Posts: 448 | Threads: 48
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 0

  • VIP
Child benefit to be scrapped for higher taxpayers
Child benefit is to be axed for higher rate taxpayers from 2013, Chancellor George Osborne has announced.

Talking on BBC One's Breakfast ahead of his appearance at the Conservative party conference, he said the move would save about £1bn.

"It's a big decision for us, but we think it's absolutely necessary and fair given the financial situation we face," he said.

Parents earning over about £44,000 who pay 40% tax and above will be affected.
It is estimated the change will affect about 1.2m families - 15% of the total number.

Mr Osborne said: "It's very hard to justify taxing people on much lower incomes in order to pay the child benefit to some of the better off in our society."

He confirmed the cut would hit homes with a single or two high earners. But families with two parents on more modest incomes - which might add up to over £44,000 - will keep the benefit.

He defended this by saying his plan was "the most straightforward" option - which avoided means testing.

Currently child benefit is paid to all families with children.

Mr Osborne said he expected the public to accept that it was not fair to tax someone earning £18,000 a year to pay child benefit to someone earning £50,000.

'In it together'

"It's not a decision we've taken lightly, but given the scale of the debts Labour's left us with, and given they've left us with no plan and we've had to come up with proposals, we think this is fair.

"It means we're all in this together. Each part of society is going to be making a contribution"

At the moment, parents are paid £20.30 a week for the eldest child and £13.40 for subsequent children, with payments continuing until the age of 19 for those in full-time education.

The chancellor insisted this was a "one-off" measure and did not mark the end of the principle of universal benefits which have underpinned the welfare state for decades.

Under the proposed changes, a family where both parents are earning just under £44,000 will continue to receive child benefit while a family where only one person is working and whose income is just above £44,000 will lose the payment.

Asked whether this was an anomaly in the proposal, Mr Osborne said the alternative was to introduce a "complex" system of means testing where all households had their incomes assessed.

People will be expected to declare on their tax returns whether they fall within the 40% and 50% tax brackets and the money will then be clawed back through the tax system.

However, Mr Osborne urged top-rate taxpayers to stop claiming child benefit altogether, saying this would be the "most sensible" thing to do.

BBC political editor Nick Robinson said the measure amounted to a middle-class tax rise that would directly hit most delegates at the Conservative conference.

He said that this reflected the contradiction that, while the party was delighted to be back in government, it was having to come to terms with the reality of the painful decisions facing the country.

Mr Osborne announced in June's Budget that the child benefit will be frozen for three years.

hopefully they'll put that money elsewhere (not holding out much hope) ie respite etc

The page can be found here:
HeartHeart Stacy HeartHeart
Mother to Terry 10 MLD + ADHD, Nicole 9 Cri-du-chat Syndrome ADHD Asthma GDD Coarctation, Jessica 4 Cri-Du-Chat Syndrome GDD Reflux
Posts: 448 | Threads: 48
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 0

  • VIP
but i don't like this, or for now i don't. I need more information (this was started by Daniel on facebook but i had to put it here)

A single “universal credit” for those both in and out of work will be created, scrapping the existing income support, disability benefits, tax credits, jobseeker’s allowance and housing benefits.

The new credit would mean that “it will be worth it for everyone to work, wherever they are in the income scale, whatever benefits they receive. It is truly revolutionary”, Mr Cameron said as the Conservative party conference got under way in Birmingham on Sunday. The change – hammered out after fraught negotiations between the work and pensions secretary and Mr Osborne – would be “one of the boldest and most radical reforms of the welfare state since Beveridge”, whose 1942 report led to the welfare state.
Although the change has been agreed in principle, many details need to be settled between now and the October 20 spending review, including how much is cut from the existing welfare budget to help pay for it, and precisely how much of their extra earnings people will keep.
Under the new system, even a few hours of work a week will pay, with ministers indicating that the likely withdrawal rate will ensure that people keep at least £3.50 out of each £10 they earn, and £2.50 once they earn enough to pay tax and national insurance.
Mr Cameron said “the poverty trap will go” and over time the new, simpler system “will save huge amounts of money” as the current £9bn bill for fraud, error and administration was cut, and as more people worked.
The credit will come with tough new conditions, including pressure on people working a few hours to seek extra hours of work or face sanctions. Mr Duncan Smith said: “We will make work pay. If there’s a job, our expectation is that you take it. There will be no excuse.”
Although ministers are promising “no losers” at the point of transition, the lengthy time-scale reduces the risk, if things go wrong, of huge numbers of losers just ahead of the planned date for the next general election in 2015.
The legislation, planned for next year, will provide a challenge for Labour as the opposition party frames its response. Once in place, the system can be made more or less generous, and Labour has examined the idea in the past.
Yvette Cooper, the former work and pensions secretary, said: “When we looked at similar proposals ... we were advised this would either cost billions of pounds or mean big cuts in support for lots of low- income families.
“Ministers must tell us which it is and where the money is coming from.”



