logo
EXCLUSIVE Penalties for failing to declare child benefit on tax return plummet as Government eyes changes

EXCLUSIVE Penalties for failing to declare child benefit on tax return plummet as Government eyes changes

Daily Mail​22-04-2025

The number of child benefit penalties paid out plummeted by 99 per cent last year, according to new figures shared with This Is Money.
Child benefit is available to all families, but the Government starts to claw it back from households where the highest earner has an income above £60,000, after Jeremy Hunt raised the threshold from £50,000 in his last Budget.
Child benefit is then withdrawn completely once the highest earner makes over £80,000.
Higher earners who do not opt out of payments need to pay a tax charge at the end of the tax year and declare it on their self-assessment tax return or face a penalty.
Changes to the system mean that penalties collapsed by 99 per cent between 2023 and 2024, according to a Freedom of Information (FOI) request by wealth manager Quilter.
In the 2023/24 tax year, 75 penalties for 'Failure to Notify' were issued, down from 7,007 the year before. The total value of the penalties fell from £4.5million to £45,443.
With just 46 penalties issued so far in 2024/25, Quilter suggests that last year's fall was not a one-off.
Holly Tomlinson, financial planner at Quilter, says: 'The collapse in these penalties is no accident — it reflects the pressure that has rightly built up over years about how unfair the system was.
'Huge media attention highlighted the absurdity of a single parent losing all their child benefit while a couple each earning just under the threshold could keep the lot.
'The Government has finally accepted this doesn't pass the fairness test and is now using carrot rather than stick to help people keep to the rules.'
HMRC itself noted in its FOI response that it had focused efforts on raising awareness of the high income child benefit charge (HICBC).
Since its introduction a decade ago, the HICBC has come under fire for placing an extra burden on working parents, particularly single parents.
A household with two parents each earning £59,000 - a total of £118,000 - will receive child benefit in full, while a household with a sole parent earning £60,000 would see some or all of the benefit withdrawn.
Hunt had pledged to significantly reform the charge and consult to move to a system based on a household, rather than individual income by 2026.
However, the Government quietly shelved the plans and will no longer proceed with the HICBC reforms.
Instead, it has pledged to reduce the administrative burden for families by allowing those affected to repay the charge via PAYE from this summer, rather than completing a tax return.
Tomlinson adds: 'In the meantime, families still need to tread carefully.
'If you opt out of receiving child benefit to avoid the charge, make sure the parent who is not working or earning less still gets their National Insurance credits, which count towards the state pension.
'And for those hovering near the income threshold, salary sacrifice into a pension can be a wise financial planning tactic — it reduces your adjusted net income and can bring you back below the charge entirely.
'While Labour look set to let the clear inequalities remain baked into the system at least they are making it easier for people to pay back any additional child benefit they are not eligible for.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Government facing ‘walk of shame' over Chinese embassy decision
Government facing ‘walk of shame' over Chinese embassy decision

Western Telegraph

time10 minutes ago

  • Western Telegraph

Government facing ‘walk of shame' over Chinese embassy decision

Sir Iain Duncan Smith said response by the Government to the proposed embassy near the the capital's financial district had become 'Project Kowtow', as he criticised the Government for 'one denial after another (and) one betrayal after another'. Sir Iain referred to the warnings reportedly issued by the White House and Dutch government to Downing Street over the plans, which is set to be scrutinised by ministers. The worries stem from the close proximity of the proposed embassy's Royal Mint Court site to data centres and communication cables. The Sunday Times said the US was 'deeply concerned' about the plans, quoting a senior US official. In response, planning minister Matthew Pennycook said he could not give a full response as the matter was still to come before the department for a decision, and any verdict could be challenged by the courts. Sir Iain said: 'Beijing has a recent history of cutting cables and confirmed infrastructure hacks, including embedding malware capable of disabling all that infrastructure. 'Minister Peter Kyle yesterday on television said surprisingly that this was in the planning process and could be managed. Will the minister correct this record? The planning inquiry has concluded, no changes can be made to the Chinese planning application at all. 'I'll remind him the application contains nothing about cabling. Indeed to the inquiry, the Chinese have rejected only two requests, which he referred to actually, made by the Government in the letter from the foreign and home secretaries, despite ministers regularly saying that this letter, and I quote, should give those concerned, 'comfort'.' Sir Iain Duncan Smith took part in a protest over the plans for the embassy in February (PA/Jordan Pettitt) The Conservative MP said rerouting the cables would cost millions of pounds, and asked Mr Pennycook why the Government had denied the existence of cables until the White House confirmed it. He asked Mr Pennycook to deny reports by Chinese state media, saying the UK had given the Chinese assurances that it would allow a development 'no matter what'. He added: 'I see this as Project Kowtow, one denial after another, one betrayal after another. No wonder our allies believe that this Chinese mega embassy is now becoming a walk of shame for the Government.' Mr Pennycook replied because of the 'quasi-judicial nature' of his role, he could not comment on details of the application. He also said it would not be 'appropriate' for him to comment on the cabling or national security issues. He said he did not 'recognise the characterisation' by the Sunday Times of the embassy being raised in talks between the UK and China on trade. 'It is important to also emphasise that only material planning considerations can be taken into account in determining this case,' he said. 'But, as I say, I cannot comment in any detail on a case and it is not yet before the department.' Tory shadow communities secretary Kevin Hollinrake said Parliament had been treated with disdain by the Government. Mr Hollinrake said: 'Question after question, letter after letter, the Government has consistently treated Parliament with complete disregard on this matter. Stonewalling legitimate inquiries about national security, about ministerial discussions, and warnings about security bodies.' He added: 'Why won't the Government follow the examples of the US, Australian, and Irish governments which veto similar embassies that threaten their national security? 'The Government is on the verge of making a decision that will lead to huge risk, that will persist for decades. Will they change course before it is too late?' Mr Pennycook replied: 'No decision has been made on this case. No application is yet before the department.' Marie Rimmer, Labour MP for St Helens South and Whiston, said: 'China has a track record of aggressive state-backed espionage, and surely this country cannot afford to make a massive underestimation of what risk if this would go ahead?' She added: 'We cannot not say anything in this House. We must comment on what we see, and please understand that we must do so.' Meanwhile, former security minister, Conservative MP Tom Tugendhat, asked whether the Government believed the Chinese would treat a similar application in the same way. He said: 'Do you honestly believe that thr minister thinks that the Chinese would look at this proposal in the same way? 'Do we actually in this House believe that our economic security being threatened, as highlighted by the Americans and the Dutch, would go through a bureaucratic planning process with no ability to vary it because, frankly, them's the orders? 'I don't think that's the way China would do it, and it's certainly not the way we should.' Mr Pennycook replied: 'I'm very glad that we have a different and more robust planning system than the People's Republic of China.'

