New tax free childcare: another small Uturn?

[Simona]

The govt is under attack for not rewarding 'stay at home mums' with the new tax free childcare effective from autumn 2015
Looks like there is small Uturn in the making.... and again we see PLA arguing for families

Why can't the govt review the present scheme, which is very popular by making it more widely accessible and reward all families by including the self employed, stay at home mums and single mothers??

Another huge waste of money as the new online system will cost millions to set up and the consultation will follow the announcement
Again this govt decides first and consults after

Stay-at-home carers to get childcare vouchers | Money | The Guardian

[AgentTink]

I do not think that stay at home carers is the same as stay at home mums. Carers are people who have to look after either another child due to a illness/disability or a elderly family. So stay at home mums are still not being included.

The whole thing in my opinion will not help parents feel much better off and they will still feel that they have to pay a awful lot towards childcare.

[Mouse]

I don't understand my stay at home parents would expect help with childcare costs?

[Mrsh3103]

I'm confused too mouse. Surely if you're a stay at home mum you don't need childcare??

[FussyElmo]

So they reduced the rate that they would pay childcare for tax credits is it now 40,000 and child benefit from couples but hey if you only earn £150.000 each they will give you help with childcare. Where is that wall to bash heads against

[Simona]

This is being manipulated by all sides.....for political reasons I assume

Stay at home mums benefit now if their husbands are part of the present ccare vouchers system...so they can use the vouchers to pay for childcare if they want to access the 15 hrs or whatever

In future they won't benefit because BOTH parents have to work

Stay at home mums are saying they do childcare because they are at home and do not feel valued...but that is not the argument in my view
The argument is this scheme is to reduce the cost of childcare...but it should address it NOW not in 2015...it is also wrongly called 'tax free childcare'

The present 'employer' backed scheme or 'salary sacrifice' is very popular and the govt should have reviewed and extended it to the self employed not trying to introduce something that is bound to cause

[Mouse]

This is being manipulated by all sides.....for political reasons I assume

Stay at home mums benefit now if their husbands are part of the present ccare vouchers system...so they can use the vouchers to pay for childcare if they want to access the 15 hrs or whatever

In future they won't benefit because BOTH parents have to work

Stay at home mums are saying they do childcare because they are at home and do not feel valued...but that is not the argument in my view
The argument is this scheme is to reduce the cost of childcare...but it should address it NOW not in 2015...it is also wrongly called 'tax free childcare'

The present 'employer' backed scheme or 'salary sacrifice' is very popular and the govt should have reviewed and extended it to the self employed not trying to introduce something that is bound to cause

But the 15 hours are free, so they don't need vouchers to pay for it and won't parents need to work to access it.

If non-working parents chose to pay for childcare (outside the 15 hours funded), I really don't see why they should get help with the costs. It's a choice, not a necessity. I thought the whole idea was to help reduce the costs of childcare.

One of my mums doesn't work, but send her child to me so she can have a break. I don't understand why she should be given help with childcare costs.

[FussyElmo]

But the 15 hours are free, so they don't need vouchers to pay for it and won't parents need to work to access it.

If non-working parents chose to pay for childcare (outside the 15 hours funded), I really don't see why they should get help with the costs. It's a choice, not a necessity. I thought the whole idea was to help reduce the costs of childcare.

One of my mums doesn't work, but send her child to me so she can have a break. I don't understand why she should be given help with childcare costs.

I agree Mouse if someone chooses to be a stay at home mum surely they are staying at home to raise their children. Though there could be exceptions to this like one parent doing a university course, volunteering, looking after an elderly relative etc etc who need childcare so could do with the help.

HOWEVER I also don't think people with a joint income of £300.000 should get any sort of help. But we should expect it from this government they vetoed the so called "mansion tax" (nothing to do with 21 members of the cabinet being millionaires) but brought in the so called "bedroom tax"

[Simona]

But the 15 hours are free, so they don't need vouchers to pay for it and won't parents need to work to access it.

If non-working parents chose to pay for childcare (outside the 15 hours funded), I really don't see why they should get help with the costs. It's a choice, not a necessity. I thought the whole idea was to help reduce the costs of childcare.

One of my mums doesn't work, but send her child to me so she can have a break. I don't understand why she should be given help with childcare costs.

The 15 hrs are not 'FREE' we subsidise them...lets not forget that
The take up for 3 and 4 yo funding is about 90%...that means that children whose mum is at home now benefit
The argument is, as I said, being manipulated because of the name given to the new scheme 'tax free' which implies being in work

Those 'sahm' can use c/vouchers now if their husband/partner is in the present scheme..in future they won't benefit unless they return to work
That is the problem ...they want to stay at home ...their right I believe...but want to benefit as well

Difficult argument but this govt is stupid and very short sighted