X

Create an account to continue reading.

Registered readers have access to our blogs and a limited number of magazine articles
For unlimited access to The Spectator, subscribe below

Registered readers have access to our blogs and a limited number of magazine articles

Sign in to continue

Already have an account?

What's my subscriber number?

Subscribe now from £1 a week

Online

Unlimited access to The Spectator including the full archive from 1828

Print

Weekly delivery of the magazine

App

Phone & tablet edition of the magazine

Spectator Club

Subscriber-only offers, events and discounts
 
View subscription offers

Already a subscriber?

or

Subscribe now for unlimited access

ALL FROM JUST £1 A WEEK

View subscription offers

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating an account – Your subscriber number was not recognised though. To link your subscription visit the My Account page

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

X

Login

Don't have an account? Sign up
X

Subscription expired

Your subscription has expired. Please go to My Account to renew it or view subscription offers.

X

Forgot Password

Please check your email

If the email address you entered is associated with a web account on our system, you will receive an email from us with instructions for resetting your password.

If you don't receive this email, please check your junk mail folder.

X

It's time to subscribe.

You've read all your free Spectator magazine articles for this month.

Subscribe now for unlimited access – from just £1 a week

You've read all your free Spectator magazine articles for this month.

Subscribe now for unlimited access

Online

Unlimited access to The Spectator including the full archive from 1828

Print

Weekly delivery of the magazine

App

Phone & tablet edition of the magazine

Spectator Club

Subscriber-only offers, events and discounts
X

Sign up

What's my subscriber number? Already have an account?

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating an account – Your subscriber number was not recognised though. To link your subscription visit the My Account page

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

X

Your subscriber number is the 8 digit number printed above your name on the address sheet sent with your magazine each week.

Entering your subscriber number will enable full access to all magazine articles on the site.

If you cannot find your subscriber number then please contact us on customerhelp@subscriptions.co.uk or call 0330 333 0050.

You can create an account in the meantime and link your subscription at a later time. Simply visit the My Account page, enter your subscriber number in the relevant field and click 'submit changes'.

Please note: Previously subscribers used a 'WebID' to log into the website. Your subscriber number is not the same as the WebID. Please ensure you use the subscriber number when you link your subscription.

Coffee House

Making work pay

10 July 2012

8:30 PM

10 July 2012

8:30 PM

‘Making work pay’ – it’s the phrase du jour of welfare reform. It’s not always clear, though, how it is actually achieved.

One part of the equation is looking at how earnings, taxes and benefits interact at the lower end of the income scale. As people earn more, they’re entitled to fewer benefits, and have to start paying higher taxes. This creates what’s known as a ‘withdrawal rate’ – the percentage of any extra income lost to this combination.

When people talk about the ‘poverty trap’ or work not paying, this is often what they’re referring to: because if people don’t get to keep much of the money, their incentive to earn more is weak. For a couple with two children, for example, the withdrawal rate is currently 73 per cent: meaning that if they want to keep just £1 more, they have to earn a further £3.70. Not a great offer, really, even before considering that those few pounds might be a poor trade-off for a few hours of time.  

Better-paid jobs, cutting taxes, raising tax thresholds, and raising the level at which you stop getting benefits or the rate at which you lose them are easy answers. How they are financed is rather more difficult.

Then there’s Universal Credit. Its big idea is to make work a more rational proposition, by ironing out some of the dafter bits of the current arrangement and creating generally consistent work incentives.

There are two hitches, though. First, that withdrawal rate is coming down for most groups, but not everyone. Sticking with our family of  two kids, they face a withdrawal rate of 76 per cent – a small rise.

Second, the credit doesn’t include Council Tax Benefit. That’s because it’s being devolved, and in England it’s up to councils to design new systems for managing it. This all sounds a bit technical, but it’s important. Under the new system, councils will have to decide whether to treat the credit as income, for assessing who gets CTB.

If they count it as income, it’s a bureaucratic nightmare. They will have to check with the DWP what every family is receiving in Credit. And thanks to the way that childcare support is calculated, some people would also have more expensive childcare, with a potential knock-on effect on how much they work.

If they don’t count it as income, then CTB will sit alongside the credit. This is the easy option. It’s also one that means people might lose both credit and CTB when they earn more. This increases their withdrawal rate: if councils keep CTB rebates the same, then a basic-rate taxpayer will lose 89.8% of any extra earnings. In other words, the simplest path for councils to take leaves us back with the original problem: poor incentives to work.

Our welfare system is a Gordian knot, which Universal Credit was supposed to slice through. Everyone should want it to function properly, because everyone wants people to be better off working.  

Unless some crucial details are sorted out, though, it looks like work still won’t pay.

Gordon Hector is Public Affairs Manager at the Joseph Rowntree Foundation

Subscribe to The Spectator today for a quality of argument not found in any other publication. Get more Spectator for less – just £12 for 12 issues.


Show comments
Close