| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Children's Tax Credit
Mr. MacShane: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is the distributional impact (a) of the children's tax credit and Working Families Tax Credit of £32 per week for a second adult and (b) if the CTC were reduced so that the cost to the Exchequer was the same as a £32 credit for a second adult. [118202]
Dawn Primarolo: As given in the reply to my hon. Friend on 9 March 2000, Official Report, column 817W, based on the full year cost of the Working Families Tax Credit (WFTC), the cost of including an additional £32 per week within the credits for all couples already in receipt of WFTC would be about £1.3 billion before taking into account additional take-up and other behavioural effects. If the overall costs to the Exchequer were to remain the same, a cost of this magnitude could absorb the funding for the children's tax credit (CTC).
The £32 per week second adult credit would benefit all couples in receipt of the WFTC equally, whereas the CTC would benefit all families with children under 16 by up to £8.50 per week.
Working Families Tax Credit
Mr. Field: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to the answer of 3 April 2000, Official Report, column 340W, if he will disaggregate the number of families claiming Family Credit and Working Families Tax Credit by (a) income deciles, (b) each £5,000 of household income and (c) families above and below half average household income. [118231]
Dawn Primarolo [holding answer 7 April 2000]: For the analyses of families with the Working Families Tax Credit, I refer my right hon. Friend to the answer given on
19 Apr 2000 : Column: 579W
12 April 2000, Official Report, column 160W. For Family Credit, the latest available estimates are for recipients in 1997-98. The distributions are given in the tables as percentages.
| Before housing costs | After housing costs | |
|---|---|---|
| Bottom quintile | 41 | 38 |
| Second quintile | 39 | 44 |
| Third, fourth and top quintile | 20 | 18 |
| Before housing costs | After housing costs | |
|---|---|---|
| 0 to £100 | * | 18 |
| £100 to £200 | 63 | 68 |
| £200 to £300 | 27 | (12) |
| £300+ | * | * |
| Before housing costs | After housing costs | |
|---|---|---|
| Above half average income | 61 | 50 |
| Below half average income | 39 | 50 |
Notes:
1. The information comes from the "Household Below Average Income" (HBAI) data set for 1997-98, based on the Family Resources Survey, and relate to Great Britain.
2. The estimates are presented on household income both Before Housing Costs and After Housing Costs, in line with HBAI conventions.
3. All the estimates in the table relate to families in receipt of Family Credit, and are based on their incomes recorded in the survey, not at the time of claim. The are also based on incomes equivalised using the McClements scale. Equivalised incomes are equivalent to cash incomes for couples with no children. The results in table (b) are particularly sensitive to the choice of scale.
4. All the estimates are subject to sampling error. Groups have been aggregated due to small sample numbers. In particular, this has led to decile groups being aggregated to quintile groups in table (a). Results are not reliable for cells with small sample sizes: cells with sample sizes under 50 are marked with an asterisk (
*. Results for cells based on samples of 50 to 100 benefit units are bracketed.
Mr. Field: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to the answer of 3 April 2000, Official Report, column 340W, how many of those families claiming Working Families Tax Credit in each month since its introduction would have been entitled to family credit. [118232]
Dawn Primarolo [holding answer 7 April 2000]: I refer my right hon. Friend to the answer the Under-Secretary of State for Social Security, my hon. Friend the Member for Wallasey (Angela Eagle), gave him on 3 April 2000, Official Report, column 340W.
19 Apr 2000 : Column: 580W
Given the difference in income rules in relation to maintenance and the fact that it is not possible to isolate behavioural effects (such as the number of families who may have entered work or increased their hours because Working Families Tax Credit provides a more generous work incentive than Family Credit) it is not possible to determine whether individual Working Families Tax Credit recipients in each month would have been entitled to Family Credit.
Miss Geraldine Smith: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer for what reasons it is necessary for claimants of working families tax credit who are paid monthly to provide more evidence of earnings than claimants who are paid weekly. [119739]
Dawn Primarolo: Working Families Tax Credit is based on a snapshot of a family's income immediately before the claim and is paid for a fixed period of 26 weeks. Therefore, it is necessary to ensure that the period over which normal earnings are considered is representative. For weekly-paid applicants, the set period is six weeks in the seven weeks immediately before the week in which the application is made. For monthly-paid people, the set period is the three months before the application. These periods should provide a representative picture in arriving at the applicant's normal earnings. Although monthly-paid staff are asked to provide evidence of pay over a three month period they need only provide three payslips whereas weekly-paid staff are required to provide six payslips.
Ms Buck: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many families have been awarded working families tax credit in each local authority area in London. [119829]
Dawn Primarolo: Up to the end of March 2000, there had been 76,200 awards made of the Working Families' Tax Credit (WFTC) in the London Government Office Region. Available figures by local authority are given in the table.
(13) All figures are rounded to the nearest hundred. The estimates for constituencies in Great Britain are based on a 5 per cent. sample and are subject to sampling error. For example local authorities with 500 awards could be in the range 300 to 700.
(14) A single estimate is given for Westminster and the City of London as there are too few sample cases in the latter for a reliable estimate to be made.
19 Apr 2000 : Column: 581W
Income Tax (Pensioners)
Jackie Ballard: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many people over pensionable age in the UK paid income tax in 1999 [118835]
Dawn Primarolo: It is estimated that the number of pensioners 1 who are liable to income tax in 1999--2000 is 4.0 million.
This estimate is based on the 1997--98 Survey of Personal Incomes and is consistent with the March 2000 Budget.
1 Women aged 60 and over, men aged 65 and over.
Personal Data
Mr. Cohen: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what items of personal data his Department routinely obtains from public utilities and other Government Departments for data matching exercises undertaken in his Department. [119529]
Dawn Primarolo: The Inland Revenue obtains personal data, under its statutory information powers, from a variety of third parties and collates this data by reference to individual records. It does provide personal data, as permitted by Social Security legislation, to the Department of Social Security for data matching by that Department to prevent and detect crime; to check the accuracy of their information; or to protect public funds.
Mr. Cohen: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what assessment he has made of the compatibility of his Department's data matching with respect to benefit fraud and tax evasion with Article 8 of the Human Rights Act 1998; what representations he has received on this subject; and if he will make a statement. [119527]
Dawn Primarolo: The Inland Revenue obtains personal data, under its statutory information powers, from a variety of third parties and collates this data by reference to individual records. It does provide personal data, as permitted by Social Security legislation, to the Department of Social Security for data matching by that Department to prevent and detect crime; to check the accuracy of their information; or to protect public funds.
19 Apr 2000 : Column: 582W
The Inland Revenue has not received any representations on data matching and Article 8 of the Human Rights Act 1998.
Mr. Cohen: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what Code of Practice covers his Department's data matching activities; and if he will place a copy in the Library. [119528]
Dawn Primarolo: The Inland Revenue obtains personal data, under its statutory information powers, from a variety of third parties and collates this data by reference to individual records. It does provide personal data, as permitted by Social Security legislation, to the Department of Social Security for data matching by that Department. This data matching is governed by their published "Code of Practice for Data Matching".
Mr. Cohen: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what items of personal data, not related to PAYE arrangements, his Department routinely obtains from the London Borough of Waltham Forest; and if he will make a statement. [119530]
Dawn Primarolo: The Inland Revenue obtains information from the London Borough of Waltham Forest under its statutory information powers. This information comprises all payments for services rendered to the borough, all payments made under grants or subsidies, all licences, registers and approvals and payments under leases and related obligations.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |