Tax Relief On Childcare Bills! Give Us A Break!

[Celt]

Bringing up kids is expensive no matter how you look at it, whether you can afford it or not.

 

I think the Government could go along way to help all parents by abolishing VAT on all kids clothes, prams, nappies and such and also Child Care if it applies.

 

This could also be applied the Pensioners fuel costs as well.

 

I've seen in in the USA and Canada and it seems to work and make sense.

 

However I can't see it happening over here, what with the Big Brother UK looking over it. Maybe if thie next Government has the balls to stand up to them we might see something positive come out off it without costing to tax Payer.

 

PS; I thought Child Care was tax deductable now ?

[Minxie]

The cost of child care is expensive, if you have two children under 4 in child care (full time working parents) it can cost about £1,000 a month. Child minders are about £3.50 per hour (for an 8 hour day that's approx £560 a month) and nurseries are approx £27 a day (roughly £540 a month). My eldest just started school this year, and I am lucky enough to have an employer who has let me take term time working so I get to spend the school holidays with the children. When you add child care costs to mortage repayments, it is financially difficult for a lot of people.

[ramsea]

pay massive taxes every year, a large proportion of which goes into a pot to pay for schooling other people's children, to support their tax relief, to subsidise council housing, etc. I could grumble about this but I don't. However, when people start making socialist remarks, wanting me to pay more to subsidise them that really annoys me.

 

From the above, it appears you live in the UK (massive taxes, council houses) and not IOM...so why do you care?

 

I also tend to agree with Lonewolf, children should be seen as a social responsibility and not just those of the parents who have chosen, or in some cases not chosen to have kids.

 

I dont hear anyone moaning about kids getting grants to go to Uni because their parents can not afford it or free school dinners for kid's whose parents are on benefits.

 

Most people these days dont have kids because they are too selfish and would rather have all their money and time for themselves.

 

Also, I dont understand how giving a tax break to people who pay £1,000's a year on childcare will increase the amount of tax for everyone else?

 

Being a parent is one of the toughest jobs in the world and being a parent/s on a low income just makes it even harder.

[LoneWolf]

By the way, Thatcher saved the UK and we are still feeling the benefits from it. Even the labour government have not managed to cock it up, yet.

 

Start a thread on that one and prepare to be ripped to pieces.

[Gladys]

I too would have to applaud Ans for being a man and dealing with a situation that is so common nowadays, but would add that I feel that in some way he should recieve finacial assistance to help him through what can only be described as a stressfull. It is a lot harder for a father to look after his kids alone and at the same time maintain fulltime employment. If the shoe was on the other foot so to speak the wife would given all the help she needed.

Once again Ans well done for getting you priorities right

Although I agree with your sentiments, I really cannot let pass your asssertions that it is harder for a man to bring up children alone and keep down a full time job than it is for a woman and that a woman would get more financial assistance. A woman does not get any more financial assistance than a man; that is a fact. Any state benefits are down to assessment of the case and not down to any gender specific entitlements.

 

As for holding down a full time job, why should it be harder for a man than a woman? I work full time and expect, and get, no concessions because I am a single mother. If my children are ill, I have to take the time off against my annual leave entitlement. I still have to work the full day, from 9 until 5.30, often beyond as it now happens. The only slight concession I was given was to be allowed to leave five minutes early each day to avoid the 5.30 traffic to get to my son's nursery before they closed at 6.45, but was expected to start work five minutes early! (As it happens this wasn't rigidly enforced, no-one glanced at their watches when I arrived or left, but I made a point of keeping to the rules to avoid any accustations of preferential treatment.)

 

I am also expected to travel for work, not often, but when needs must, I must do it. This puts huge stresses on the family set-up, believe me.

 

Now how is that any easier than for a man in a similar position?

 

A response could be, 'well find another less demanding job', but I do what I am qualified to do and I also want to provide the best I can for my family.

 

Methinks you still have an archaic view of a woman's role in our society

[Foxtrotlima]

I think maybe it may be a lot fairer to say "lone parent" rather than single mother/ single father. Each present an equally difficult set of circumstances. I don't actually know of one person who woke up one morning and said "Bugger me, I am going to be a single parent". (Ok, before you flame me, yes, I know *some* women do, I am talking specifically about the ones that I know)

 

I am a single parent of 2 children. A single parent due to being in an abusive relationship. After reading some of the posts on here, I now realise how fortuitous I am to actually have a Commissioners house, although I am on the waiting list for a Government First Time Buyers house.

 

I have a demanding job. I generally work 50-60 hours a week and am required to travel to Belfast frequently for work. To be fair, I do get single parent working allowance tax relief and that does help immeasurably.

 

In all fairness, most of the above is irrelevant. What is relevant is the pride that comes from providing for my family. From every person who has identified themselves as a lone parent in this thread, this is also evident. As it is for those in dual income homes, from people wanting to give their children a decent start in life.

