Letter: Taxation of child benefit
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: We must hope that your story 'Child benefits may be taxed' (20 July) is just kite-flying by a Government looking at all the options for public expenditure savings, no matter how lacking in logic.
For, of course, to tax child benefit would not only run counter to the spirit of the whole-hearted endorsement in the Government's election manifesto; it would also contradict the letter of the Government's rejection of this option in its 1985 Green Paper during the review of social security:
the great majority of working families pay tax, so that the effect would be equivalent to a 30 (now 25) per cent reduction in child support . . . (or) reducing their tax threshold . . . The Government's aim is to take people out of tax, not bring them into tax.
The illogicality of taxing a benefit aimed primarily at meeting extra costs, not replacing an income from employment, was recognised when the Government took mobility allowance for disabled people out of taxation. There are plenty of good ways of extracting more money in taxation from the better-off, if this is the perceived problem; picking on only those who happen to have children is not one of them.
As pointed out in your leading article, the Government's manifesto promise that 'child benefit will remain the cornerstone of our policy for all families with children' may not have excluded the possibility of taxation. But such a step would make a mockery of that promise.
Yours faithfully,
FRAN BENNETT
Director
Child Poverty Action Group
London, EC1
20 July
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments