Just 8 parents opt out of child benefit since 2012

Cabaal

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/just-eight-parents-opt-not-to-claim-child-benefit-392889.html

Even though up to 130,000 people earned over €100,000 last year, just eight parents have contacted the Department of Social Protection since 2012 saying they do not need child benefit.

Its certainly a system that needs changing, having a person earning for example 140k a year and still getting the same benefit as somebody earning 20k a year is frankly nuts.

If you "need" child benefit of around 1.7k on 140k a year then you are living way way past your means,

Mongfinder General

Cabaal wrote: »

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/just-eight-parents-opt-not-to-claim-child-benefit-392889.html



Its certainly a system that needs changing, having a person earning for example 140k a year and still getting the same benefit as somebody earning 20k a year is frankly nuts.

If you "need" child benefit of around 1.7k on 140k a year then you are living way way past your means,

Tax it. All income should be taxed. We have thousands on welfare not paying a penny in income tax.

MRnotlob606

Mongfinder General wrote: »

Tax it. All income should be taxed. We have thousands on welfare not paying a penny in income tax.

Just like we have lots of multinationals not playing due corporation tax. But sure we won't after them

Mongfinder General

MRnotlob606 wrote: »

Just like we have lots of multinationals not playing due corporation tax. But sure we won't after them

I didn't know multinationals could claim child benefit. Are you really telling me that somebody on welfare with a family of five can pay no tax while an individual with a similar income on min wage with a family of five gets rode up the hole on tax?

12Phase

Plenty probably don't apply though.

hognef

Cabaal wrote: »

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/just-eight-parents-opt-not-to-claim-child-benefit-392889.html



Its certainly a system that needs changing, having a person earning for example 140k a year and still getting the same benefit as somebody earning 20k a year is frankly nuts.

If you "need" child benefit of around 1.7k on 140k a year then you are living way way past your means,

The person on 140k pays enough into the system (multiples of the person on 20k) that (s)he deserves to get something out of it too. I can't see what's so nuts about that.

The problem in this country is that there's never any correlation between what you pay in and what you get out. In a proper welfare society, everybody contributes in relation to their means, but likewise everybody also gets something in return. Here, only the 'rich' contribute, and only the 'poor' benefit.

Besides, child benefit is a payment towards the upkeep of the child, a way for the state to acknowledge that it ultimately benefits from people having children, and an assertion that all children are of equal value.

Moonbeam

A family earning 140k are not taking home super crazy amounts after paying near 50% tax and most likely childcare too.
We get very little in return for our taxes in this country and all children are supposed to be equal so I agree that it should be paid to everyone.

tomwaits48

Cabaal wrote: »

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/just-eight-parents-opt-not-to-claim-child-benefit-392889.html



Its certainly a system that needs changing, having a person earning for example 140k a year and still getting the same benefit as somebody earning 20k a year is frankly nuts.

If you "need" child benefit of around 1.7k on 140k a year then you are living way way past your means,

Are you being intentionally idiotic?

draiochtanois

This post has been deleted.

Avatar MIA

draiochtanois wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

A person on €140k a year and paying €70k tax needs to have a good talk with their accountant. But I agree with the gist of what you are saying.

Orion

tomwaits48 wrote: »

Are you being intentionally idiotic?

You're new to the site so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. Personal attacks are not allowed under any circumstances. If you have some thing to say attack the post not the poster. Please read the forum charter. Any further attacks like that will result in action.

joeysoap

If I was asked in would say no minister in those 8 cases. And I agree 12phase, I suspect some of the mega rich don't bother to claim it. I would be surprised, given his views on the subject if Michael O'Leary (or Mrs O'Leary:)) submitted a claim form.

draiochtanois

This post has been deleted.

munchkin_utd

draiochtanois wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

a couple on 140k a year, say split 100k/ 40k will have a take home of 91,400 which is not 50% tax nor anywhere near it.

thats 7616 a month cash in hand which no matter which way you look at it is a heap of cash.