[Theskeat]

How often doe the ex wife pay child maintenance to the father

[ans]

I would imagine the number of female defaulters was a lower percentage then their male equivalent. Women in general tend to have more social conscience. Unless you can back up your assertion with some evidence, I think it's pretty safe to dismiss it as rubbish.

[Albert Tatlock]

How often doe the ex wife pay child maintenance to the father

This is happening more and more these days. Most men don't get 'residence orders' (or custody as it used to be called) - only because they don't apply for them.

 

My experience is that lone women parents expect more of lone male parents. Also, whether it is built into society or whatever, lone women do tend to get treated better by their employers WRT kids than men do.

[Tuna Sandwich]

By the way, Thatcher saved the UK and we are still feeling the benefits from it. Even the labour government have not managed to cock it up, yet.

Duh!

 

By the way, Thatcher saved cocked up the UK and we are still feeling the benefits from paying the price for it.

 

Fixed your post.

 

Really Uncle Albert? Please tell us how?

[Albert Tatlock]

By the way, Thatcher saved the UK and we are still feeling the benefits from it. Even the labour government have not managed to cock it up, yet.

Duh!

 

By the way, Thatcher saved cocked up the UK and we are still feeling the benefits from paying the price for it.

 

Fixed your post.

 

Really Uncle Albert? Please tell us how?

Well, for those people that live in the UK - just look at your bank statement.

 

And for the rest of us...15.5% interest rates, mass unemployment, collapse of the pound, sell out of industry, two recessions, selling us utilities we already owned - the list is endless.

 

Not that I'm saying new conservatives labour is a good thing either mind.

[ans]

lone women do tend to get treated better by their employers WRT kids than men do.

 

I must be very fortunate to have an employer that has been very supportive of my requirements and allowed me to the very flexible.

 

I'm surprised we haven't seen Ripsaw wading in to this discussion, as one of our more well known single parent fathers, but I guess he's a little pre-occupied for the next few days

[Gladys]

How often doe the ex wife pay child maintenance to the father

And how often do ex-husbands fail to pay the maintenance they are required to pay?

 

In my case, I knew that it would be pointless getting a maintenance order as sure as eggs is eggs, it wouldn't be honoured. So the agreement was that I would have a substantial share of the proceeds from the marital home (which, by the way, was bought in my name, on my earnings alone and with my contribution as to deposit and subsequent improvement works) in order to buy with a minimum mortgage a home for the family. I was advised that the courts would not accept a no maintenance settlement as we couldn't 'agree out' the children's basic right to be supported by both parents, so in the interests of a quick and relatively clean divorce, the maintenance order was for £10 per year (never yet paid, BTW). When my good husband saw that there was hell to pay!

 

I really didn't want to get on the 'all men are bastards' bandwagon, but when I see such blinkered preconceptions, it really makes my blood boil.

 

However, to echo what Foxtrotlima said above, I love and am proud of my children and I am also proud at how they are turning out, despite being a single parent with full financial, custodial and pastoral responsibility for them.

[Tuna Sandwich]

Well, for those people that live in the UK - just look at your bank statement.

 

And for the rest of us...15.5% interest rates, mass unemployment, collapse of the pound, sell out of industry, two recessions, selling us utilities we already owned - the list is endless.

 

Not that I'm saying new conservatives labour is a good thing either mind.

 

So the opposite of 15.5% interest is the silly low rate we have now that has pushed house prices through the roof. People drawing on house equity which will cripple them financially WHEN the rates go back up. You want to see a recession? just wait until the next one, caused by the current labour administration.

 

But Albert, go back prior to Thatcher and reflect on things like the 3 day week, Real poverty, Strikes, Real unemployment that was covered up, and of course the rioting. It is easy to forget the mess Thatcher took over from, but easy to remember the real extent of the damage that the seventies labour governement left in their wake when the conservatives layed labour's true cards on the table.

[Albert Tatlock]

Well, for those people that live in the UK - just look at your bank statement.

 

And for the rest of us...15.5% interest rates, mass unemployment, collapse of the pound, sell out of industry, two recessions, selling us utilities we already owned - the list is endless.

 

Not that I'm saying new conservatives labour is a good thing either mind.

 

So the opposite of 15.5% interest is the silly low rate we have now that has pushed house prices through the roof. People drawing on house equity which will cripple them financially WHEN the rates go back up. You want to see a recession? just wait until the next one, caused by the current labour administration.

 

But Albert, go back prior to Thatcher and reflect on things like the 3 day week, Real poverty, Strikes, Real unemployment that was covered up, and of course the rioting. It is easy to forget the mess Thatcher took over from, but easy to remember the real extent of the damage that the seventies labour governement left in their wake when the conservatives layed labour's true cards on the table.

That argument is like saying 'how do you want to die - painfully or horribly?'

 

There are other, and better, ways of doing government. Vote Albert!