Yes I agree with this, but thats working tax credits, which depends on how much you earn.

 

Child tax credits is different, its based on how many kids and how much you earn. The bulk of the money in the original article is child tax credits. Its wrong for some people to have kids as a career and its god they have limited that. Thats an abuse. Its rare though because families are much smaller. You get roughly £53 per child per week plus a family element of £10 a week.

 

I think Ron is signining up for getting rid of benefits, getting rid of tax credits because people are scroungers etc as the DM says so, he goes walking in Firth park and he has experienced some employees refusing some extra hours from him.

 

People who are unemployed can remain on benefits and work up to 16 hours a week. If they work any more they come off benefits and move onto tax credits. Any money above a certain amount is deducted from them £ for £.

 

Similar with tax credits any money above the threshold gets reduced. It used to be £6420, but now earings above £3850 will be reduced by 48% up from 41%. So you will be working for half the money or even less if taxed.

 

I cant work out whether Rons objection is to.

 

Benefits in general as all claimants are scroungers.

 

People who dont work.

People who get child tax credit.

People who get working tax credit.

People who get housing benefit.

 

They are all big and different subjects if you want to discuss them, but this thread is all over the place. I think Rons point is that based on his experience (which is all he needs) then the system doesnt work and its unfair on taxpayers. He seems to think everyones at it, which goes on to other issues about unemployment and whether jobless people are there because they want to be and are dependent on benefits enjoying the life of Riley.

 

There was another discussion to be had on the persuasiveness of evidence and annecdotal pr seeing things on internet forums v actual analysis from credible sources with credible data. Annecdotal runs strong on Sheffield forums.

 

Its hard to discuss because the moment one issues addressed someone skips to another aspect.

[I1L2T3]

They were brought in because some people perceive that people who do not work are better off.

 

So why not give workers a boost, we could afford it. I pay a little tax, but did get more back in tax credits.

 

Wouldn't it be better if you received a living wage instead?

 

If you were in a certain category, say a single parent, then of course extra help should be available anyway.

 

As for most other workers it simply isn't right for the state to be boosting their income. It's crazy.

[El Cid]

As for most other workers it simply isn't right for the state to be boosting their income. It's crazy.

 

But the system is crazy, if you have 3+ children you were better off not working, but they are stopping some benefit at 2 children now.

Not much fuss about that cut, but thats because its not retrospective.

[I1L2T3]

But the system is crazy, if you have 3+ children you were better off not working, but they are stopping some benefit at 2 children now.

Not much fuss about that cut, but thats because its not retrospective.

 

Yes the whole system is mental. The fixes have to start somewhere and unfortunately tax credits are one of the biggest areas of expenditure and so is an area that needs to be tackled.

 

That said, it's cynical from the Tories. They know they can't touch the pensioners and are scared to take on the landlords. If they don't take them on in the next 2 years that is it until 2020.

[Cyclone]

Set a limit on benefits of 75% of the average wage the person earned in the past year, down to a maximum of 75% of 40 hours at minimum wage for those that haven't worked in over a year.

 

Fine for single people, but for families it's a deliberate choice to put children into a poverty situation.

 

---------- Post added 19-10-2015 at 09:35 ----------

 

But the system is crazy, if you have 3+ children you were better off not working, but they are stopping some benefit at 2 children now.

Not much fuss about that cut, but thats because its not retrospective.

 

Looking at this;

 

http://www.which.co.uk/money/tax/guides/tax-credits/child-tax-credits/

 

It shows that (for someone with 3 children) you can earn up to 15k/annum without losing any CTC.

It then shows that if you earn 20k (5k more before tax) you'll lose 1.6k in CTC...

 

Explain the maths to me, where working somehow reduces your overall income?

 

It also says that if you're working you'll be able to claim WTC in addition to the CTC.

 

It appears that with 3 children, for each 5k increase in household income you lose £2050 in CTC... Except for the 1st increment between 15 and 20. And the same staging occurs if you have 2 children as well (and presumably also 4 or more).

[sgtkate]

I agree. This is indeed rare.