Tiddlypeeps

Even if there was the political will to means test child benefit it wouldn't likely be financially viable to do so. The costs involved in means testing and fraud detection would likely cost multiples of what it would save, especially in a country that loves over spending on anything administration related.

xz

Unfortunately, we live in a society where the more you have, the more you want, and feck the lower paid and unemployed, there's a misconception here on Boards, that unemployed people are scroungers who don't contribute to society...... Tell that to them before they were made unemployed, it's an urban myth that the unemployed have never worked a day in their lives.

Avatar MIA

xz wrote: »

Unfortunately, we live in a society where the more you have, the more you want, and feck the lower paid and unemployed, there's a misconception here on Boards, that unemployed people are scroungers who don't contribute to society...... Tell that to them before they were made unemployed, it's an urban myth that the unemployed have never worked a day in their lives.

Poor people Good.

Employed people uncaring.

Moonbeam

I disagree anyone can become unemployed it is unavoidable.
There is a different between between people that become unemployed and people that choose never to work.
Luckily one group is way greater then the other .

Orion

Not sure where some people are getting their figures from. Here's two calculations. One is dual income of 140k with 9k pension contributions. The other is single income with 9k pension. These figures are just to match some examples given above. Both have no company provided health insurance, bik for anything, no company loans and are just employees not directors. If you want to do you own calculations head over to http://services.deloitte.ie/tc/Default.aspx

So now we have some actual figures not just ones pulled out of the sky to stop the arguing over how much tax is paid.

Idbatterim

how bloody predictable, that people being bled dry at those income levels, should get something back from the state. If I had money to burn, Id be claiming it, if I didnt need it, Id be claiming it and giving it to charity, better than those wasters in the Dail pissing it away...

PhoenixParker

For me the history of child benefit is very important here.

Going back a long time the system operated as follows:

1) There was a child tax credit (think it was an allowance back then), so basically having a child allowed you to pay less PAYE tax by increasing the tax bands.
2) There was a small child benefit.

That meant that medium - high earners who got the full benefit of the tax credit did ok, but that people who were on low or no incomes were kinda screwed over.

They equalised the situation by abolishing the tax bit and giving everybody the same amount of child benefit at a much higher level.

The idea that high earners should give up child benefit - well it only went up when their historical equivalents gave up their tax credit. They may not "need" it, but 1.7k back is a drop in the bucket compared to what someone earning 140k is contributing in taxes.

The idea that it should be taxed - then you get people just on the border between tax bands who get screwed by the child benefit tipping them over the line and losing most of their child benefit when they do actually need it.

At the moment we have a neat functional system, easy to administer and it means that nobody falls between two stools. No vagaries of tax bands or income have an undue effect.

nc6000

How many people are eligible but don't collect it?

bigpink

Avatar MIA wrote: »

A person on €140k a year and paying €70k tax needs to have a good talk with their accountant. But I agree with the gist of what you are saying.

What would that do?

Avatar MIA

nc6000 wrote: »

How many people are eligible but don't collect it?

I suppose the # of under 18s in the country less # of payments.

It gets complicated because EU workers can claim it on behalf of their children in their home country.

Avatar MIA

bigpink wrote: »

What would that do?

What would what do?

Neyite

nc6000 wrote: »

How many people are eligible but don't collect it?

Every single child in the state is eligible for it*. Its paid automatically as far as I know, and I suspect that most people who could give it up just cant be arsed to contact the DSW to do the associated paperwork.

If I was filthy rich, I'd still collect it and donate it directly to charitable services for children, in particular the ones who've had vital government funding withdrawn. So maybe those who live the high life do this too.

*I think born in the state??

mitresize5

We're on about 125k combined so the figures above are a close match.......except for the 2k a month we spend on child care.

