Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I'm sure most people know about this, but I didn't - and apparently 3.6M of 4.2M eligible couples are missing out on it, so I thought it worth sharing. Basically, if you earned less than ?10,600 last tax year (2015-16), or are going to earn less than ?11,000 this year (2016-17), you can transfer ?1,000 of your tax free allowance to your spouse or civil partner (provided they earn less than ?43,000), which could mean saving up to ?432 in tax. Not a dodge or anything, fully legit - because I took a large part of last year off as we were moving house and I was doing the old place up, I came under the threshold, gave Mrs.H ?1,000 of my allowance and HMRC have just (very promptly!) come up with a backdated ?200 odd rebate for us. This article tells more about it: http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/family/marriage-tax-allowance - five minutes to apply online, all you need is both your NI numbers and your passport number (the person who earned below the threshold has to apply).


Hope that helps some people, it's certainly brightened my week!


Cheers,


Rendel


ETA: What happens is, by the way, is that your partner's tax code is changed so they get an extra ?1,000 allowance for this year, but it's backdated, so once they've notified your partner it's been changed they can give HMRC a ring on 03002003300 and claim last year's rebate as well, they'll pay it straight to your bank account.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/125365-marriage-tax-allowance/
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • CPR Dave, attendance records are available on Southwark's website. Maggie Browning has attended 100% of meetings. Jon Hartley has attended 65%.
    • I do hope NOT, wouldn't trust Farage as far as I could throw him, Starmer & co.  He's backed by GB News which focus's predominantly on immigration while the BBC focus predominantly on the Israel - Gazza conflict.   
    • Everyone gets the point that Corbynites try to make with the "total number of votes cast" statistic, it's just a specious one.  In 2017, Corbyn's Labour got fewer votes than May's Tories (both the percentage of votes and aggregate number of votes). In 2019, Corbyn's Labour fewer votes than Johnson's Tories (both the percentage of votes and aggregate number of votes); and he managed to drop 2.7 million votes or 6.9% of vote share between the two elections. I repeat, he got trounced by Boris F***ing Johnson and the Tories after the Brexit omnishambles. It is not true that a "fairer" electoral system would have seen Labour beat the Tories: Labour simply got fewer votes than the Tories. Corbyn lost twice. There is no metric by which he won the general election. His failure to win was a disaster for the UK, and let Johnson and Truss and Sunak into office. Corbynites have to let go of this delusion that Corbyn but really won somehow if you squint in a certain way. It is completely irrelevant that Labour under Corbyn got more votes than Labour under Starmer. It is like saying Hull City was more successful in its 2014 FA Cup Final than Chelsea was in its 2018 FA Cup Final, because Hull scored 2 goals when Chelsea only scored 1. But guess what - Chelsea won its game and Hull City lost. Corbyn's fans turned out to vote for him - but an even larger group of people who found him repellant were motivated enough to show up and vote Tory.
    • I guess its the thing these days to demonstrate an attitude, in this instance seemingly of the negative kind, instead of taking pride in your work and have standards then 🤷‍♀️
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...