Child Support Changes in UK
As of yesterday the Tories in the UK have a plan to eliminate the public paying for parents unable to come to a voluntary arrangement for Child Support. I do not know the costs involved in an administrative review in NZ but it is bound to be a shit load. The threshold for obtaining one of these in NZ is very low and unfair on the tax payer. Under the UK plan the parents will pay a penalty to take the matter to the State for a settlement, however it seems a bit unfair that mainly DADS will get a 20% penalty whilst MUMS lose just 4%. The UK calculation for child support is interesting. Bear in mind that the MEDIAN wage in NZ is $844 a week and UK $1000.
Is this a step in the right or wrong direction in your opinion???
Just did a quick run through on the calculator assuming 1 child; no benefits being received by paying parent; weekly gross income of 450 pounds = +/- $NZ 885 and like most dads probably not getting to see the kids often enough (52 nights a year). The calculated weekly child support payment was $NZ 106 – about 12% of gross salary for one child. Seems fair to me, but I’d rather have my kid thanks. I wonder if the UK set the support level “low” (at 12%) to ensure parents never agreed and dad had to cough up another 20%?
I imagine like all “calculators” – this one has been designed as a guideline for parents so that expectations for support (from mum) aren’t too high or too low for dad? My ex was decidedly of the opinion that she was entitled to maintenance as well as child support. This is where the IRD saved me from her (and her lawyer)…..so sometimes IRD are saviours.
Overall – I think the idea of parental settlement is far better than any state mandated program; as long as the state has the power to intervene only when either support payments aren’t being made, demands are too high or visiting rights are being ignored! I prefer the Brazilian model which encourages BOTH PARENTS to be responsible for their children and that any attempt at parental alienation by either party will see that party severely penalized!!
Comment by Bruce S — Thu 22nd May 2014 @ 9:09 pm
OMG, just read that article and it’s insane. Just plain making a crap system worse. But I did notice they said men over there can choose to pay direct to the mum! I can’t do that here because it woudl be considered income and she would pay heaps more in rent etc as she lives in state housing and they dont consider it income if it comes through IRD.
Wow this penalty thing cant come here the woman would riot! Taking 4% off them from the legal theft of that assholes contribution to raising his kids…. wow I can’t believe this.
Comment by too tired — Thu 22nd May 2014 @ 10:48 pm
Wow. I just did a calculation and assuming the calculation works for shared parenting (eg. Both parents pay and 1 gets the difference) I would go from a net payer of child tax in nz to a net receiver in the uk!!! Maybe I should think about moving to England…
Comment by A dad — Sat 24th May 2014 @ 3:04 pm
@Dad (#3) – precisely! The NZ system is geared around divide and conquer. Heaven forbid shared care be an option; the tax taking trough would quickly dry up. That’s why I made the comment that the Brazilian system is so good – it encourages parents (you know both father and mother) to take care of their children. Completely the opposite of the penalty we pay in New Zealand for daring to father children and then have the sperm recipient in the gravy trough for the rest of it’s life, at your expense. If you need any help with the air ticket to freedom….. 😉
Comment by Bruce S — Sun 25th May 2014 @ 12:28 pm