We're been ridden rock solid between a marginal taxe rate, variable rate mortgages and child care so Ive no problem taking the child benefit.

ive absolutely no qualms in saying its been saved to pay for the 'free' 3rd level education the kids will hopefully go to

mitresize5

We're on about 125k combined so the figures above are a close match.......except for the 2k a month we spend on child care.

We're been ridden rock solid between a marginal taxe rate, variable rate mortgages and child care so Ive no problem taking the child benefit.

ive absolutely no qualms in saying its been saved to pay for the 'free' 3rd level education the kids will hopefully go to

AlanG

Means testing is usually done on household income from about 18 months previously. It is messy and would leave a lot of people without the benefit they need. High earners pay a lot of tax and child care so they need to get something from the state.

seamus

I always find it odd that people seem to think that wealthy people shouldn't claim all benefits and reliefs available to them and that when they use legal methods to reduce their tax bill, somehow they're in the wrong.

Why shouldn't someone on 140k claim child benefit? It's there, take it.

If, as a country, we don't believe that it should be available to these people, then we should stop making it available.

Mongfinder General

Mongfinder General wrote: »

Tax it. All income should be taxed. We have thousands on welfare not paying a penny in income tax.

I believe it's taxed at source. Just like welfare.

Mongfinder General

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I believe it's taxed at source. Just like welfare.

I'd like to see the calculations for a two parent, 3 kid family. I've never even heard that welfare is taxed never mind seen calculations to that effect

ectoraige

That figure of eight may be misleading though. The department routinely write to parents seeking confirmation of address and school enrolment. If the form is not returned, the payment will be stopped. So this is another avenue for parents who decide they don't need it anymore to stop claiming it. It's probably more likely to happen this way to be honest as all you have to do is to do nothing, rather then taking the time writing a letter asking to stop the payment.

Avatar MIA

Mongfinder General wrote: »

I've never even heard that welfare is taxed never mind seen calculations to that effect

Some welfare is taxed, such as Job seekers benefit (Income tax), but effectively only gets taxed if you have other income or have a spouse that is working.

pwurple

On means testing, I've been through 4 means-tested medical card applications in recent months for the over 70's, and I cannot see for the life of me how that saves the state money. Means testing is a crock of administrative excrement.

A 70 year old woman, partially deaf, almost completely blind and diabetic... Had to be means tested for that f-ing card. i'd say it took about 15 letters and 30 phonecalls to sort it out, and all she was living on was a pension. But because she had a small shop years previously, and had been self employed, out came the requirements for self assessment tax forms etc. The staff working in that means testing department, and the infrastructure to go with it cost more than any saving. But some smug idiot is delighted that the 70 year old who saved for their retirement or to pass on as inheritance, instead of blowing it all on fags and drink will get their due come upance now for being prudant.

Flat rate benefits make much more sense to me. creating a point at which you lose child benefit creates poverty traps. And means testing it is financially daft.


Similar socialist crap was brought in with the restructure and taxation of maternity benefit during my last pregnancy, which meant i had no time to save for it. someone like me, who gets no 'company top up' and pays top rate PRSI now gets less maternity benefit than someone who is topped up, or who paid a lower prsi contribution. F that! I pay more tax so obviously my family have to live on less income when i've had a child, rather than someone who contributes nothing. How does that make any sense?

And I can't transfer that leave to my husband and drag my arse back to work straight after giving birth so I can earn something (i'm the primary earner). Talk about giving you a good hard kicking for working hard. How feckin dare I.


This 100k malarky is getting very tired. Two working parents earning 50k each, which in their late 30's or 40's isn't too outrageous a propostion are now the 'superrich'? Give me a break. They are the squeezed middle. They pay for everything, and get no thanks. And now you want to take the meager child benefit?

You know who makes the most from child benefit? People with 10 children. And there are very very few high earners with ten children.


And another thing. You know where that child benefit goes? To pay for the children's education, because you can be damn sure they won't qualify for any grants.