Tax to repay - Child Benefit
Discussion
RYH64E said:
Childcare is an irrelevance for many high earning couples, I'm in the fortunate position (?) of having two teenage children, one thing they don't need is childcare.
Absolutely, I was countering the supposition that 2 working parents might need to pay for childcare and this might justify their"need" for child benefit, despite a high household income.In other news:
When I moved overseas I forgot to terminate child benefit. It was paid into our UK bank account, which I did'nt use whilst overseas. After about a year I noticed that CB had continued to be paid, so I contacted the benefits department to explain and arrange paying back the cash - they sent me a bill in the end for about £400 more than we had received. Never did get the bottom of that!
superkartracer said:
http://www.barnardos.org.uk/what_we_do/our_work/ch...
Start here if you like, then maybe the care homes and the 12k that go missing each year in the UK. Maybe then look into the gangs that abuse them ( including professional rings ) .
Maybe you can help this poor lot ( http://www.starlight.org.uk) like i do
All child benefit is madness?
I don't think any of that necessarily indicates that cash child benefit is a good thing. Indeed, if you assume that the people caught in that raft of stats actually receive child benefit, it might suggest that it prevents nothing.Start here if you like, then maybe the care homes and the 12k that go missing each year in the UK. Maybe then look into the gangs that abuse them ( including professional rings ) .
Maybe you can help this poor lot ( http://www.starlight.org.uk) like i do
All child benefit is madness?
Child benefit is an anachronism. And evidently a very poor way of ensuring children are helped. It should be stopped across the board to remove the bleating, and if extra help is needed for families in need, then apply it a different way to those who genuinely need it and in a way that genuinely helps them.
(Also, the word "poverty" is so overused in this country it's frankly meaningless).
lauda said:
pork911 said:
so to be clear, do you NEED the child benefit?
if yes, why did you have kids you can't afford?
if no, why are you scrounging?
Do you make use of your tax allowances? Do you utilise ISAs or Premium Bonds? Make contributions to a pension scheme and claim tax relief? Would you voluntarily pay tax at your marginal rate on your winnings if you won the lottery?if yes, why did you have kids you can't afford?
if no, why are you scrounging?
All are perfectly legal and common ways of minimising tax/maximising income. Do they make you a 'scrounger'? Of course they don't and neither does claiming a benefit that you're perfectly entitled to, especially if you're working and already contributing a f
k-load to the Treasury via income tax and NI. I fall into the £50-60k bracket (after making some pretty substantial pension contributions) and I certainly don't consider myself a scrounger for claiming back a very small proportion of my money that the government has taken from me in tax. I assume that you'll be turning down any future increases in the personal allowance so that you can make your full and necessary contributon to the government coffers and not do the public purse out of any money.
Edited by lauda on Friday 23 January 20:29
A lot of sneering on this thread, I think child benefit should be provided, it is a bit of help for those with kids, dont see the problem. I think it is tough for a lot of people to make ends meet, if you have a house with one person working and one looking after kids, income of thirty grand, that is 2 grand a month take home, from that they have to provide accommodation, clothing, transport, food, heat, light etc, 2 grand a month goes nowhere. If you are working it isnt a benefit, it is getting a bit of your tax back to help with bringing up kids.
Without it, a lot of working people wouldn't have kids or would defer it until they could afford it, as it is the feckless will breed anyway, is that what we want, just the underclass able to have kids ?
Listening to those with no kids, with plenty of money pontificating is annoying, someone has to have kids, or do we stop having them, would it only be for earners over 150k ? even on fairly good money, when you have kids that extra is valuable.
As it is, I get the sentiment of the scheme but the holes in it are awful, the fact that a couple on 60k (30k each) still get it yet a single earner on 60k doesnt, and gets to pay more tax as well, then there is the fact they give it you and then grab it back, which has left a lot of people who ignored it with big bills.
I am on about sixty and got caught in it, it means that for every quid extra I earn in that band, it effectively gets taxed at sixty odd percent, £100 in that band gets taxed at 40 percent, NI at whatever that is, then you lose 1 percent of the CB, doesnt exactly inspire you to earn more as you see cock all of it.
As it is, to mitigate it I do the following,
Pay pension, I pay the higher rate pension for our scheme, may as well, I get the CB back and more goes into my pension, it gets taken off before tax so drops my income down by four grand, I get 40 percent of the CB back
Cycle to work scheme, I pay 56 quid a month into that to pay for my nice Trek road bike, that is pre tax also, so another £650 or so taken off, I get 6.5 percent of the CB back, bike actually costs me £20 or so a month
Extra time off, I buy an extra weeks holiday, a grand comes off my basic salary, doesnt affect car allowance so doesnt hit my entire salary, so 10 percent of the CB back
So, I get almost 60 percent of it back, a bit cynical but I pay enough tax and to be honest it would happen pretty much like the above anyway, without contriving anything.