What has been proposed?

A single universal credit to replace a clutch of existing means-tested benefits and tax credits. It will be withdrawn as earnings rise – at a sufficiently slow rate to guarantee that being in work pays.

What do the critics say?

There are advocates for the idea across the political spectrum. A much simpler system would be easier to understand, cheaper to run, and have clear incentives to work. It could also reduce the current £5bn a year of fraud and error and halt the nightmare of over- and underpayments. The critical questions include what the withdrawal rate should be, what sanctions should accompany the new system, which benefits should be included, and how to handle the inevitable losers, as in and out of work payments are brought together.

As the Institute for Fiscal Studies has pointed out, “it is hard to strengthen work incentives without either spending more money or hurting the poor”. If more is to be spent, the proposal implies significant cuts to other parts of the welfare system to pay for it.

FT Verdict

An entirely admirable goal. But it will take years fully to implement. And it inevitably carries the risk of another government IT disaster that would hit the most vulnerable.

HeartHeart Stacy HeartHeart
Mother to Terry 10 MLD + ADHD, Nicole 9 Cri-du-chat Syndrome ADHD Asthma GDD Coarctation, Jessica 4 Cri-Du-Chat Syndrome GDD Reflux
Posts: 19 | Threads: 3
Joined: Sep 2010
Reputation: 0

  • Established member
I read that DLA was not bring affected by these changes and that those who claimed it would also not be affected by the changes, basically the capping of benefits!
Posts: 28 | Threads: 2
Joined: Sep 2010
Reputation: 0

  • Registered
what annoys me about this is that people who will just waste it on beer, fags and sky subscriptions will still get it. Not saying that this applies to anyone here, we have more important demands on our money! I have been trying to save some of it in the building society for my Children in the hope that it will help them through university (though in Sam's case, uni is unlikely Wink )
Mum to Sam (7) Opitz G/BBB syndrome, bronchiolitis obliterans, supraventricular tachycardia, autism. "I am first and foremost, a child"
Posts: 7,752 | Threads: 3,202
Joined: Oct 2009
Reputation: 11

  • Administrators
With all the talk about the benefit cuts i wonder if there were true alterntives?
They needed to make it fairer in regards to the child benefit changes so a one parent family on 45k never lost out when a 2 parent family who could earn 88k would be ok still.
Think maybe they should have had a cap on couples to make it a little fairer.
Maybe they could have saved money by means testing benefits more?
And with any savings use it to reduce the deficit and also spread more money to the more genuine needy.
I have a sister who i dont speak too who has two Children and does not do anything and relies on the state to fund her smoking habit and mobile phone costs and will not work at all.

Her Children are fit and well but she chooses not to work because they allow her not too.
Its wrong that a person can do this as her Children may grow up to believe this is the right thing to do and its sad that a kid has no real role model to look to.

I feel todays benefit generation will create a new generation of lost children who wont want to work and its sad.
Particuallry sad when you consider how many of us here would simply love the chance to work without worry or have our children grow up and achieve something and get a good job but due to circumstances it cannot happen for all.
I think when we have children with special needs we value things so much more and in a way i must admit im jealous of the people who claim benefits and have no reason to not get a job.

Not jealous that many seem to get what they need without working but they have a real choice of choosing not to work or too work and they choose not too.
Yet many here would jump at the chance of holding down a full time job or simply having the choice to do so.

I must say that all of the parents of special needs children are worth 100 times more better than the parents who see children as a simple career option.

We work in more ways than any typical job would involve,we dont work shifts we work 24/7.
We dont have the option of calling in sick we work regardless.
We dont have the option of holiday leave.
We dont get flexi time.
We dont get pay rises.

We have a hard job and not one we chose but we all get on with it and we have our ups and downs but as a parent with a child with special needs we really do the BEST!
So if anyone ever makes you feel like you should get a job or makes you feel down and make you think you are just stay at home parents your not,YOU ARE BRILLIANT WORKERS AND DESERVE ANYTHING YOU CAN GET TO MAKE YOU AND YOUR CHILDS LIFE MORE COMFORTABLE.

Just gets you mad that people take so many little chances for granted and we just plough on Smile
Looking for sensory toys at affordable prices then look no further

Sensory toys for children with special needs CLICK HERE

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)