Child Benefit reduction confirmed...

MILF

So it's definately gonna happen then. Mary Hanafin confirmes that the Government are taxing or means testing the Child Benefit.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0628/hanafinm.html

Well that's a lot of us f****d then. I know when the first Tuesday of every month rolls around, my child benefit for two children has already been earmarked since pretty much the first Wednesdy of the previous month. Reducing it AT ALL is gonna mess up so many people.

What are your thoughts??

IT Loser

MILF wrote: »

So it's definately gonna happen then. Mary Hanafin confirmes that the Government are taxing or means testing the Child Benefit.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0628/hanafinm.html

Well that's a lot of us f****d then. I know when the first Tuesday of every month rolls around, my child benefit for two children has already been earmarked since pretty much the first Wednesdy of the previous month. Reducing it AT ALL is gonna mess up so many people.

What are your thoughts??

I know, I know.......the whole thing is messed up. I would glady take a hit in my dole, I would settle for 66% of what the going rate is and not touch the child benefit.

On a broader note, the entire thing is quite messed up, mired in bureaucracy and what not.

tinner777

MILF wrote: »

So it's definately gonna happen then. Mary Hanafin confirmes that the Government are taxing or means testing the Child Benefit.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0628/hanafinm.html

Well that's a lot of us f****d then. I know when the first Tuesday of every month rolls around, my child benefit for two children has already been earmarked since pretty much the first Wednesdy of the previous month. Reducing it AT ALL is gonna mess up so many people.

What are your thoughts??

how will this be managed? I dread to think

jape

MILF wrote: »

So it's definately gonna happen then. Mary Hanafin confirmes that the Government are taxing or means testing the Child Benefit.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0628/hanafinm.html

Well that's a lot of us f****d then. I know when the first Tuesday of every month rolls around, my child benefit for two children has already been earmarked since pretty much the first Wednesdy of the previous month. Reducing it AT ALL is gonna mess up so many people.

What are your thoughts??

I think that's fair enough, at the moment it doesn't make sense that millionaire parents, company directors, etc get exactly the same rate as, for example, a jobless couple or with 1 parent working minimum wage and the other on welfare who need it more. What's the problem with means testing ?

dvpower

MILF wrote: »

So it's definately gonna happen then. Mary Hanafin confirmes that the Government are taxing or means testing the Child Benefit.

Wasn't this flagged at the last budget? Nothing new here.

Euro_Kraut

I would imagine that taxing it will be the best way of introducing the cuts. Its fair enough when you think about it. The higher earners get a 41% cut, middle earners lose 20% and low earners and unemployed stay the same.

IT going to be rough for everyone but at least the pain will be felt in accordance to the peoples income. It was never fair that people who earned 200k a year got the same child benefit as some on 20k.

niceirishfella

If its means tested and takes away the payment from people with lots of cash, fair enough. But its got to have a mechanism to ensure ordinary people don't get Screwed, I'm ok with it.

jape

niceirishfella wrote: »

If its means tested and takes away the payment from people with lots of cash, fair enough. But its got to have a mechanism to ensure ordinary people don't get Screwed, I'm ok with it.

That's exactly what a means test is afaik

MILF

Yep, all good points but its focusing on the high earners and them losing their CB. Taxing it in any way is still gonna hit the people like me who are barely surviving as it is. I rely on the child benefit as do a lot of people in my situation. Why not save money in other areas like stop pumping money into building a stupid bridge shaped like a harp or ridiculous other things that the Government are pissing away their cash on. It drives me mad....

Euro_Kraut

MILF wrote: »

Yep, all good points but its focusing on the high earners and them losing their CB. Taxing it in any way is still gonna hit the people like me who are barely surviving as it is. I rely on the child benefit as do a lot of people in my situation. Why not save money in other areas like stop pumping money into building a stupid bridge shaped like a harp or ridiculous other things that the Government are pissing away their cash on. It drives me mad....

So you are in favour of cuts so long as they don't impact on you.

dvpower

Euro_Kraut wrote: »

I would imagine that taxing it will be the best way of introducing the cuts. Its fair enough when you think about it. The higher earners get a 41% cut, middle earners lose 20% and low earners and unemployed stay the same.

IT going to be rough for everyone but at least the pain will be felt in accordance to the peoples income. It was never fair that people who earned 200k a year got the same child benefit as some on 20k.

Taxing it would be the simplest option of the two (but perhaps not the fairest - people on 200k would receive the same benefit as someone on 50k).

But there is a third option - abolish it. Put some savings into increased social welfare dependant child payments, put some into measures to support childcare or reduce VAT on goods and services used by parents.

MILF

Euro_Kraut wrote: »

So you are in favour of cuts so long as they don't impact on you.

Did I once say that? I wasn't in favour of the 1% levy, I wasn't in favour of the medical card fiasco, I wasn't in favour of the dole cut that people living at home got, I wasn't in favour of the reduction of rent allowance for those on it, I certainly wasn't in favour of the cuts being made at Crumlin Childrens Hospital and I'm not in favour of this. But I don't see anything wrong being annoyed at cuts that affect you as a person, surely that makes sense to you?

jape

MILF wrote: »

Yep, all good points but its focusing on the high earners and them losing their CB. Taxing it in any way is still gonna hit the people like me who are barely surviving as it is. I rely on the child benefit as do a lot of people in my situation. Why not save money in other areas like stop pumping money into building a stupid bridge shaped like a harp or ridiculous other things that the Government are pissing away their cash on. It drives me mad....

The samuel beckett bridge cost €10,000,000 (€10 million once off)

The social welfare system costs €21,500,000,000 (€21.5 billion per year)

MILF

jape wrote: »

The samuel beckett bridge cost €10,000,000 (€10 million once off)

The social welfare system costs €21,500,000,000 (€21.5 billion per year)

€10 million that I'm sure could have gone on something better, don't you think? Crumlin Hospital maybe?

dvpower

MILF wrote: »

€10 million that I'm sure could have gone on something better, don't you think? Crumlin Hospital maybe?

Same argument can be made for child benefit.

MILF

You don't think the child benefit money that the Government is paying out is going on something good?? The children?? Do you have kids??

Euro_Kraut

MILF wrote: »

Did I once say that?

Essentially, yes. You say yourself:

I don't see anything wrong being annoyed at cuts that affect you as a person

Of course its natural to be annoyed. We are all annoyed about cuts. But we have to move beyond being annoyed now and start getting constructive. Your post earlier was just a rant. Doesn't add much to the debate aside from letting off a little steam.

There has to be cuts in Child Benefit. I'm sure you agree. Some where in the region €500 million needs to be saved. I would be interested in hearing what your proposals are. Others have offered theirs here.

dvpower

MILF wrote: »

You don't think the child benefit money that the Government is paying out is going on something good?? The children?? Do you have kids??

I think the bridge is good. I also think Child Benefit is good, but its far too much because it goes to people who don't need it. I do have kids and the money is very handy, but this untargeted benefit is a luxury we can no longer afford.

There are far better ways for the Government to support parents.

MILF

So were not allowed "rant" on here or let off a little steam?

Yes, I agree that cuts need to be made and, yes I think CB would be one of the obvious ones to cut but I just hope they do it the sensible way. For me, I think means testing it is the best way. It will save lots and make the whole thing fairer. My question is now though, what will happen the people who get it taken off them once the recession ends? Sorry if that sounds a little thick but it just baffles me how all the cuts will end up at the end of the recession.

MILF

dvpower wrote: »

I think the bridge is good. I also think Child Benefit is good, but its far too much because it goes to people who don't need it. I do have kids and the money is very handy, but this untargeted benefit is a luxury we can no longer afford.

There are far better ways for the Government to support parents.

I have to say, I agree with this (apart from the bridge!). Point well made!!

jape

MILF wrote: »

Sorry if that sounds a little thick but it just baffles me how all the cuts will end up at the end of the recession.

I think that should be the least of your worries. But even during boom times, child benefit should be means tested. Rich people don't need it now, and they didn't need it in 1999-2007 either.

dvpower

The problem with means testing is that, while it is fairer, it does requires a lot of administration. That's a whole pile of new civil servants - money paid to adminitrators, not children.

MILF

jape wrote: »

I think that should be the least of your worries. But even during boom times, child benefit should be means tested. Rich people don't need it now, and they didn't need it in 1999-2007 either.

It's not a worry, its a query and a thought I had.

themadchef

Means test would be a much fairer way. More expensive? Yes, ive no doubt it would be. There are lots of couple who bank this every month and have done since the kids were born as a college fund. I don't have that luxury.

What are we saying though by taxing the CB for people paying minimal tax? We are saying IMO "you would be better off on the dole where you can get all your benefits".

As someone who works damn hard for a living, for the sake of a couple of euro i would almost be better off sitting at home claiming benefits as it is. Tax my CB and you are taking alot of people like me out of the work force. WHY? Because the people on social welfare will be taking home more at the end of the week than i am.


Yes i'm worried but, it will be what it will be and life will go on.

astrofool

MILF wrote: »

€10 million that I'm sure could have gone on something better, don't you think? Crumlin Hospital maybe?

The bridge will bring in far more money through the extra retail business it allows in the area, and alleviating traffic in the city centre. It'll go down on the books as a once off payment with a long term pay back.

Money spent on social welfare disappears without any pay back (apart from intangibles). The bridge is a bad example.

I wouldn't agree with means testing, as it creates extra bureaucracy, easier to scam, and will bring up lots of unfair scenarios.

Taxing sounds about the best way to do it.

This should also be brought about with a similar reduction in social welfare.

For us to balance the books, we will all have to pay, taxing "the rich" (i.e. anyone but me) too much, may end up reducing our tax take.

Euro_Kraut

MILF wrote: »

So were not allowed "rant" on here or let off a little steam?

Well there is always the Ranting & Raving forum....

Ah no of course you can. Its always upsetting to get news that your income will be cut and I probably came across as unsympathetic. I thinks it awful that people like you will see there incomes being cut. Its the byproduct of a series of bad decisions made over the past 10 years by our leaders. Now everyone from the elderly to middle income earners to special need children will feel the chill. Its an awful shame.

Now there's my rant over too..

Euro_Kraut

themadchef wrote: »

Means test would be a much fairer way. More expensive? Yes, ive no doubt it would be.

I would worry about the logistics of the mean test. Would it require extra staff in the Dept of Social Welfare? At a time when we are looking to cut back on PS numbers would this be feasible?

I take on the point of means testing be more equitable. There certainly is the potential to create welfare traps under a taxed scheme.

dvpower

Euro_Kraut wrote: »

I take on the point of means testing be more equitable. There certainly is the potential to create welfare traps under a taxed scheme.

There is a dependant child allowance paid to welfare recipients. I think its €26 p/w. This could be reduced by an amount equivalent to the standard rate tax on CB. This would mitigate the welfare trap problem.

graciebaby

themadchef wrote: »

As someone who works damn hard for a living, for the sake of a couple of euro i would almost be better off sitting at home claiming benefits as it is. Tax my CB and you are taking alot of people like me out of the work force. WHY? Because the people on social welfare will be taking home more at the end of the week than i am.

I work full time and I have two kids, neither of whom qualify for the free preschool place in January, and I pay a lot of money in childcare each month. My c.benefit helped me to cover some of this expense- I'm already put to the pin of my collar to pay bills with all the new levies etc, even taxing the C.B. will add further pressure.

Loosing c.benefit will mean that I would be better off at home, receiving social welfare payments, instead of working- and I'm sure I won't be alone in thinking that. Where is the incentive to work?

dvpower

graciebaby wrote: »

Loosing c.benefit will mean that I would be better off at home, receiving social welfare payments, instead of working- and I'm sure I won't be alone in thinking that. Where is the incentive to work?

The touted upcoming reduction in social welfare?

Xiney

For those who are working, the incentive to work when social welfare is "so high" is difficult to understand.

But once you've spent 8 months at home, bored out of your mind, surviving but worrying constantly about money, hearing nothing back from your many job applications, yet thankful that you now qualify for the medical card so that you can afford the anti-depressants you now need to keep your head above water.... you'd do anything to be working.


There are certainly those who only look at the financial side of things. But earning a living has benefits beyond the monetary.



(Dearie me, forum moderator went a bit off topic there. Carry on then.)

