I know it's not new but anyone else really hacked off about the child benefit cuts?

[suzib76]

I don't really see people's argument for opt in/opt out surely it already is an opt in system people don't HAVE to claim

 

[smileyfaces]

You dont need to spend £1000 a month on a car whether it includes petrol and insurance or not. Even it is on finance you can return the car and the dealer will usually take the car as payment for the rest of your finance (depending on the dealer and the value of your car obviously) and I know this because I was going to do it last year with mine. With hire purchases you can return your car HALF WAY through your agreement if you no longer want it or can afford it.

£1000 is LUDICROUS.

 

[smileyfaces]

I don't really see people's argument for opt in/opt out surely it already is an opt in system people don't HAVE to claim

In order to claim child tax credits you have to be registered with child benefit so unless you want to forget anout everything else you are entilted to then yes, you do have to claim it.

 

[suzib76]

I don't really see people's argument for opt in/opt out surely it already is an opt in system people don't HAVE to claim

In order to claim child tax credits you have to be registered with child benefit so unless you want to forget anout everything else you are entilted to then yes, you do have to claim it.

But we were talking high earners who wouldn't be entitled to tax credits here surely? I know people who don't claim cb because they don't need it and wouldn't get tax credits anyway

 

[suzib76]

You dont need to spend £1000 a month on a car whether it includes petrol and insurance or not. Even it is on finance you can return the car and the dealer will usually take the car as payment for the rest of your finance (depending on the dealer and the value of your car obviously) and I know this because I was going to do it last year with mine. With hire purchases you can return your car HALF WAY through your agreement if you no longer want it or can afford it.

£1000 is LUDICROUS.

I agree and disagree

I think if people have that kind of money to throw around then yeah great go for it

HOWEVER when they start banging on about not having enough money and needing to claim benefits (any kind) to support this lifestyle it then become ludicrous

 

[smileyfaces]

I don't really see people's argument for opt in/opt out surely it already is an opt in system people don't HAVE to claim

In order to claim child tax credits you have to be registered with child benefit so unless you want to forget anout everything else you are entilted to then yes, you do have to claim it.

But we were talking high earners who wouldn't be entitled to tax credits here surely? I know people who don't claim cb because they don't need it and wouldn't get tax credits anyway

Sorry, my mistake

 

[smileyfaces]

You dont need to spend £1000 a month on a car whether it includes petrol and insurance or not. Even it is on finance you can return the car and the dealer will usually take the car as payment for the rest of your finance (depending on the dealer and the value of your car obviously) and I know this because I was going to do it last year with mine. With hire purchases you can return your car HALF WAY through your agreement if you no longer want it or can afford it.

£1000 is LUDICROUS.

I agree and disagree

I think if people have that kind of money to throw around then yeah great go for it

HOWEVER when they start banging on about not having enough money and needing to claim benefits (any kind) to support this lifestyle it then become ludicrous

Oh yeah, of course. If I had plenty of money then I dont see why not BUT the point I was making is that if people are complaining about having to spend so much on a car and needing CB then they shouldnt have the car at all. The money that goes towards a car is disposable income, it isnt a necessity like rent/mortgage, council tax, gas and electric etc etc. therefore if you are soending 1k a month on a car then i personally think it is downright cheeky to expect £80 a mmonth off the government to pay for your child.

 

[weewdy]

As a pp put it might be £1000 for car, insurance and petrol we dont know how its split up. My oh is nearly 400 a month on petrol alone.

 

[Mummy Bean]

Money is relevant to everyone...depending on your cicumstances and lifestyle and lots of people have different financial circumstances. you cant compare one person who survives on £16k a year to one who earns £40k. i know in order for my OH to earn that much we have to live in london where rent/mortgage is more then double, he has to commute with car and train which cost us around a 1000 a month along side lots of other inflated price. as i said before CB should be per house hold not per individual...but as long as it being spent on the child then what the issue?

 

[R_x]

The amount of tax these high earners will pay, so what if the want to claim a tiny bit back. I wouldn't be surprised if it gets stopped altogether eventually x

 

[Raggydoll]

I'm surprised at the amount of people who have jumped on the PP for spending £1k a month on her car. She pointed out the car and house were purchased before she had her child. For all we know her job could involve a long commute which contributes to the high cost.

Also, earning £50k plus, does not mean you have ample disposable income. That income is gross. Tax of 40% is paid on an income over £32,010, plus NI of 12%. If you're earning that kind of income, it's fairly likely you are working FT and paying for child care.

I do believe CB should be based on household income, but as a PP stated the cost of means testing will outweigh the benefit.

 

[dani_tinks]

Circumstances change. We pay around 1000k for our audi a month, some months we really struggle, other months we're ok. I expect lots of families have things that they can't always afford, sky tv, a mobile contract etc.

 

[Pearls18]

Out of interest, am I right in thinking child benefit helps with pension contributions, so if a woman is a SAHM and her husband now earns £44k+ so she's not entitled, does that mean she won't "earn" enough for the state pension? There was something on here about it recently but not in light of the changes to the system. Just curious.

 

[deafgal]

Probably not. I think it should go to those that really need it! We earn 35k combined and it comes in very handy. The price of living is crazy where we live.
We aren't entitled to any other benefit. I think the current system is very unfair and it should be based on total household income rather than how much one person earns

I am not from the U.K. but in the U.S. , they do look into the whole household income but sometimes when a man makes too much, he selfishly keep it to himself and tells the woman what she can and can not spend. And she is stuck because she has no money saved up.

 

[kates84]

I don't claim child benefit. We are entitled to it - my hubby currently earns £35K a year and my income varies as a self employed freelance writer but as I've only been doing it year, it's not a huge amount.

However, we do not need it and we don't believe in taking things that other people really need just because we can. We wouldn't go to a buffet and eat everything in sight just because "it's there" when that food could be the only meal some other people would get all week.

We own a house down south and we've been without a tenant since a week after our little boy was born (about 4 months now). We've had to pay mortgage payments of £700 a month plus the rent of where we are living and we still manage to put money in to a savings account for our little boy each month, have nice outings every weekend, buy good clothes and pay for me to take another degree. How the heck could we justify claiming a "measly" £20 a week from the public purse when it could be so better spent elsewhere?

It doesn't matter to us that we've paid in to the system since we were 15. Legal entitlement and moral entitlement are two very different things.

This is aimed at people who don't need child benefit at all but still claim, not the higher income earners who are actually struggling - I know that circumstances are different and some families genuinely struggle on £50k+

 

[Tasha]

Out of interest, am I right in thinking child benefit helps with pension contributions, so if a woman is a SAHM and her husband now earns £44k+ so she's not entitled, does that mean she won't "earn" enough for the state pension? There was something on here about it recently but not in light of the changes to the system. Just curious.

Yes, you are right in thinking that, think its called National Insurance Credits. But they did account for that concern, in that you can still claim but you pay the money back through a tax return at the end of the year. This is what I would do if my husband earned over the threshold, four reasons why I wouldn't opt out are 1) the national insurance credits 2) you can put that money in a savings account and the interest over the year can go towards your childs savings 3) some schools require the child benefit letter when your child starts school 4) it is easier to be in the system should your income go back down and you now need to claim the CB

 

[lau86]

I don't claim child benefit. We are entitled to it - my hubby currently earns £35K a year and my income varies as a self employed freelance writer but as I've only been doing it year, it's not a huge amount.

However, we do not need it and we don't believe in taking things that other people really need just because we can. We wouldn't go to a buffet and eat everything in sight just because "it's there" when that food could be the only meal some other people would get all week.

We own a house down south and we've been without a tenant since a week after our little boy was born (about 4 months now). We've had to pay mortgage payments of £700 a month plus the rent of where we are living and we still manage to put money in to a savings account for our little boy each month, have nice outings every weekend, buy good clothes and pay for me to take another degree. How the heck could we justify claiming a "measly" £20 a week from the public purse when it could be so better spent elsewhere?

It doesn't matter to us that we've paid in to the system since we were 15. Legal entitlement and moral entitlement are two very different things.

This is aimed at people who don't need child benefit at all but still claim, not the higher income earners who are actually struggling - I know that circumstances are different and some families genuinely struggle on £50k+

That's an admirable attitude. Have you ever thought about claiming and giving to charity/ saving for your child etc? Not saying you should just wondering....

 

[Foogirl]

We're in the group who have two salaries a bit below the threshold so are still entitled to it. It never occurred to me not to claim it, after all, it's not as if y'all will get more if I don't. We've paid a lot into the system and to be honest, it's nice to get a little back as a wee "thank you". We also use the childcare voucher salary sacrifice and get a tax benefit on buying vouchers. Frankly, if the government says they want to give it, I'll accept it. We wouldn't struggle without it, although it was a great help, when I was on maternity leave. I once lived comfortably on a salary half what it is now. I couldn't live on it now as I'm tied into a mortgage. Should I have continued to share a house with three strangers as my salary increased enough to allow me to buy a property? I bought a fairly expensive car, should I have continued to drive a battered old car when my salary allowed me to afford a better one. Can anyone honestly say if their monthly income increased they wouldn't go out and change their way of life, sticking the rest of it in a savings account. How many lottery winners still live in the 3 bed semi and drive a Nissan micra?

I save the benefit in an account for Abby. She will need it when she reaches the age where the government decide she has to pay for her own equipment and therapies, when she needs assistance for university and getting her own flat. As a disabled child there are lots of services open to her. As a disabled adult there won't be. So as far as I'm concerned we'll take government money now and save it for that.

Universal benefits aren't based on need, and nor should they be. Should we really be in a society where getting an education and working to earn a high salary means you are not rewarded for that in the same way as someone who hasn't done that? Even though both groups of people work equally as hard as each other? the government is trying hard to get more children in to further education but frankly, why should they, when attain a degree and a good salary the government then just take take take? How many of you living on a 20k salary do so without any help from the government? When you factor in what the government gives in tax credits and CB and all the rest, what would the take home look like? 50k isn't a lot of money where one person isn't working. 50k joint income, That's a teacher and a nurse, that's a receptionist and a mechanic, are those people wealthy?

Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with anyone working on a low wage and claiming benefits. But just as some here will berate me for my life choices and claiming child benefit, I could throw that back and say why not instead of asking the taxpayer to bump up your income, go out and get another job, or a better paid one and do without that payment? I'm not gonna because frankly how other people choose to live their lives is none of my damned business. We all do what we are able to do and are following the path life has carved out for us.

I really resent the implication I morally shouldn't claim something the government wants to give me.

Having said all that, no I don't think it's fair the way they have introduced the cut. They should leave it as a universal benefit, just as they said they would before they were elected.

 

[lindseymw]

Very well said Foo.

I'm glad the CB you get & save will mean your LO will have some help when she is adult. (Although I think that should be upto the Government but that's another debate!).

 

[emyandpotato]

We're in the group who have two salaries a bit below the threshold so are still entitled to it. It never occurred to me not to claim it, after all, it's not as if y'all will get more if I don't.

Actually, if everyone who didn't 'need' CB didn't claim, then there would be a substantial amount of money to be spent on other things, things that truly are important that have been cut, such as women's refuges and help for homeless people.

We've paid a lot into the system and to be honest, it's nice to get a little back as a wee "thank you".

I HATE this attitude. It's disgusting. People don't pay taxes as a nice little pension scheme!!! And we all get a great deal back from taxes; we get health care, police, social services, help if we truly need it etc etc etc... Taxes are paid (thank god) to improve the country. Money that you said yourself you would not struggle without is not exactly helping you, it's just a nice little extra for you. But the thing is, it isn't meant as a "wee thank you", taxes are paid to improve the state of the country, help people in need, and pay for the many many services and provisions we have access to.

Should I have continued to share a house with three strangers as my salary increased enough to allow me to buy a property? I bought a fairly expensive car, should I have continued to drive a battered old car when my salary allowed me to afford a better one. Can anyone honestly say if their monthly income increased they wouldn't go out and change their way of life, sticking the rest of it in a savings account. How many lottery winners still live in the 3 bed semi and drive a Nissan micra?