Each month I pay into a separate account to cover the money they will ask for back so I dont get a nasty surprise just before Christmas like many have, I think it is a bit rubbish that they cant make the system work better than this, probably costs a fair amount of what they collect back to administrate.
My kids are all over 16 now so wont get it for long now, will be glad when its over as its a pain in the bum these days.
Without it, a lot of working people wouldn't have kids or would defer it until they could afford it, as it is the feckless will breed anyway, is that what we want, just the underclass able to have kids ?
Listening to those with no kids, with plenty of money pontificating is annoying, someone has to have kids, or do we stop having them, would it only be for earners over 150k ? even on fairly good money, when you have kids that extra is valuable.
As it is, I get the sentiment of the scheme but the holes in it are awful, the fact that a couple on 60k (30k each) still get it yet a single earner on 60k doesnt, and gets to pay more tax as well, then there is the fact they give it you and then grab it back, which has left a lot of people who ignored it with big bills.
I am on about sixty and got caught in it, it means that for every quid extra I earn in that band, it effectively gets taxed at sixty odd percent, £100 in that band gets taxed at 40 percent, NI at whatever that is, then you lose 1 percent of the CB, doesnt exactly inspire you to earn more as you see cock all of it.
As it is, to mitigate it I do the following,
Pay pension, I pay the higher rate pension for our scheme, may as well, I get the CB back and more goes into my pension, it gets taken off before tax so drops my income down by four grand, I get 40 percent of the CB back
Cycle to work scheme, I pay 56 quid a month into that to pay for my nice Trek road bike, that is pre tax also, so another £650 or so taken off, I get 6.5 percent of the CB back, bike actually costs me £20 or so a month
Extra time off, I buy an extra weeks holiday, a grand comes off my basic salary, doesnt affect car allowance so doesnt hit my entire salary, so 10 percent of the CB back
So, I get almost 60 percent of it back, a bit cynical but I pay enough tax and to be honest it would happen pretty much like the above anyway, without contriving anything.
Each month I pay into a separate account to cover the money they will ask for back so I dont get a nasty surprise just before Christmas like many have, I think it is a bit rubbish that they cant make the system work better than this, probably costs a fair amount of what they collect back to administrate.
My kids are all over 16 now so wont get it for long now, will be glad when its over as its a pain in the bum these days.
aka_kerrly said:
Or am I giving 'most' people too much credit here? As I see it if you are on £50k a year but desperately need the additional circa £1700pa of child benefit (based on 2children) then you need to get a grip of your finances! (not suggesting the OP is doing this!!!)
I'm hoping that the majority cut back on having kids as a result leaving future generations and the Govt fked due to lack of taxpayers. Reap what you sow etc.TX.
J4CKO said:
....or would defer it until they could afford it...
A radical idea...if only it would spread.J4CKO said:
... it is a bit of help for those with kids,...
Problem is, there are more people needing help (in all sorts of situations) than we have money to help them properly with.J4CKO said:
....a bit cynical but I pay enough tax ...
Arguably none of us paying tax are paying enough, otherwise there would be no deficit.Of course the other view is that we are spending way too much.
Personally I fall more into the latter camp than the former, and feel that too many people enjoy the warmth of the state's safety blanket rather than stand properly and fully on their own two feet knowing there's a safety net in extremis.
I also see nothing generically wrong with means testing benefits. Indeed it makes serious sense. The time it doesn't, that is often cited, is when doing the means testing costs more than you'd save. My thoughts on that are (a) I'd be prepared to take a negative hit just to ensure the right people get the funds and (b) the benefits system is way, way too fragmented which drives means testing not being cost effective.
Murph7355 said:
J4CKO said:
....or would defer it until they could afford it...
A radical idea...if only it would spread.J4CKO said:
... it is a bit of help for those with kids,...
Problem is, there are more people needing help (in all sorts of situations) than we have money to help them properly with.J4CKO said:
....a bit cynical but I pay enough tax ...
Arguably none of us paying tax are paying enough, otherwise there would be no deficit.Of course the other view is that we are spending way too much.
Personally I fall more into the latter camp than the former, and feel that too many people enjoy the warmth of the state's safety blanket rather than stand properly and fully on their own two feet knowing there's a safety net in extremis.
I also see nothing generically wrong with means testing benefits. Indeed it makes serious sense. The time it doesn't, that is often cited, is when doing the means testing costs more than you'd save. My thoughts on that are (a) I'd be prepared to take a negative hit just to ensure the right people get the funds and (b) the benefits system is way, way too fragmented which drives means testing not being cost effective.
By all means means test benefits but at the same time let's make them genuine welfare benefits not just reward the feckless and workshy into the bargain.
tomw2000 said:
This news has partly made a great Friday (at the end of a vile week) even greater.