Math Coke

In response to dvpower, if you were to cut VAT on items related to children I can only imagine the retailers would bump up the price, maybe not straight away but slowly through the passage of time any benefit to the consumer would be eroded. For some people the child benefit pays for the shoes/clothes or nappies but for others it is the second holiday or trip to the salon. Really though, abolishing it would hit a lot of people very hard!

I am in favour of means testing but not taxing it. The question then is:-

what kinda household income would stop you getting CB??

graciebaby

Irony Maiden, unfortuately, it's a case of actually being able to afford to go work that will cause problems, not that I don't want to work, and it is a worry because I can't afford to not work either!

Also taking money out of the system will have a knock on effect on other areas too- take retail, for example, many small shops are closing already because people have no money to buy anything. Those who worked in the shops have children in creches, they'll now have to take them out, creches loose business, then close, creche staff loose jobs etc.

yes, it is true that for some c.benefit means getting the nails done or retouching the highlights once a month, but for many it is the money to pay for the schoolbooks,clothes, shoes, school bus fees, braces and the millions of other things kids need.

IT Loser

Anybody who says that there is "NO INCENTIVE TO WORK" needs their head examining, or is being bloody insulting for the sake of it.

If you know anything about anything then you know that a job is SO MUCH MORE than a basic income.

I WANT OUT of my Parents house.
I WANT a motor
I WANT to date a girl and go to a restaurant with her and meet her folks

I CANT do ANY of the above COS I GOT NO JOB.

To suggest I would willingly swap a motor, a life and a position in society for €204 a week and a trip to the Dole Office every month is so wrong. Its just so wrong.

And to think: I have to wait 10 weeks just to have the luxury in the first place?

IT Loser

graciebaby wrote: »

Irony Maiden, unfortuately, it's a case of actually being able to afford to go work that will cause problems, not that I don't want to work, and it is a worry because I can't afford to not work either!

Also taking money out of the system will have a knock on effect on other areas too- take retail, for example, many small shops are closing already because people have no money to buy anything. Those who worked in the shops have children in creches, they'll now have to take them out, creches loose business, then close, creche staff loose jobs etc.

yes, it is true that for some c.benefit means getting the nails done or retouching the highlights once a month, but for many it is the money to pay for the schoolbooks,clothes, shoes, school bus fees, braces and the millions of other things kids need.

So true: friend of mine, his father works in stone and gravel. He basically summed the trouble up when he said that what was needed was for people to "just start spending again".

Its the bottom line. We need a circulation of capital. Stopping money never made money.

MILF

I lost my job in Jan after working years in a legal firm as a legal sec. Next thing I know, I've no option but to go on the dole. It's all new to me. I hate, hate, HATE it but I HAVE NO OPTION. I apply for every job I think I'm suitable for but I don't even get a recognition email from these recruiters anymore. The child benefit, especially since Jan, was digging me out of a huge hole bill-wise each month and I expect it is doing the same for thousands of families around the country. I so desperately want to get back to work, to get my kids back in a creche and interacting with other kids and for us to stop surviving and start living...but we can't. Taking away more money from the likes of me is putting SO MUCH PRESSURE on an already near-exploding pressure pot is too much.

It's a rant, I know, but I am a product of what this Government, and their decisions, are doing to us.

97i9y3941

im sure some are going to be upset that their social life will be affected now...

IT Loser

Fred83 wrote: »

im sure some are going to be upset that their social life will be affected now...

Now, I think you might rephrase that so as to be less inflammatory.

Mrs Smurfit used to save up the kiddies allowance and buy shoes with it.

So what if the rest of the mommas get the occassional night out with the difference???

97i9y3941

i did say some ,i know theres people that really depend on it of course,apologises

niceirishfella

MILF wrote: »

I lost my job in Jan after working years in a legal firm as a legal sec. Next thing I know, I've no option but to go on the dole. It's all new to me. I hate, hate, HATE it but I HAVE NO OPTION. I apply for every job I think I'm suitable for but I don't even get a recognition email from these recruiters anymore. The child benefit, especially since Jan, was digging me out of a huge hole bill-wise each month and I expect it is doing the same for thousands of families around the country. I so desperately want to get back to work, to get my kids back in a creche and interacting with other kids and for us to stop surviving and start living...but we can't. Taking away more money from the likes of me is putting SO MUCH PRESSURE on an already near-exploding pressure pot is too much.

It's a rant, I know, but I am a product of what this Government, and their decisions, are doing to us.

Milf, I hear ya! Hang on in there.

icbarros

dvpower wrote: »

The problem with means testing is that, while it is fairer, it does requires a lot of administration. That's a whole pile of new civil servants - money paid to adminitrators, not children.

Good point!
And I heard they are not even coping with the Jobseeker allowance means tests.

And HSE is spending €16m, yes, sixteen million euro a year to hire advisers!:eek:
(The Irish mail, June 28)

97i9y3941

its like everything else,if you work for the gov you got them by the balls when comes to pay and contracts....

gowayouttadat

I don't think the public service are capable of means testing CB without the administration of it costing a fortune in the long run. To me taxing it is the only possible way of introducing the cuts. How they do it will be extremely important. If they're going to tax it at income tax rates will people like MILF who are on the dole be exempt because they don't currently pay income tax? etc etc

There are endless questions that can't be answered until we are fully aware of how they are going to go about it. I know couples who currently don't even spend CB. They put it in an account for when the child hits 18. Things like that need to be stopped but they need to do it sensibly. I have my doubts that this government will be able to implement this successfully.

IT Loser

gowayouttadat wrote: »

I don't think the public service are capable of means testing CB without the administration of it costing a fortune in the long run. To me taxing it is the only possible way of introducing the cuts. How they do it will be extremely important. If they're going to tax it at income tax rates will people like MILF who are on the dole be exempt because they don't currently pay income tax? etc etc

There are endless questions that can't be answered until we are fully aware of how they are going to go about it. I know couples who currently don't even spend CB. They put it in an account for when the child hits 18. Things like that need to be stopped but they need to do it sensibly. I have my doubts that this government will be able to implement this successfully.

That was the excuse Hanafin was getting ready to make alright..."Oooh...the logistics of means testing 500,000 mothers".

Nolanger

Fred83 wrote: »

its like everything else,if you work for the gov you got them by the balls when comes to pay and contracts....

The only people with brains in government are the consultants.

schumacher

There are endless questions that can't be answered until we are fully aware of how they are going to go about it. I know couples who currently don't even spend CB. They put it in an account for when the child hits 18. Things like that need to be stopped but they need to do it sensibly. I have my doubts that this government will be able to implement this successfully.[/quote]

I dont see whats wrong with that. Does anyone ever think that people have money because they have worked hard and maybe even saved their money and not spent it on overpriced houses, cars and holidays without ever saving and thinking the raining days would eventually come. I dont have children but i dont understand why people cant accept that they are somewhta to blame for the debt that they find themselves in and people who dont have debt-maybe it is because they didnt live a high life when the celtic tiger was here.Why should they be punished more so than they already are?

dvpower

schumacher wrote: »

Why should they be punished more so than they already are?

Why should they get social welfare payments?

schumacher

dvpower wrote: »

Why should they get social welfare payments?

Because they have a child and a child is a child regardless of whether they have rich or poor parents. Why should they have to pay child benefit through their taxes because that have maybe worked harder for their money?

dvpower

schumacher wrote: »

Because they have a child and a child is a child regardless of whether they have rich or poor parents. Why should they have to pay child benefit through their taxes because that have maybe worked harder for their money?

And where do you suggest we get the money to pay rich parents Child Benefit?

Fighting Irish

schumacher wrote: »

I dont see whats wrong with that. Does anyone ever think that people have money because they have worked hard and maybe even saved their money and not spent it on overpriced houses, cars and holidays without ever saving and thinking the raining days would eventually come. I dont have children but i dont understand why people cant accept that they are somewhta to blame for the debt that they find themselves in and people who dont have debt-maybe it is because they didnt live a high life when the celtic tiger was here.Why should they be punished more so than they already are?

Somewhat?

No, its the banks and the governments fault :pac:

Fighting Irish

dvpower wrote: »

And where do you suggest we get the money to pay rich parents Child Benefit?

that's what broke/jealous people say, i prefer "successful" and most of the time hard working