You can only redistribute what you can create and the current consensus seems to be that as a nation we are less productive than we used to be.
But this government has started "means-testing" CB, in a lunatic fashion. The result is that a couple who have one parent bringing in £60K gross, and one parent who stays at home to bring up the children, get zero CB, and a family where both parents go out to work, and bring in £50K gross, each (so total £100K), get full CB, as well as, of course, the benefit of two personal tax free-allowances and 20% income tax bands. It's idiocy, and presented with the laughable statement that "it's wrong for lower-rate tax payers to be paying for CB for higher rate tax payers" when the reverse is the truth (the higher rate tax payers pay the income tax that funds the CB for far more than just themselves). Of course it would be far too difficult to find ways to restrict CB to the first two children, or to make it unecessary to pay it at full UK rate to foreign EU nationals whose children don't even live here...
Well the CB is tax-free in principle, until one of the parents earns £50K+. And any individual (except those grossing more than £100K) has a personal tax free allowance of around £10K (which is not transferable from a non-working spouse to a working one). But you should know that. The personal tax free allowance has been greatly increased by the current government and is probably much larger than in most other countries, but in the UK there are very few other tax reliefs available to employees (pension and charitable contributions, nothing else I can think of). The point I was making was that a couple with a combined gross income of £100K can not only get £20K of it tax free, but also get full CB, whereas a couple with one worker on £60K gets only £10K tax free and no CB. Which seems irrational if not "unfair".
I think their is already a process in place 1st child gets x amount and 2nd child slightly less cant be rocket science to develop it further.
Not quite correct, upto 42k I think you get £10,000 allowance and the rest at 20% tax, anything you earn over 42K is charged at 40% tax
I wasn't going to complicate matters by talking about the non-tax-free part of it! But the truly insane thing is that (ever since the Darling budget which introduced the 50% tax rate from £150K - which only applied as the top rate for about 1 month of Labour government), the personal tax-free allowance is progressively withdrawn for those earning over £100K (not me, but could easily be your GP). This means that the rate of tax between about £100-120K is effectively 62% - that being made up of 40% income tax, 2% NI plus 20% by taking away £1 of personal allowance for every £2 earned). I wonder why so many GPs now work part-time? Successive governments, Labour and Conservative, have developed a nightmare tax and benefits system for the UK.
Well I did a little maths based on your £60k & £50K scenario So a married couple both earn £25k - £10k allowance is £15K minus 20% tax is £12k + the Allowance = £22k * 2 = £44,000 Single parent earning 60K - allowance 50k -20% on 1st 42K A=33600 40% on remaining 8k is B=4,800 so A+B = 38,400 + allowance = £48,400 Child benefit is £20.50 for 1st child per week Child benefit is £13.55 for 2nd child per week so with 2 kids they get £1770.60 a year in CB add that to their total earnings and it is still less than the single parent on 60k with no benefit.
Found this on the Government website Apparently there is a cap on benefit How much is the benefit cap? The level of the cap is: £500 a week for couples (with or without children living with them) £500 a week for single parents whose children live with them £350 a week for single adults who don’t have children, or whose children don’t live with them
I thought you were advocating contribution based beenefits! So surely if I have put in 20k a year fir the last 5 years, I shouod get at least 20k back for a max of 12m, shouldnt I?
... not forgetting National Insurance Employees Contributions, currently 0% up to £8K, then 12% up to the £42K upper limit, then 2% over the upper limit.
Pete I just kept it simple just to show how much difference there was, someone suggested the couple would be better off, obviously not.
Was just saying the filthy rich don't need child benefit or any other type of benefit for that matter.
I would like to think the more you contribute / work pay taxes the more you would get but somehow I can't see it working like that.
No, the example quoted is 50k EACH not combined, ie 100k income yet get CB where 60k single earner doesnt. And you're missing NI btw which is 1% over the threshold
So what does filthy rich look like? Salary based? Asset based? Savings based? Or a title or upper class twit name?
People who own more than one Ducati for a start the bastards lol But joking aside, If you earn enough that you can run a house car put food on the table treat yourself to nice things and still have money left over each month to put away for a rainy day why do you need more money? And those that can do all of that without working deserve more money even less
