Married people's tax break

This seems pretty unfair to me.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24309634

David Camoron has announced a tax break for some married couples. To qualify, BOTH partners have to be basic rate tax payers.

So, for those double income households, bringing in upto about £70k (ie both partners earning right at the top of the basic rate band), will qualify for the tax break, but old fashioned couples like wife and I will not qualify, because wife chooses to stay at home to look after the home and raise the kids.

Lets say we wanted to qualify. Well then my wife would have to add 1 to the number of out of work people looking for work. With a finite number of jobs available, it means that if she gets a job, someone else who might need it more, does not get a job. But if she did take away an opportunity from someone else, then we'd qualify for David Camoron's tax break so we'd be better of still, while someone else is in dire straights.

But what of the kids if my wife got a job. It could be argued that we'd have to pay for childcare, which puts more people into work and oils the wheels of the economy. Well not really, we'd just get various relatives to share the workload, meaning the kids grow up with less stability in their lives, and the relatives get the joy of working more hours for nothing.

I wish that just once, just one time, a government minister would actually think things through and do a bit of research before planning anything. Then they might just stand a chance of getting it somewhere near right.

Unless of course a deal like this might appeal to the kind of people that are most likely to vote for him? I don't know. I'm sure ministers act in what they believe to be the best interests of the people, and not their own political gains or anything surely.

 

It's the same with child benefits from what I've gathered from friends with children.

 

As a side line I recently got an appointment for physio on my back, via the NHS.
Its taken 3 months.
I saw this bloke, we had a "chat" and he said make another appointment for a weeks time.

When I tried to make the appointment I could see large amouts of time when he was not available, I think the woman at the desk could see me looking at the diary.

She explained that he shares child care with his partner so can only do a certain amount of hours a week, basically he was only part time.

So I have to fit my appointments around his child care.

I'm probably old fashioned, but you either do a weeks work or you dont, I assume his partner was also part time, so two people doing what amounts to one job.
Its crazy.
But probably both basic rate tax payers.

 

Clueless, I think you would qualify.

If I understand this correctly, you would therefore be able to transfer £1,ooo of your wife's unused personal tax allowance to your own earnings, thus increasing your tax free allowance by £1,ooo.

 

I seem to remember someone once telling me that the non-working spouse could set up a business, and then the working spouse could pay the other for housekeeping services, then claim the tax back on that expense.

I don't know if that was a 'loophole' and if it has been closed, but that would be worth more than Cam's idea.

 

On the basis of this, I disagree with CL1 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10340987/Married-couples-to-receive-1000-tax-break.html

I 'gave' Mrs Scrungee all of my massive amount of savings, otherwise I would've paid tax on them in addition to paying tax on my small early retirement pension. It's to be hoped that this new proposal enable me to have an additional £1,000 of tax free allowance transferred to me.

 

When I read that both had to be basic rate taxpayers, I figured you're not a tax payer if your not earning anything, therefore you're not a basic rate taxpayer.