From The Daily Mail:
Thousands of people earning more than £50,000 will lose some of their pay if they move in with a new partner who has children, accountants have warned. Tax experts at Deloitte said the ‘bizarre’ anomaly was the result of government plans to claw back child benefit from homes where at least one resident is a higher earner.
The changes are due to come into force in just 10 weeks, and the Treasury has been forced to insist they remain on track despite hundreds of thousands of families affected being in the dark that they will lose money from January 1. Letters are due to be sent to those affected by HM Revenue and Customs next week...
Under the changes, if one person in the home earns £50,000 or more, the entitlement to child benefit will be gradually cut. If anyone earns more than £60,000, they will lose child benefit all together [sic].
So they're preening themselves for having reduced the (spiteful) 50p tax rate to a marginally less spiteful 45p, but as a quid pro, they are increasing the marginal tax rate on above-average earners by another twenty or thirty per cent (the maths is tricky); bringing in a whole new raft of bureacracy; and as a bonus penalising people who try and make a second attempt at marriage.
Wednesday, 24 October 2012
The Tories show us how to "reward marriage"
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
"bringing in a whole new raft of bureacracy"
This wouldn't be the DWP, by any chance?
B, no no no, the benefit withdrawal will be deal with by HMRC, who frankly have a worse record with these matters (Tax Credits) than the DWP does.
Its jobcreationism. Im really starting to despise those people. I shouldnt. But its really hard. The real gall is there is an army of social reformers who love it. More non productive work for them. More planet saving merit tokens.
the ability of ministers to make policies that result in an increase in bureaucracy is what we need to examine. It is almost as if there is a treaty that says no legislation without increased bureaucracy.
RS, I've despised them for ages.
G, politicians are clueless about anything but sound bites, it's the civil servants who want things to be as complicated as possible. And liars generally.
"it's the civil servants who want things to be as complicated as possible."
Although this looks like civil servants trying to make extra work and hence employ extra staff, as an ex-civil servant, I don't think it is. It's more a futile attempt at loophole closing, to make sure that every case, however bizarre and unusual, is catered for by the regulations. The pols are responsible for the main thrust of such idiocies as the child benefit rules, in a vain attempt to keep the Envious happy.
B, difficult one to call.
Just end feckless reproduction rewards.
No Child Benefit is needed if you work.
SB, you've missed the point and gone off on your favourite rant.
Can you confirm whether your parents have refunded all the Child Benefit they received for you when you were little?
Post a Comment