Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
Child Benefit to be scrapped for higher earners
The materials in this website are in no way intended to replace the professional medical care, advice, diagnosis or treatment of a doctor, qualified personal trainer, therapist, dietitian or nutritionist Runners's World, Part of the Hearst UK well-being network © Copyright 2017
Comments
seth, have you not noticed that they're trying to save money so how exactly would reducing fuel tax achieve this?
but that doesn't stop runners debating this issue??
I earn a decent wage, I dont want kids and I shant have them
I would quite like some fuel benefit tho, or just some working heating please
I think that if benefits are to remain for children then they should only be paid for the first two and the second is a smaller percentage than the first
Some of that benefit for the child should be paid direct to the schools in the area so that they are educated and fed to a decent standard and then can go out and get a proper job and start paying some of it back
Seren, I often hear this trotted out about who's going to look after us in our old age...it's not just nursing home residents who will need today's children...who's going to serve you in shops, cut your hair, service your car etc?
Jez, some grumpy feckers here. Moaning about parent/child parking? Get a life! I expect that the disabled should be in after dark too.
I'm childless by choice. But I accept that I live in a society. I went to school, have access to health care, security etc. Part of being in that society is about pooling resources, paying tax. I don't think I should get a tax break because I don't have kids. That would be crazy!
On this issue, it does seem very unfair going by individual income rather than household. As always, it's those on PAYE and those that are honest about their incomes who will hit the hardest. Surely it wouldn't be much harder to assess a joint income than a single? There has to be a tie up at some point anyway to check.
Seth - if you've come to talk about running you've come to the wrong place
I tend to agree BDB, I don't expect a tax break for not having kids. I do expect the cuts to affect people equally and its a shame that some people will be badly effect by this as LB has pointed out.
I don't expect a tax break for not having kids either but I don't really see why there should be flat rate allowance for having them. It's a choice. I can't think of any other benefit which is paid out for a lifestyle choice ... people don't choose to be disabled/unemployed/old .... so why retain this for anyone. However, if we are going to keep it them make it fair and pay on household income.
To work it through PAYE you would have to assume that everyone who gets the benefit is within the PAYE system which would miss out those who are not working or who are self employed though you could pick them up other ways ... it would be a bit complicated and still wouldn't tie the household income together.
this is beginning to sound like a work comversation
But the tax code would take into account those doing their own tax returns wouldn't it? For those not working, it would be a means tested benefit.
Anyway, that's not how it's going to work. I suspect that it's being put off for 18 months to a)Give it time for people to forget about it, so not hitting opinion polls, but far enough out form General Election to not have an impact, and b)If there is an uproar, give time to work out how to do fairer.
"The nitty-gritty will be decided; we don't have any details yet," said an HMRC spokesman.....yes, right.. apparently the government's announcement took HMRC by surprise (not the first time)
Mr Osborne has suggested that any higher-rate taxpayers in receipt of child benefit may be asked to declare this fact on their self-assessment tax return...so if an employee, it could be clawed back through your code or self employed, through your payments on account.
I think child benefit should be scrapped and if you fall into the catagory of benefits needed due to low income, then you should get some sort of help. However, I do think that there should be a cap on benefits. Why should my taxes pay for someone to keep having children 'because they can'.
Rather than giving benefits in cash to bank accounts, why don't they give it in vouchers. i.e. you choose a nominated shop in your area (tesco, morrisons etc) and you are given an amount to spend there in vouchers or on a 'benefit card' but you aren't allowed to buy alcohol or cigarettes, my reasoning....I don't smoke but if I wanted too I couldn't because I couldn't afford it. The benefit card would also be able to be used to pay gas/electric, they wouldn't need it for council tax because they don't bloody pay any!!!
You've only ever made two comments! And you have chosen at least 50% of those to comment on a non running issue! I didn't check the other one - might have been about running, who knows?
I have made 21,000+
I have probably said running once (or maybe twice) but I got told off for swearing
Isn't that a bit like American food stamps? Do we want a society where being "on welfare" is shameful and stigmatised?
I'm just throwing that in there - I daren't actually answer it....
I will...... Sounds like a good idea
i always get pi$$ed off at the fat munter with loads kids moaning about how hard it is to feed 7 kids at Maccy D's on what she gets on benefit.. As she takes another drag on her fag
Why is it that whenever benefits get mentioned, so many are happy to accept the image of anyone receiving them as fat, lazy, boozing smokers who have pushed out or provided the seed for at least 6 kids?
To use the phrase that seems so popular in politics these days, why can't we have a sensible debate?
All mothers are neglectful fat smokers with unruly kids and don't work as well
Feel free to any sensible debate
But Last Thursday evening on the local news, Fat tattoo'd munter said "Do politicans have any idea how much it costs to feed 7 kids when you are on benefits"
Can't have it every way...
So why not food stamps.. We (the great the good and the tax payer) will provide you with food and sustainance for you and your rabble. We will not pay for Maccy D's. Fags, Booze and tattoo's
I'd rather not pay towards EU farm subsidies, 134 million Euros to Tate & Lyle in 07 for example, or the Export Credits Guarantee Department, wasn't too keen on bailing out the banks either. Taking money from children (I'm childless) wouldn't have been top of my list, the saving is also relatively small and won't do much to address the economic crisis.
Dave, you know that's not a typical parent though.
I wouldn't necessarily object to food stamps or vouchers. Don't see how it would save any money though. How would you use them to pay your gas and electric?
redeemable for electric keys at the local shop?