Yes there should be tax breaks for married couples especially with children to break families together again. Which helps all children to be in a stable relationship
No - Why should they? I am with my partner and we live as married and as a family unit but I still pay full taxes.
I think we need to get back to some basic family values and the married persons tax break is one way towards this, social and family values have been allowed to decline under Labour, it's time to change.
Yes - Many of our society's problems can be related back to 'broken' homes / families.
Yes - I agree families who try harder to stay together are usually married, its all too easy to walk away from responsibilities when no social contract is in force. This unfortunately needs to many single parents needing new homes or the partner needing one on the break up which all need extra funding which can then so easily lead to the debt levels of many today.
where do you think marriage came from? - the Bible of course, so God says marriage is a holy union based on love. also it fosters more secure family values.
Oh you could get married, I suppose!
Yes it is about time that married couples are rewarded for being together.
Yes I agree there should be tax breaks for married couples.
Yes they should but only if they have children. The current situation favours women not marrying and/or declaring that their partners are living with them to enable them to receive assistance with childcare costs.
Married women lose out even though their incomes may be the same. The system is gendered as it assumes a man will earn more and be able to look after you, but in this day and age both partners have to work and what's the point of going to work when you pay £270 per week for childcare?!
Of course it is right to allow a tax advantage for marriage. It is a legal contract which confers some advantages (and some disadvantages such as joint liability for debts) on the parties entering it. It is fine for people to choose not to marry but they just won't get the same legal recognition. It is exactly the same as if I choose to enter a legal contract with an insurance company to insure my house against fire. If my house catches fire, I get a payout. If you choose to spend the premium on a holiday and do without the insurance and your house catches fire, you don't get a payout.
Just make tax allowances transferrable where one partner does not work. If you think that that will favour the rich too much then just withdraw it for those in the 50% tax bracket. Many many women would prefer not to work while their children are young. They only do so out of financial necessity, I know I did. A transferrable tax allowance might enable some to leave the workforce for a few years and the jobs vacated would be filled by the unemployed.
Of Course its Fair.
Yes it is.
I also think those who have legally entered a civil partnership should be given the same tax break. It's about responsibility, loyalty and commitment and being prepared to sign up for it. It's harder to walk away from a marriage than if you just live with someone. Anyway why are people who live with someone and intending to stay together so afraid of making it legal?
The present government has gradually eroded the institution of marriage, so much so, that it is now considered unfashionable. The incoming government should do all it can to change atitudes with a return to the old family values. Returning tax breaks which were taken away, could be part of that process.
Why should an ex-husband or ex-wife (having left their partner, probably with children) be entitled to a tax break if he/she should re-marry? The one that is left behind shouldn't lose out. They may have tried to keep the family together but have failed because their partner wouldn't try. So NO I do not think there should be a tax break for married couples. The reason a family stays together shouldn't be because there is money involved. That won't keep the family together.
NO TO TAX BREAKS - Here we go again, something else to blame on the goverment of the time, how is giving out more money going to bring families together, if they dont want to be together more handouts are not going to work - what happened to peoples pride - my parents never got any handouts, they worked for everything they owned.
Stable relationship are made by parents - not handouts - Those in need of benifits get them allready, and those that dont but should need to claim them.
Trouble is that everybody wants everything today and they are not prepared to work for anything they want anymore. Having said that I know it is not possible for many to work for one reason or another.
Old fashioned values are made by people - not goverments.
I have been married to the same lady for 51 years! I can well remember when we used to receive extra tax allowances. To the 'guest at 14.04'; you have made your own point. You are NOT married and are, therefore, NOT fully commited. If any of you are still considering voting Labour this year then thank God I am 73 years old. You will get what you deserve; a country run by Scots!!!!
Yes: But go one step further and let married couples combine their tax allowances too!
Yes: But wasn't it the conservatives who removed the married couples tax allowance in the first place??!??
Yes: Cannot understand how we got into the situation where a family unit can be better off with the couple being unmarried!
Might be useful to know what it is we are voting on, From what I heard on the radio this morning this is a broadbrush idea that has not yet been published as a detailed policy.
Why is it that almost everyone thinks that it is only people with young children who are married are hard up and need help. What about the married OAP's who are married and need help?
Yes I agree with most of those who support tax breaks for married couples but you know there are so many things wrong with the way this country is going. I beleive we need to step back further to when family values were far more respected. When the young looked up to their elders more and learned from their advice and experience.
The young today largely do as they please in nearly all aspects of life- Fine, if they are well adjusted but in many a case the disciplines have gone and we are now seeing the results with certain attitudes and crimes.
I applaud any move that strengthens the family unit, as I am sure,this is what this country needs urgently. Perhaps some parents also need to stand up and be counted as to whether or not they are good enough to be parents
To Malcolm 2282 I feel really sorry for your wife! spending 51 years married to a racist bigot like you. At age 73 you have still not learnt to judge people by who they are rather than what they are. Sad sad sad.
IMO Yes to tax breaks for married couples.
Why should marriage be rewarded
My ex was unfaithful I got rid of him
HE re married
I had to take out another mort -as a single person
WHY should they be rewarded???? Married ADULTERERS!!!!
I agree with you, I have been married for 43 years and bought up two children, my husband used to get married mans allowance then it was stopped.
Yes and it should be transferable between the couple.
We have a huge £188bn + National Debt and tax rises will be coming thick and fast after the election. A rare potential tax break should be treated with respect !
Think the Tories have got this one wrong.
Yes to tax breaks for married couples.Would like to see more emphasis on financially encouraging a parent to stay home to bring up their children too!
perhaps there should be penalties for those who refuse to get married!
This is a supposed vote catcher for this election.
Previously married people had various tax incentives for years. These were dwindled away to nothing, infact couples positively taxed, especially during the thatcher years.
The tax incentive will be meaningless already as they will be funded from other taxes, the first being a tax on motorists and air travel. That should make the school run and holiday travel more expensive for couples.
What the outcome will be is 'give with one hand and take with the other' plus the cost of the changes will be additional and need more taxes to pay for civil service administration. Then when time has passed the tax incentive will be removed adding more changes and costs.
Very well put
What about "Widows and Widowers" have they to get married again just because the Government has stuffed up ???????????
Get real - Comit and get married - you will regret it if you don't.
I am a 'young' widow. Why should I miss out? It isnt my fault that I am bringing my 8 year old daughter up as a 'single parent'. Will they make allowances for that? I think not.
I tried hard to stay married but my ex didn't even give me a hint that he was leaving, so why should he reap the rewards if he remarries? I was the one left to bring up 5 children on my own & I would have loved a tax break to help me out.
Yes, most definitely. At the end of the day it is only something that we already had which was taken away by the shambles which we call government.
So from what I can work out from the majority of messages we should be marrying for a lttle extra cash and not for love?
Also those who are married with dual income coming into the house to cover living costs deserve more of a break than those who have not managed to find that someone special in their lives and struggle to meet their living costs on their own?
I can understand some living costs such as food & clothing will be higher for couples but rent, insurance, etc cost the same, regardless of whether you are married or single.
Yes. At present there are tax and benefits advantages to being unmarried: Labour Party discrimination against marriage must be wrong. This must stop.
But as Britain is in such a desperate financial situation, it would make sense to have an allowance just for married couples with children under 18.
Children need to have a Dad and a Mum living together, and committed to one another.
Murdoch does not seem to have noticed that the Scots have secured advantages denied to the English. Scotland receives a subsidy from Britain, worth over #1,000 per head per annum.
The #3,000 per annum university tuition fee does not apply to Scotland.
Some medicinces are availalble to Scots on the NHS, which are not available to the English.
The Scots not only have their own Parliament, but they dominate the English Parliament, and need less votes in each seat. At the last electiuon, there were more Conservative votes than Labour votes in England, but Labour claimed many more seats.
England would benefit if the Scots secured full independence.
Just as many of our society's problems can be related back to homes/families with two parents!
Tax breaks will not encourage couples to stay together & is not always good for the children. I know many single parent families whose children are well mannered, well dressed, have obtained top marks @ university & are very much loved. I also know two parent families where there is friction between the parents which has affected the children & the children have become withdrawn.
Well if you get extra money for being married what about widows, widowers and single people living alone. (I am speaking as a married person).
It seems to me that lots of people grab when there is money going but hate the 'nanny state' when it suits.
Another outmoded excuse to catch votes, what rubbish. Single people already pay for those that have children perhaps they should get a bigger tax break why should they pay for peoples children to be educated or given healthcare. Basically it is unfair to discriminate in such a way. I dare say the likes of Mr Camerons set stay at home anyway so why should they enjoy tax breaks. It is better for chldren to live in a safe environment where they are loved and cared for than with bickering and maybe violent parents. Who are we as people to judge that because people are living with partners or single that they are bad parents. I can think of well off people i know whose children have taken or pushed drugs, and they are with there parents as an original family. By advocating this you are saying they are better parents and should get tax breaks. Think outside the box!! If you go to work and pay taxes why should one set of people be penalised. I doubt all those spouting family life regularly go to church? At they end of the day it is just a cheap gimmick to get married people to vote for that party. If that is all they have up there sleeve heaven help us all. They have probably all got husbands and wives out having or had flings but choose to stay married for selfish ends ie money, fightened to be on their own. Unfortunately Mr Cameron doesn't see in to peoples souls. Judging by past, present and I dare say future MP's the majority of them seem to choose to ignore indiscretions but stay married what a farce. Time to concentrate on making this country great again. Removing the Human rights act, discipline in the classroom and policeman on the street and not allowing immigrants to run the pot dry on benefits they don't deserve may be then we can all enjoy tax breaks.
A couple can already share their cost of living. A couple in a one bedroom between them are paying 600 each on a 1200 per month rent. As a single person I must pay the full 1200 without help from anyone and I don't get a break?
Everything is setup now for duel income. Try buying a house in Vancouver as a single guy.
No I dont think it is,me and my partner have been together for 10 years we have 3 children and we have a very stable loving home my partner works full time why should we be singled out because we are not martiedsome,months tax man takes half of his wage why should we pay for those that choose not to work and then pay for tax break,of married couples,its outragous
Good morning, times have changed and we have been offered a diffrent way of life without the the harsh judgement of those silly rules of having to be married to live a life together with children. I'm 30 years old successful in my career and so is my partner we have a a wonderful son age one and a half and another on the way I simply dont beleave in God so why get married its just a piece of paper to us.
News, articles and guides on all things money related, from pensions and investments to savings and mortgages. Moneywise offers independent news and views, video and blogs as well as uniquely independent and interactive comparison services.
Moneywise distributes services supplied by Interactive Investor. Interactive Investor Trading Limited, trading as "Interactive Investor", is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Copyright © 2016 Moneywise.