 

Blimey. That makes 3 of us. Tax credits are too easy to be manipulated by all sides, often leaving the people who really need support out in the cold.

 

Get rid of them, increase wages, decrease living costs.

 

---------- Post added 19-10-2015 at 12:19 ----------

 

Fine for single people, but for families it's a deliberate choice to put children into a poverty situation.

 

---------- Post added 19-10-2015 at 09:35 ----------

 

 

Looking at this;

 

http://www.which.co.uk/money/tax/guides/tax-credits/child-tax-credits/

 

It shows that (for someone with 3 children) you can earn up to 15k/annum without losing any CTC.

It then shows that if you earn 20k (5k more before tax) you'll lose 1.6k in CTC...

 

Explain the maths to me, where working somehow reduces your overall income?

 

It also says that if you're working you'll be able to claim WTC in addition to the CTC.

 

It appears that with 3 children, for each 5k increase in household income you lose £2050 in CTC... Except for the 1st increment between 15 and 20. And the same staging occurs if you have 2 children as well (and presumably also 4 or more).

 

Is it possible that things like bus passes, rent subsidies and council tax support are affected if your income reaches a certain level? TCs are tapered so you CANNOT lose out by working more, but that's not the only benefit people receive.

[999tigger]

Blimey. That makes 3 of us. Tax credits are too easy to be manipulated by all sides, often leaving the people who really need support out in the cold.

 

Get rid of them, increase wages, decrease living costs.

 

---------- Post added 19-10-2015 at 12:19 ----------

 

 

Could you explain how they are manipulated? What do you mean by manipulated?

We all agree the person in the headline has used the system, but she does have 12 kids and thats uncommon. It was a flaw in the system and from 2017 only the first 2 children will get child tax credits. It only applied to children born after this date.

 

Working tax credits are targeted at people with low salaries. You either qualify ot you dont because its means tested.

 

Who are the people being left out in the cold?

 

Increasing wages takes time. Do you think they should be compelled to increase them?

 

Decreasing living costs depends on inflation and that would depend on falling prices and supply outstripping demand. Its very rare you get negative inflation.

 

 

Is it possible that things like bus passes, rent subsidies and council tax support are affected if your income reaches a certain level? TCs are tapered so you CANNOT lose out by working more, but that's not the only benefit people receive.

 

I explained this above, but if you work what used to be 16 hours a week, then you cna still sign on, but you have your benefits deducted from your salary. At min wage that means your 16 hours would net you about £33, not taking into account travel costs. The advantage is that passport benefits like prescriptions, CT, HB, free school meals are easier to obtain. Working more than 16 hours means you have to apply for these seperately and you could be ineligible for some of them.

 

Working tax credits are tapered so that any earnings above the threshold (which is now going to be £3850) will reduce tax credits by 48%. I have a feeling thats gross earnings, but need to check.

[Cyclone]

Blimey. That makes 3 of us. Tax credits are too easy to be manipulated by all sides, often leaving the people who really need support out in the cold.

 

Get rid of them, increase wages, decrease living costs.

 

---------- Post added 19-10-2015 at 12:19 ----------

 

 

Is it possible that things like bus passes, rent subsidies and council tax support are affected if your income reaches a certain level? TCs are tapered so you CANNOT lose out by working more, but that's not the only benefit people receive.

 

It's CTC we're talking about though isn't it?

 

In theory the universal credit system means that nobody should ever experience a >100% marginal tax rate as they increase the amount of work they do. Precisely to remove the disincentive argument.

[999tigger]

It's CTC we're talking about though isn't it?

 

In theory the universal credit system means that nobody should ever experience a >100% marginal tax rate as they increase the amount of work they do. Precisely to remove the disincentive argument.

 

The current system promised that already.

 

The clawback can be as much as 80% though, so a person could be better off by c £1.30 an hour for someone on min wage.

[Cyclone]

The current system promised that already.

 

The clawback can be as much as 80% though, so a person could be better off by c £1.30 an hour for someone on min wage.

 

So, any claim that they could be worse off, would in fact be wrong then.