What does the Winter Fuel Payment U-turn mean for Scottish pensioner?
What does the Winter Fuel Payment U-turn mean for Scottish pensioner?

The National

time10 minutes ago

  • The National

What does the Winter Fuel Payment U-turn mean for Scottish pensioner?

The Chancellor announced on Monday the payment, worth up to £300, will be restored to anyone of pension age with an income of under £35,000 a year. But what does this mean for Scotland? The Scottish Government was due to take over responsibility for winter fuel payments in September but the introduction of a new universal benefit was delayed after the UK Government decided to start means-testing the payment. In November, it was announced a devolved benefit would be created, giving £100 for all pensioner households, with those on pension credit due to receive £200 or £300 depending on their age. It is set to be introduced ahead of this winter. While Scotland can still boast that the £100 payment is universal whereas the English and Welsh payment is not, it means a cohort of Scottish pensioners – those with income less than £35,000 – will now receive less than their English counterparts. READ MORE: Former SNP MP hits out at 'foolish' Hamilton by-election campaign Social Justice Secretary Shirley-Anne Somerville said ministers were not consulted on the major U-turn and has urged the UK Government to ensure the Scottish Government is 'fully appraised' of the proposed changes 'as soon as possible'. She said: 'I welcome any extension of eligibility by the UK Government, but this is a U-turn the Chancellor should have made a long time ago. 'But there is still no detail about how the Chancellor intends to go about that. Unfortunately, it still sounds as if many pensioners will miss out.' The Scottish Government now has a decision to make as to whether it makes any changes to the Pension Age Winter Heating Payment on the back of the announcement. Scottish Labour is calling for the extra money the Scottish Government will receive as a result of Barnett consequentials to increase the current offer. Labour MSP Paul O'Kane said: 'The SNP must re-examine their own proposals in light of this game-changing announcement, ensure payments reach those most in need, and give a cast-iron guarantee that no struggling Scottish pensioners will be left out of pocket under their plans.'

Spending review is ‘settled', says Downing Street
Spending review is ‘settled', says Downing Street

Western Telegraph

time10 minutes ago

  • Western Telegraph

Spending review is ‘settled', says Downing Street

Chancellor Rachel Reeves is expected to announce funding increases for the NHS, schools and defence along with a number of infrastructure projects on Wednesday, as she shares out some £113 billion freed up by looser borrowing rules. But other areas could face cuts as she seeks to balance manifesto commitments with more recent pledges, such as a hike in defence spending, while meeting her fiscal rules that promise to match day-to-day spending with revenues. Home Secretary Yvette Cooper was the last minister still to reach a deal with the Treasury (Jacob King/PA) On Monday morning, Home Secretary Yvette Cooper was the last minister still to reach a deal with the Treasury, with reports suggesting greater police spending would mean a squeeze on other areas of her department's budget. Speaking to reporters on Monday afternoon, the Prime Minister's official spokesman said: 'The spending review is settled, we will be focused on investing in Britain's renewal so that all working people are better off. 'The first job of the Government was to stabilise the British economy and the public finances, and now we move into a new chapter to deliver the promise and change.' The Government has committed to spend 2.5% of gross domestic product on defence from April 2027, with a goal of increasing that to 3% over the next parliament – a timetable which could stretch to 2034. Ms Reeves' plans will also include an £86 billion package for science and technology research and development. Last week the Chancellor admitted that she had been forced to turn down requests for funding for projects she would have wanted to back, amid the Whitehall spending wrangling. Mayor of London Sir Sadiq Khan's office is concerned that Wednesday's announcement will include no new funding or projects for London. Mayor of London Sadiq Khan (Lucy North/PA) The mayor had been looking to secure extensions to the Docklands Light Railway and Bakerloo line on the Underground, along with the power to introduce a tourist levy and a substantial increase in funding for the Metropolitan Police. A source close to the mayor said on Monday that ministers 'must not return to the damaging, anti-London approach of the last government', adding this would harm both London's public services and 'jobs and growth across the country'. They said: 'Sadiq will always stand up for London and has been clear it would be unacceptable if there are no major infrastructure projects for London announced in the spending review and the Met doesn't get the funding it needs. 'We need backing for London as a global city that's pro-business, safe and well-connected.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store