No one is saying you can't buy what you like with your money, but it's fairly safe to say, I think, that if you can buy yourself a nice big car etc etc you shouldn't be complaining about CB. Yes, people live within their means, but why should the government give top ups to people living within much higher means than people really and truly struggling?! It seems fairly straightforward that if you're intelligent enough to get yourself a high salary you can do the simple maths that works out you'll be no longer receiving a tiny £1k a year and budget around that.

Universal benefits aren't based on need, and nor should they be. Should we really be in a society where getting an education and working to earn a high salary means you are not rewarded for that in the same way as someone who hasn't done that? Even though both groups of people work equally as hard as each other? the government is trying hard to get more children in to further education but frankly, why should they, when attain a degree and a good salary the government then just take take take? How many of you living on a 20k salary do so without any help from the government? When you factor in what the government gives in tax credits and CB and all the rest, what would the take home look like? 50k isn't a lot of money where one person isn't working. 50k joint income, That's a teacher and a nurse, that's a receptionist and a mechanic, are those people wealthy?

Not all low earners are imbeciles who haven't gotten an education nor worked for what they have, you know?! And no, why should people who have nice highly paid jobs be rewarded?! They're rewarded by their high earnings. People on lower paid jobs do receive top ups that make the wages substantially higher but only to the extent that they can actually survive on such wages- they're not being pushed up to £50k! And people in lower income jobs work, on average, just as hard as anyone in a higher paid job, and often the more menial jobs are so incredibly mind numbing that the feelings associated with such rival the stress of many higher paid jobs. As you said about the nurse and teacher etc, I don't know about people in such jobs in very expensive areas, such as London, because of course when the cost of living is higher things change, and if you truly need the benefit there is a big difference, however you have already stated that you yourself do not need it, and thus are arguing from the perspective that everyone should get it regardless.

But just as some here will berate me for my life choices and claiming child benefit, I could throw that back and say why not instead of asking the taxpayer to bump up your income, go out and get another job, or a better paid one and do without that payment? I'm not gonna because frankly how other people choose to live their lives is none of my damned business. We all do what we are able to do and are following the path life has carved out for us.

You say 'how other people live their lives' like it's a choice to struggle. Many many people on lower income jobs work in the roles they do because they have no other choice. It isn't many people's dream to work 12 hours a day stacking supermarket shelves, but, especially with how the economy is at the moment, that's what happens for many- educated or not. And for professional low income jobs- whilst the choice to enter the profession was indeed a choice, it is oft not a choice to receive government benefits- or, usually, just tax credits-, it is a necessity. If you're on minimum wage, you'd have to be living in a hostel and eating supernoodles for every meal to survive without government help, as the cost of living (and I'm not talking nice cars and a social life, I'm talking water, electric, food, basic transport to work) has long surpassed the minimum wage. Thing is, the government know this full well, hence the benefits and tax credits, and that's the wonderful thing about this country in comparison to many: it is striving to make people equal in the ways that matter, i.e. basic standards of living, despite wages. And to get a better paid job?! I'm sure billions would love to just go and get a better paid job. For many, though, getting a job at all is extremely difficult. And to get another? So people should have to work 18 hour days to simply survive, because they didn't have the good fortune to fall in to a well paid job, or have the chances in life that led them to it?!?! Now I know you said you're not gonna say that, but the fact that you even wrote that suggests that people claiming in low income jobs is similar to people in higher income jobs claiming because they can. It's not.

I really resent the implication I morally shouldn't claim something the government wants to give me.

If you can afford comfortably not to claim, or to give the money to charity, then really, you shouldn't. Why claim simply for the sake of claiming?! Yes, you're putting it in to a savings account for your LO, that's great, I completely get what you said about her needing help as an adult, but would you not be able to put aside £20 a week otherwise? It isn't exactly the epitome of virtue to take money you don't need when the economy is crippled and others are in dire need, and claim you're entitled, simply because you pay taxes. As a PP said, the sense of entitlement so many have is exactly what is wrong with the western world.