Free childcare would raise millions in tax on working mums, says thinktank

[alp227]

Source: The Observer

Free nursery care would raise millions of pounds for the government by enabling mothers to return to work, according to a report by the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR). The thinktank says the increased tax revenues that would result would outstrip the cost of providing care for all pre-school children.

Many women, especially those on low to middle incomes, stop work after having children because of the high cost of childcare in the UK. In the 34 developed nations that make up the Organisation for Economic Co-operation & Development, a couple who are both earning average wages spend 12% of their income on childcare. However, in the UK that figure is 27%.

At just over 60%, the employment rate of women with children in the UK is much lower than in many other OECD countries – it ranks 19th behind countries such as Iceland, Sweden and Denmark, which tend to have affordable, high-quality childcare provision.

The IPPR estimates that the cost of universal childcare would be £6.7bn, which could be funded, it suggests, by restricting tax relief on pension contributions to the basic rate. Money could also be raised by means-testing winter fuel payments, free travel passes and television licences for pensioners.

Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2011/dec/11/free-childcare-millions-tax-mums

[midnight]

1. K&R

[FreakinDJ]

2. Doesn't it mean their wages are lower

Daycare = 27% of wages compared to just 12% tells me the women's wages are so low they feel they are better off just staying home taking care of the children

[movingviolation]

3. I wish we could do that in the U.S.

Then I wouldn't have to work nights while my wife works days. Especially now since many night shift jobs in my field (printing) seemed to have dried up due to our economic downturn. The company I worked at for 10 years got sold to another company and most of us were laid off in Sept. I think I'd still have a job if I could work days.

[pnwmom]

4. But how does that work when there are no jobs?

The UK has a terrible unemployment rate, like we do.

[Lionessa]

6. My immediate thought as well.

[LeftishBrit]

9. My first thought too!

[NashVegas]

11. Exactly

At this point, I can't help but think it would be a subsidy for attractive, thin, middle-class women who already have an easier time getting hired than their less fortunate counter-parts.


Also, the UK should work to bring the cost of childcare DOWN, rather than take more parents out of their childrens' homes, more hours. Duh!

[bhikkhu]

5. In theory...it could also oversupply labor markets, driving down wages

I think unemployment is still a problem in most places. Of course it would also create jobs in childcare, so people could work taking care of other people's kids rather than stay home taking care of their own. Or something like that...

[tblue37]

8. While my kids were little I ran a home daycare, so I could stay home

with them. I also continued to teach college English as an adjunct, but I had my office hours two evenings a week and alternating Saturdays when they were at their dad's, so I was only away from them during the 9-12 hours per week that I actually had to be in class. I graded papers late at night or on alternating weekends when they were asleep or at their dad's, and to make ends meet I did other work that I could fit around their waking hours (custom sewing & alterations; freelance writing & editing).

I was exhausted, but I was there with them during most of their waking hours, and my memory is filled with their childhood. My memory is also full of precious memories of the childhood of other women's children, but unfortunately, those poor mothers don't have those same memories.

Many of us do not want to spend most of our kids' earliest years hardly ever getting to see them. I always felt sad for the parents, especially the mothers, who missed out on so many precious moments with their little ones. I got to enjoy my children's childhood--as well as the childhood of several others, but their mothers did not.

Childcare should be subsidized for women who want to work while their kids are little, but if it is going to be subsidized, it should also be subsidized for women who want to be the ones caring for their own kids. Child rearing is a truly important job--not just for the family, but for society as a whole--and poorly raised kids are a terrible drain on society.

[NashVegas]

12. Great Post

[tblue37]

14. Thank you! nt

[No Elephants]

7. The sound you hear is the sound of RW heads exploding on both sides of the pond.

[RantinRavin]

10. Do I have this right?

Spend 6.7 billion to fund a program that would bring in millions??????

[NashVegas]

13. That's F-ed Up

The problem is that working parents have to work longer hours away from their children, in order to be able to have a job and get child care in the first place, and that UK parents have to pay over twice as much to afford child care as other countries.

Subsidizing child care by hitting everyone's pocketbook isn't going to bring down the cost of child care anymore than health insurance brings down the runaway cost of health care.