Martin Lewis has published an open letter to the Chancellor, calling on him to tackle the “unfairness” of the Child Benefit system in his next budget.
The Money Saving Expert addressed four areas of concern he has ahead of Jeremy Hunt’s budget in March.
Mr Lewis addressed the lifetime ISA penalty hitting young first time buyers, mid-contract broadband and mobile price hikes, and substantial real term cuts to student living loans.
He also addressed unfair Child Benefit rules penalising single income families.
The budget is just 6 weeks away. Today I sent the Chancellor, @Jeremy_Hunt a letter, on his request, to ask that he fixes:
— Martin Lewis (@MartinSLewis) January 22, 2024
- Unfair Child Benefit rules penalising single income families
- The Lifetime ISA penalty hitting young 1st time buyers
- Above inflation mid-contract… pic.twitter.com/ZVIt00Cq1p
In his letter to the Chancellor, Mr Lewis said: “This was by far the biggest single topic the public asked me to raise with you. In our interview, I read a question from Alan which highlights the unfairness in the way Child Benefit gains start being withdrawn spending solely on one parent/guardian’s income hitting £50,000 (and wiped at £60,000).”
The question from Alan said: “My son’s partner tragically died 34 days after giving birth to twins. My son has taken a new job that now pays him £60,000 and is struggling with the cost of living and mortgage repayments after loss of a second income.
“HMRC has asked him to repay the Child Benefit. This seems grossly unfair that a couple can bring in nearly £100,000 but a single breadwinner loses out once they earn more than half of this. Are there any plans to change this?”
Continuing, the Money Saving Expert said: “I can see a few people arguing that it is right that Alan’s son’s family should lose their child benefit even though their total family income is lower. I was very pleased that you accepted there is an ‘unfairness’ in the structure that penalises single-parent families, single-earner families, and families where there is one dominant earner.
“While I agree, as you point out, that there are many structurally problems in the tax system, this one is exacerbated by the face the £50,000 (and £60,000) thresholds have been frozen since 2013 – which fiscally drags 100,000s more families into this situation each year. I’m sure it would be very popular measure if it were addressed in the budget.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here