Marriage tax allowance

[jazzactivist]

Hi all! I have just read that if the Conservative Party win the UK General Election next year they will re-introduce the married person's tax allowance, in order to encourage couples to marry and stay married to support their children. When OH and I first got married in 1990 this tax rebate was in operation and it equated to about £30 per month, which was a reasonable amount then. We spent our first married allowance amount on a duvet cover from Habitat that I had my eye on, which we still have and regularly use. I will be happy to have it back, but don't know if I agree with it or not. I don't think that a couple has to be married to be happy and stable, or that a couple whose relationship has gone bad should remain together for their children as it could make their upbringing worse. What do you think?

[dragonfly]

I have heard people say they are better off not being married and I think that is wrong. I can't see that it is wrong to reward people for being married especially if they have children.

[franbee]

I certainly don't think people should be better off not married, nor do I think that couples need to be married to be happy, but once children come along, couples should be given every encouragement to become a family.

[Gentian]

People over a certain age (and that's us) still get it but the allowance is only 10% now.

[Ivy]

I don't see the point why it needs certificates to make a relationship more stable. I am married because I wanted my children to grow up with their father in case I had a lethal accident or so. I know it does not sound very romantic. I do love my husband but I doubt that being married or not would have changed anything for our relationship. And I honestly do not see why the state thinks it should "sponsor" certain ways of lifestyles.
We do have tax reductions for married couples in Germany but I think them unfair. If it was for couples( married or not) who bring up children and thus invest in a nations future okay, but not for DINKS, where is the point?

[Crocus]

Personally I don't think I would stay with my husband for the benefit of tax allowance. I'll stay with him because I love him and want to be with him and want him to be part of our children's lives.

Won't it mean couples would eventually stay together because of the benefits while perhaps not loving or even liking each other? My OH have the saying: "You can't throw money at a problem".

[dragonfly]

I don't think the benefits will be high enough for people to stay together if they don't want to.

I don't think marrage is about a certificate, I think it is much more than that. I think being married means you are committed to a relationship and you want to be a family all with the same family name.

[Ivy]

I don't think the benefits will be high enough for people to stay together if they don't want to.

I don't think marrage is about a certificate, I think it is much more than that. I think being married means you are committed to a relationship and you want to be a family all with the same family name.


Ah that used to be once... do you know how many children I know who's parents are married but they both kept their birth-names and so the kids are named either after father or ( in most cases) their mother?

[jazzactivist]

I am married and have kept my own name, and it seems very odd if I am ever addressed by my husband's name. I don't think that it is a good idea for a woman to lose her identity to the man she marries. I think that it should be a matter of choice. If OH had a much nicer surname than mine then I might change it, but not otherwise. Likewise, children can grow up with the choice of which name to use if the partners keep their own names, as one is often nicer than the other. There are various ways around it with double barrelling, merging and so on. Perhaps everyone having the same name in a family is important for shared identity and stability, although it shouldn't automatically be the man's name. Sometimes the man changes his name to the woman's name, which is perfectly within UK law. Also, if things don't work out in a family then it can be a burden to have the same name as a parent who is, say, convicted of a serious crime or to carry the name of a 'problem' family.

The married tax allowance isn't very much money. Certainly not enough to stay with your partner for. Also either partner could claim it, or it could be equally split between the two salaries. You only get it if you work / have worked, as it is a tax rebate.

[dragonfly]

I don't think it matters who's name you choose as long as all the family have the same name, otherwise it must be very confusing. I grew up with a double barrel name and was happy to get rid of it.

[buecherwurm]

I would have loved to keep my own name when I got married but unfortunately it was against the law in those days. Nowadays you can keep it and my daughter intends to do so when she gets married next year. In Holland and Belgium women keep their maiden names when they get married. Seems to work well for them.