Uk Government Changes to Child Benefits Are Unfair
UK Government Changes to Child Benefits are Unfair to Families with a Single High Earner
Is it fair that families with a single high earner should have their benefits removed while other families earn tens of thousands more and yet retain theirs? Good evening council and I am here to explain why these changes to child benefits are unfair on families with a single high earning parent or guardian.
The new changes to child benefits state that families with one parent on a wage higher than 60,000 pounds will lose all of their child benefits. Also, those earning over £50,000 will have to pay 1% of the child benefits back in tax for every £100 over this limit that they earn. While I understand that the Government have to make cutbacks in all areas the manner they have implemented these cuts to child benefits are clearly unfair to a single high earner.
A family with both parents on £40,000 per annum will have a joint income of £80,000 yet retain 100% of their child benefits. On the other hand, a family with a single earner on 60,000 will have lost all of their child benefits whilst being on 20,000 less than this other family. So in this situation we see a family losing their benefits while a family with an income that is 25% higher retain theirs.
This loss of child benefits for a family with two children equals to a significant amount of £1720.30 per annum which can be the difference between comfortable living and struggling to provide your children with a sufficient lifestyle. So I ask you this, can the fact a family with less money that don’t receive the financial support that a family with a significantly higher income do be fair?
I understand the reasoning behind the way this policy is that to only have to analyse one guardian or parent there are many man hours saved in the implementation of this change in policy, especially considering how many couples are divorced. Furthermore, the change also coincides with the change in the taxation bracket which makes it
Is it fair that families with a single high earner should have their benefits removed while other families earn tens of thousands more and yet retain theirs? Good evening council and I am here to explain why these changes to child benefits are unfair on families with a single high earning parent or guardian.
The new changes to child benefits state that families with one parent on a wage higher than 60,000 pounds will lose all of their child benefits. Also, those earning over £50,000 will have to pay 1% of the child benefits back in tax for every £100 over this limit that they earn. While I understand that the Government have to make cutbacks in all areas the manner they have implemented these cuts to child benefits are clearly unfair to a single high earner.
A family with both parents on £40,000 per annum will have a joint income of £80,000 yet retain 100% of their child benefits. On the other hand, a family with a single earner on 60,000 will have lost all of their child benefits whilst being on 20,000 less than this other family. So in this situation we see a family losing their benefits while a family with an income that is 25% higher retain theirs.
This loss of child benefits for a family with two children equals to a significant amount of £1720.30 per annum which can be the difference between comfortable living and struggling to provide your children with a sufficient lifestyle. So I ask you this, can the fact a family with less money that don’t receive the financial support that a family with a significantly higher income do be fair?
I understand the reasoning behind the way this policy is that to only have to analyse one guardian or parent there are many man hours saved in the implementation of this change in policy, especially considering how many couples are divorced. Furthermore, the change also coincides with the change in the taxation bracket which makes it