Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Income Of £100,000, Feels Losing Child Benefit Is Discrimination Against Her Kids


 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 215
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I am actually quite sympathetic to her.

The way I see it, there is little point in the UK trying to earn either £50-60k or £100-115k due to bizarre tax treatments in these bands. £50-60k you pay back a proportion of child benefit, so that is like a 15% increase in your marginal tax rate at 60k, and between £100k and £115k you lose your personal allowance, so at say £115k you'd be paying an extra £3600 or thereabouts which is like an extra 24%.

I don't see why people on either £60k or £115k should have super high marginal tax rates, when someone on £200k has a 45% marginal rate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am actually quite sympathetic to her.

The way I see it, there is little point in the UK trying to earn either £50-60k or £100-115k due to bizarre tax treatments in these bands. £50-60k you pay back a proportion of child benefit, so that is like a 15% increase in your marginal tax rate at 60k, and between £100k and £115k you lose your personal allowance, so at say £115k you'd be paying an extra £3600 or thereabouts which is like an extra 24%.

I don't see why people on either £60k or £115k should have super high marginal tax rates, when someone on £200k has a 45% marginal rate.

its tough at the top.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was listening to this item on the Jeremy Vine show. Pretty much all comments read out by listeners were not on her side.

The middle aged lady called in.She had worked solidly for 30 years, had no children but then had to give up work due to ill health and claim Disability, was giving her both barrells!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it all comes down to human nature. We are all VI's. All the people that think this woman on over £100,000 is mad. Would be agreeing with her if they were all earning that much. and I think I probably would be to. Just reading this forum and listening to the views of the people on it has shown me that. and for proof.

I am actually quite sympathetic to her.

The way I see it, there is little point in the UK trying to earn either £50-60k or £100-115k due to bizarre tax treatments in these bands. £50-60k you pay back a proportion of child benefit, so that is like a 15% increase in your marginal tax rate at 60k, and between £100k and £115k you lose your personal allowance, so at say £115k you'd be paying an extra £3600 or thereabouts which is like an extra 24%.

I don't see why people on either £60k or £115k should have super high marginal tax rates, when someone on £200k has a 45% marginal rate.

My guess this poster is not on minimum wage. And if I was on over £100,000 i would agree with every word he said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am actually quite sympathetic to her.

The way I see it, there is little point in the UK trying to earn either £50-60k or £100-115k due to bizarre tax treatments in these bands. £50-60k you pay back a proportion of child benefit, so that is like a 15% increase in your marginal tax rate at 60k, and between £100k and £115k you lose your personal allowance, so at say £115k you'd be paying an extra £3600 or thereabouts which is like an extra 24%.

I don't see why people on either £60k or £115k should have super high marginal tax rates, when someone on £200k has a 45% marginal rate.

So they (those over £50k) have to pay the same tax rates as those of us without kids.

Awww diddums.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So in other words you work hard, pay tax and even if you lose your job you will never get anything back. This is just another example of the Government using the politics of envy to extract more tax and pay less benefit.

Why shouldn't higher earners get Child Benefit, after all they pay the tax to cover many other families Child Benefit?

So they (those over £50k) have to pay the same tax rates as those of us without kids.

Awww diddums.

Those kids will be working to pay for your healthcare when you retire.

Edited by Peter Hun
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So in other words you work hard, pay tax and even if you lose your job you will never get anything back. This is just another example of the Government using the politics of envy to extract more tax and pay less benefit.

Why shouldn't higher earners get Child Benefit, after all they pay the tax to cover many other families Child Benefit?

Those kids will be working to pay for your healthcare when you retire.

As am I working to pay for others' healthcare. If people want kids they can plan accordingly and should not expect preferential tax rates.

Edited by SHERWICK
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So in other words you work hard, pay tax and even if you lose your job you will never get anything back. This is just another example of the Government using the politics of envy to extract more tax and pay less benefit.

Why shouldn't higher earners get Child Benefit, after all they pay the tax to cover many other families Child Benefit?

Those kids will be working to pay for your healthcare when you retire.

Benefits, historically, were not supposed to be a grab-back. They were supposed to help the poor and unfortunate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am actually quite sympathetic to her.

The way I see it, there is little point in the UK trying to earn either £50-60k or £100-115k due to bizarre tax treatments in these bands. £50-60k you pay back a proportion of child benefit, so that is like a 15% increase in your marginal tax rate at 60k, and between £100k and £115k you lose your personal allowance, so at say £115k you'd be paying an extra £3600 or thereabouts which is like an extra 24%.

I don't see why people on either £60k or £115k should have super high marginal tax rates, when someone on £200k has a 45% marginal rate.

Those at the bottom have marginal tax rates of 100%. Factor in transport an it makes sense to stay on the dole in many cases.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

£100,000 a year is not actually a lot of money. It may sound a lot to someone earning less.

The women is right.

It is discrimination.

The benefit should be for everyone or not at all.

Edited by Asheron
Link to comment
Share on other sites

£100,000 a year is not actually a lot of money. It may sound a lot to someone earning less.

The women is right.

It is discrimination.

The benefit should be for everyone or not at all.

actually the average wage is not a lot of money.

Minimum wage is even less.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think anyone should be given handouts for having children. But if anyone is, then surely higher rate tax payers should not be excluded - let's not lose sight of the fact that they are contributing more than most individuals to the exchequer.

It's a bit like entering the Christmas raffle where if you buy more than one strip of tickets you are excluded from winning the hamper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

actually the average wage is not a lot of money.

Minimum wage is even less.

I don't care for people on minimum wage. Do something about it.

Everyone has the chance to go from Minimum Wage to £100,000 a year.

Taxing the rich more & taking away their benefits is not helping anyone.

It's the Rich & Successful who create jobs in this country.

There are too many generous benefits for people who bum around and have no ambitions in life.

The only people we should be going after is the Super Elite Rich earning over £200,000,000 a year and paying 0% Tax and the useless bums that sit at home and scrounge because they are too embarrassed to clean toilets.

Going after someone earning £100,000 - £200,000 a year is just government theatre.

Edited by Asheron
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Under the old FA system she would have been entitled to it after the first child with no problem but that twit Brown could not leave well alone. It was the same with the Married Man`s Allowance which was stopped as it was not considered fair to those who had a common law marriage now known as Partners. HMRC, have you a Partner Mr Tramp? No, You are single Mr Tramp? No. I don`t understand Mr Tramp. I am married. So you do have a Partner Mr Tramp? Oh just p**s off. :angry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

£100,000 a year is not actually a lot of money. It may sound a lot to someone earning less.

The women is right.

It is discrimination.

The benefit should be for everyone or not at all.

+1

There is no moral level of tax , it's ********. You get some people arguing for 50 or 60% tax on high earners now. You could bet your bottom dollar that if top rate of tax was 85% then not a single one of them would be arguing as vociferously for a 25 or 35% tax cut .

People need to get a grip. The state should pay for the basic services we need, should redistribute some of our cash to ensure social cohesion and the morality argument should really be confined to what we tax and whether that's justified or fruitful .

The level should be just enough .

As it is, we have to play the game under the rules . There have been families on 100k 200k for years getting child benefit ,no wonder people on 100k suddenly feel aggrieved of they suddenly have £3k a year taken out of their net income. As done one said its nature and it's arbitrary . Non kids families with 100k pay the same as before , it's weird because families on 30-40k with 3 kids seem to be treated better than non kid families or singles on the same rate.

Ok people on 100k shouldn't need the benefit , buy do people on 50k need it or do they like having it ?

Edited by Sir Harold m
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.