Wife's income and child benefit

A question about : Wife's income and child benefit

Why the hell should my wife's income and our child benefit be taken into account when calculating CS1 assessment to pay for MY child? This system is all wrong and is causing a lot of trouble between myself and my wife, we are on the verge of breaking up and she is ill with worry.

Best answers:

• If your child lived with you would not your wife's income etc go towards her upkeep?
• Your wife can't be forced to provide details of her income. In most cases it doesn't make any difference to the calculation anyway.
• My daughter does not live with us, we have not saw her in 5yrs. I have a daughter with my current wife and she has a child from her previous marriage.
• Justontime, her income is used in the disposable section.
• Makes it easier for us to follow if you kept to your original thread rather than multiple threads
  https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/...=#post66967969
  Means all your information is in one place
• your wife does not have to provide her income, however, if she does not then the CSA will assume that she is also providing towards the total households costs giving you more disposable income.
  For example, if your wife didnt work and you had Ј1000 a month income then you personally would be paying all the household costs leaving whatever disposable income there is.
  if your wife worked and you both earned Ј1000 a month each then she would be paying towards the household costs meaning you were not paying as much so have more disposable income.
  Having not seen your daughter for 5 years does not make a difference in terms of having to pay maintenance. Neither the fact that you have gone on to have another child... Your first one still needs a contribution from you for her upbringing.
• FBaby, the system isn't fair. My ex lives with her partner who earns a lot more than my wife and I together, my ex also has a good job but their income dosnt come into it because the ex receives child benefit but they use my wife's income and our child benefit!
  I'm all for NRPs paying for their child as I have been for many years but to take my wife's income into account is a disgrace.
• But surely this means that a percentage of your ex's partners income goes towards supporting your child so what is the difference. your child benefits from joint incomes on both sides.
• It's a disgrace that people are still on CSA1 so many years after it should have been phased out. There are losers on both sides with CSA1 but it's wrong that people have been stuck on a system with different rules for so long.
• I do admit I don't know the ins and out of csa1 and indeed, I am surprised that when considering the contribution of the nrpp into the household, her children from previous relationship wouldn't be taken into account.
  It doesn't take away that I am tired of nrpp who cry outrage that their income can be considered when this is and always has been the case of pwcp. Yet we never see posts from them. When the decision to stop CM to those earning over Ј60k and that affected nrpps, there wasn't a row of 'it's not fair, why should I be taxed because of my step-children' threads.
  I am a huge partisan that when it comes to children, ONLY their direct parent income should be taken into consideration, but if one step parent is going to be penalised as a result, then I don't find it outrageous that so should the other.
• Not for CSA purposes but every other purposes and I don't think it matters much for the pwcp which agency it is.
  The way they are most affected is if the pwc suddenly loses their job and the nrp earning is such that they are not entitled to any tax credits. The way it stands, the pwc can't turn to the nrp and says 'sorry, can't support our children any longer, so you will have to do so fully from now on, and don't care where you get the money from', it becomes the responsability of the pwcp to take that responsibility over.
  The same when the nrp loses their job. They don't have to contribute any longer, the nrpp doesn't have to take over, so unless the pwc can make the difference up, it is again up to the pwcp to do so if the children are not to be affected.
  I agree, there will never be a fair system, but I do get annoyed when nrpps come and moan that they have to contribute (usually in a very minor way if assessed on csa1) when many if not most pwcps do one way or the other.
• But it is just the same in the NRP household if the NRPP loses their job the NRP would then be expected to support her and her children. We should keep in mind that in many cases these roles are not set in stone, many NRPs become PWCs (to the same children) at different points. Also a NRPP is often a PWC as well, meaning that the NRP is also a PWCP or even a PWC. So the lines are blurred and a lot of people experience the disadvantages from all angles.
  As parents/step parents we just have to do the very best we can for all our children - and I honestly believe that the majority of people do exactly that. Unfortunately on any advice forum you will people facing problems, not the majority who are just getting on with it and making it work.
• Totally agree and in the case of a nrp who also happens to be a pwcp, the same applies. It is about the role, not the person.
  Once again, I don't agree that nrpp should be involved in supporting their step-children, but then if nrpp are going to be so legally (whether they are pwcp too or not), then I don't find it outrageous that nrpps should be too.
  Indeed, there will always be winner and losers in this situation depending on who is a nrp/pwcpp - pwc/nrpp and indeed, no system will ever be fair to everyone.
  Unfortunately, I don't agree that the majority of parents put their children first financially, or at least do so equally. I hear of so many issues one way or the other, certainly much more than from those for whom it all works ok. I understand that it is probably instinctive to favour those children who reside with you, mainly because the parent knows where the money goes.
  I always said that the csa should support nrp requesting some breakdown of how the maintenance is being used. Of course, it couldn't be done for every penny, but a general budget breakdown should be totally acceptable. Why would a pwc who definitely does spend all the maintenance on her kids have anything to hide especially if it could reassure the nrp.