C'mon tax evading, breeders* - cough up what you owe.
Or did you all miss the HUGE HMRC ad campaign about the a couple of years ago?
(*if the cap fits, etc).
"Breeders", isn't that a pejorative term used by the gay community when talking about heterosexual couples with children ?C'mon tax evading, breeders* - cough up what you owe.
Or did you all miss the HUGE HMRC ad campaign about the a couple of years ago?
(*if the cap fits, etc).
You ever going to have kids ?
J4CKO said:
tomw2000 said:
This news has partly made a great Friday (at the end of a vile week) even greater.
C'mon tax evading, breeders* - cough up what you owe.
Or did you all miss the HUGE HMRC ad campaign about the a couple of years ago?
(*if the cap fits, etc).
"Breeders", isn't that a pejorative term used by the gay community when talking about heterosexual couples with children ?C'mon tax evading, breeders* - cough up what you owe.
Or did you all miss the HUGE HMRC ad campaign about the a couple of years ago?
(*if the cap fits, etc).
You ever going to have kids ?
pork911 said:
I totally agree and accept you believe that if you would never criticise any changes to entitlement to child benefit, anyone claiming any benefits, anyone avoiding any tax and anyone using food banks or anything else they might be entitled to regardless of need.
You are one sick piggy - do you think people use food banks for fun? It is a sad day when we have scumbags like you having a pop at those who are forced into using foodbanks. What is worse is that the use of foodbanks seem to be on the rise, not decreasing. Do you really think that people use foodbanks because they think they are entitled to them? You, sir, are in need of a good slap!!!!!xjsdriver said:
You are one sick piggy - do you think people use food banks for fun? It is a sad day when we have scumbags like you having a pop at those who are forced into using foodbanks. What is worse is that the use of foodbanks seem to be on the rise, not decreasing. Do you really think that people use foodbanks because they think they are entitled to them? You, sir, are in need of a good slap!!!!!
NOPEnot for fun
So they can afford a nice new iPhone
J4CKO said:
"Breeders", isn't that a pejorative term used by the gay community when talking about heterosexual couples with children ?
You ever going to have kids ?
I believe so, yes. It was a gay friend I got the term from. You ever going to have kids ?
I'll never be having kids, thanks. Wife and I took a concious decision not to have children.
I'm just hoping hmrc catch all these fraudulent child benefit claimants. Every little helps and we are, after all, all in this together.
McWigglebum4th said:
NOPE
not for fun
So they can afford a nice new iPhone
Wow!!! Wiggles.....no random, yet moronic "ironic" shouts of Freedom from you this morning? Decided to grow up have we and actually try your hand at debating for once?..... Keep up the good work, even if I heartily disagree with your sweeping generalisation........ not for fun
So they can afford a nice new iPhone
What's fking me off us that we have to actually do something about this in order to avoid getting landed with a near 2k bill somewhere down the line (which we'd struggle to pay in one hit).
My Mrs came of maternity, then went part time, then back to full time, then recently got promoted to within the new threshold. She hasn't a clue about this scheme and if it weren't for me flagging it up due to this thread then we'd likely have carried on oblivious. As it stands it looks like she now has to piss about registering for self assessment or just telling them to keep it.
How does it work month to month, do you still get the benefit as tax relief each month then pay it back as a lump sum at the financial year end or is your tax code adjusted to cover it?
king me off us that we have to actually do something about this in order to avoid getting landed with a near 2k bill somewhere down the line (which we'd struggle to pay in one hit). My Mrs came of maternity, then went part time, then back to full time, then recently got promoted to within the new threshold. She hasn't a clue about this scheme and if it weren't for me flagging it up due to this thread then we'd likely have carried on oblivious. As it stands it looks like she now has to piss about registering for self assessment or just telling them to keep it.
How does it work month to month, do you still get the benefit as tax relief each month then pay it back as a lump sum at the financial year end or is your tax code adjusted to cover it?
Edited by dave_s13 on Sunday 25th January 19:37
Once you have sorted yourself out for Self Assessment - which I would guess is now a priority for you - and you have established how much you need to pay back - you can either have it recovered through an adjustment in the tax code, or you can pay it up front.
The latter is preferable in my experience because once HMRC starts mucking with tax codes you'll never work out where you stand.
The latter is preferable in my experience because once HMRC starts mucking with tax codes you'll never work out where you stand.
dave_s13 said:
Why, strange assumption?
Lots of paye bods are on North of 60k I'd have thought.
It's an alien concept, self assessment, when you've only ever been paye.
I thought you had to submit a self assessment form if you were in the 40% band so you can declare any interest on savings etc? Might be wrong though.Lots of paye bods are on North of 60k I'd have thought.
It's an alien concept, self assessment, when you've only ever been paye.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff