Discussions

What are people's thoughts on the recent changes? What is the household I come cut off that you will not receive the credit?

is the cut off. Make more you get nothing. Personally I think it should be ALOT lower.

I think it's totally unfair that the hard working families get less or nothing now! Now we're gonna have to work even harder to pay for extra circular activities. Only good thing that came out of it is that it's non taxable! Would of liked it better if they kept it the way it was! I get that lower income families need more. But why penalize well educated hard working families too?

Seems the harder you work the less you get. Perhaps I should get a lowering paying job so the government can support my family. Where's the equality?

I still dont no the details of it..was waiting till next month to see what we get. Our income tax lady couldnt even exactally tell us....wish they would send out a letter instead of the general one they sent for you to go online and estimate it yourself..

I don't mean to change direction on this topic but I feel I have to respond to some of the comments. While I understand what you're saying in terms of higher income earners not receiving any assistance doesn't seem right, I have a very hard time with the implication that just because you have a lower income you aren't educated or a hard worker?? Honestly, some of the smartest and hardest working people I know aren't in the $200,000 income bracket or anywhere near. And a lot of professions aren't paid what they are worth. Anyway, I don't like to argue, especially on a forum like this, but I felt it was necessary to point this out.

so is this the changes you are all trying to elude too?? If you check this link, it makes it much more clear.  
 
https://www.sudbury.com/local-news/new-child-benefit-payments-to-start-arriving-july-20-325929  
 
 
and this is where you can calculate it:  
 
http://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/how-much-the-canada-child-benefit-will-help-your-family/  
 
Edited by whatthewhat, 2016-06-29 23:19:44

Here is the most current child tax calculator. Now remember these are just estimates. Sadly no one will know exactly what they are entitled too until July.  
 
http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/benefits-calculator/

SH said "I don't mean to change direction on this topic but I feel I have to respond to some of the comments. While I understand what you're saying in terms of higher income earners not receiving any assistance doesn't seem right, I have a very hard time with the implication that just because you have a lower income you aren't educated or a hard worker?? Honestly, some of the smartest and hardest working people I know aren't in the $200,000 income bracket or anywhere near. And a lot of professions aren't paid what they are worth. Anyway, I don't like to argue, especially on a forum like this, but I felt it was necessary to point this out. "

My husband makes okay money, and we simply manage to live on it, probably with proportionately less debt than a household making $200K. But he doesn't work less hard because he makes a fraction of what others even in our neighbourhood make. And we still manage to enroll our kids in extra curricular activities, plus we homeschool so even though we pay school taxes we're shelling out money for curriculum materials on top of that.  
 
If a family that makes $200K feels strongly that they should be getting government money, they can have more children. That is, after all, part of the social engineering that's behind programs like that (child 1 and 2 are weighted the same with the same income cut-off in the calculation... 3rd and subsequent have a higher weight and dramatically increases the cut-off with each child. I worked in Child Tax for nearly 10 years back when the Liberals were in government last time, so don't blame the Conservatives.)

remember there is a "Mail Strike" coming up - so maybe the cheques will not be delivered. Keep that in mind.

Actually, if you have a CRA online account you can check your payments for July 2016-June 2017. Notices may not have been mailed, but it is posted online.

In my opinion this just gives those that live on welfare more of a reason to stay on welfare. If someone has 4 or 5 kids they have it made. I can already see the unemployment rate sky rocket. Just keep popping out those babies and live on child tax. I know many that do and see many that do. It's disgusting.

Thank you sh and abbysmum. Love that people think because others "only" earn minimum wage or less than 200,000.00 they're less educated and lazy. I can almost guarantee most of us "lazy, uneducated" people work a lot harder at our jobs than most and take pride in what they do everyday. Rude much?smh

I agree with giving more money for children but I think the amount should be capped at 3 or 4 children max. I think it really encourages people who do not have the time, energy, money, health to raise up such a large family to keep having children. I agree with a cut off for income. It''s not that high income earners work harder get less but if you bring home 8ooo plus a month are you really going to miss a couple hundred dollars a month for child tax credit? You can probably afford sports and all the extra's without struggle where low middle income at 3000 dollars a month these things are more difficult to pay for the family.  
 
Edited by winterstorm45, 2016-06-30 08:33:32

Justmy2cents said "In my opinion this just gives those that live on welfare more of a reason to stay on welfare. If someone has 4 or 5 kids they have it made. I can already see the unemployment rate sky rocket. Just keep popping out those babies and live on child tax. I know many that do and see many that do. It's disgusting. "

I fully understand what you are saying.  
 
In light of your comment, I also want to share this other important thought that many low income, large families will not address in public...  
 
They hope that most people will not assume that just because a family has more than the average amount of children that they are on welfare/are lazy/that they had those kids to make an easy income/to have a larger income/that they chose a low income on purpose/any of the other similar incorrect assumptions people make.  
 
I think many with no kids or few kids, and moderate to large incomes, judge larger families without realizing that this is really not the reason that they had more kids, nor is it that they didn''''t realize the potential outcome of what they did as a couple..."Whoops, now we have 5 kids?!? What to do?!?" These things seem to be a common assumption about large families on eBrandon and in various communities in MB.  
 
This child tax is supposed to help families who are just getting by no matter what they have tried to do to "get ahead" (they could be very well educated at that as stated previously)...it is not to make them rich. It is far from that. It is like assuming a "one income family must be rich or how else could the other stay home?" (Daycare costs a lot, and not everyone wants to do daycare either.) I have heard this ignorant assumption as well.  
 
These low income couples often make great sacrifices for their families that others will never see nor be aware of. Often they are very hard workers that support the lifestyles of those with higher incomes. Those high incomes often would not exist without those workers who are being paid less (& as mentioned previously sometimes less than they are worth). These low income, often creative and frugal couples often do without perks for the betterment and well being of their family. There is no such thing as "disposable income". They just don''''t broadcast this fact nor do they usually feel that they should have to defend it to those who will not hear anyway.  
 
I have heard people who are very well off (we''''d be rich with their income), those who can travel anywhere they wish on a whim with their disposable income, complain about not getting the income supplement. These couples I am referring to have a couple kids to 4 or 5. That is greed just the same and to give them that extra would be wasting money that would be used on more perks...abuse on the other end of the scale.  
 
In theory, this has been put into place to help the large hardworking & self sacrificing families that do actually need it, not just to be income for those whom you speak of.  
 
Edit to respond to the last post... Penalize those who have more kids? Really? You made an assumption that these folks have no time, energy, or health. High paying jobs and income is not always available, physical problems can happen suddenly to change the course of one''s life. Sometimes life happens.  
 
Edited by Flutterby, 2016-06-30 09:40:49

I don't equate hard workingness with wage - so I think that is a misrepresentation. Many people work very hard and don't make tons of money.  
 
Giving lower income families (especially those already collecting from other assistance programs) more money - especially for more children seems like a recipe for disaster to me. I agree it should be capped at 3-4 children. These people are just going to realize as well that if they start making more money at their jobs that they will be getting less from the government, so why try any harder??? Why not have another baby instead??  
 
In my opinion, for Child Benefits, each child should be registered through the government to receive their child tax credit to some sort of account or fund, which can be used for things like sports, or necessities like clothing or food. To get your money, you must submit receipts and paper or perhaps the government would pay direct to different approved sporting groups etc. Giving some families big cheques just means that money sometimes doesn't make it where it belongs. Not all. But some. We see it all the time with other government assistance programs. Many use it properly and wisely and for what it is intended, but there are many who don't - and those are the ones that give it a bad name sometimes.  
 
In my opinion I think everyone who has children should get the UCCB or no one should. That's what made it universal. Those who needed more also qualified for a further benefit which the UCCB people did not get. Keep in mind families making $200,000 plus are also sending around $80,000+ back to the government each year. If they have kids, why shouldn't they get a small kickback like everyone else??? Yes they make more, and can likely afford more. But it doesn't mean that they can't use the money nor should they be penalized simply for making more money (which again, benefits the government greatly with the tax money they collect from these families). Not everyone who makes that wage sits atop some ivory corporate tower. Often people who are making those kinds of wages are constantly working overtime, and working their butts off too, to try to earn more for their families.  
 
Universal Child Care Benefit. The name said it all.  
 
Just my thoughts.

Have multiple kids to rake in the money but I have lived a life where I know lots have and enjoy it very much. Free money. Enough to live on without working. Come on. Let's start being realistic and not so politically correct. We want people to get off welfare yet we raise the child tax to an amount which a family could comfortably live on with their social assistance cheques. If this wasn't the issue, I think more would consider not having so many kids. "Oh I'm pregnant again, oh well more money for me"

Well as already been said, there are always those who use it properly and those who don't... My family is on the lower income bracket, and I am very thankful for this benefit that Canada is providing. Mind you we only have 2 children, but as they grow I want them involved in things like violin and martial arts, etc. On our smaller income, affording these things would be near impossible without the aid of this child tax. Growing up I remember I couldn't be involved in extra activities because if low income, and I pray God gives me the wisdom on how to manage the money so that my children don't have to be left out of things because of lack of money. I am very grateful, and by no means see it as a way to have a flock of children, or money making scheme. So, on behalf of those who use it the right way, I am very grateful

Sounds like pure greed to me! If you cannot afford to put your children in extra curricular's and you make 200+k then you should really get some financial advice. I'm a single mother with a annual income of about 30,000 and I still manage to put my kids in activities. And I also believe it's the people earning under 200k that work harder for the money, and a lot of us are actually well educated. And to the others saying people on welfare are just going to keep having babies because of the new child care amounts (smh) I highly doubt the child tax benefit even comes close to equate the cost of raising a child. I think it's great that the rich aren't getting richer and low to moderate income families are getting the extra hand they need!

SH said "I don't mean to change direction on this topic but I feel I have to respond to some of the comments. While I understand what you're saying in terms of higher income earners not receiving any assistance doesn't seem right, I have a very hard time with the implication that just because you have a lower income you aren't educated or a hard worker?? Honestly, some of the smartest and hardest working people I know aren't in the $200,000 income bracket or anywhere near. And a lot of professions aren't paid what they are worth. Anyway, I don't like to argue, especially on a forum like this, but I felt it was necessary to point this out. "

yes to this! Also, lower income families can't even dream of putting their kids in these expensive sports people speak of.. let's put things into perspective.

I should clarify. I clearly chose the wrong words. I did not mean to imply that higher income earners work 'harder', although I am sure some do and also equally sure some do not. However, those people have done things in their lives to advance to that higher wage earning position and it appears the government penalizes them for that. My point was why should the government subsidize those who earn less vs those who earn more. The government takes more than their share of taxes off the wealthy too.

Yes child tax helps tremendously. I have 2 children myself. I work full time and receive child tax (My oldest will be 18 and off in Sept). In July my child tax will jump to nearly $1000 with the new CCTB. So let's do the math for those that are arguing the "can't raise a child comfortably on child tax" bull****!!! If a person has... let's say 4 kids (which is probably the average in a family now) That amount is going to double. DOUBLE. So tell me again how they can't live comfortably on the new CCTB. Yes I do stereotype so some of this aims at some in particular.

Personally I think that each child should be entitled to the same amount, regardless of parents' income. Just because someone makes less money, why should their children be allowed more from the government?

Starblanket01 said "Sounds like pure greed to me! If you cannot afford to put your children in extra curricular's and you make 200+k then you should really get some financial advice. I'm a single mother with a annual income of about 30,000 and I still manage to put my kids in activities. And I also believe it's the people earning under 200k that work harder for the money, and a lot of us are actually well educated. And to the others saying people on welfare are just going to keep having babies because of the new child care amounts (smh) I highly doubt the child tax benefit even comes close to equate the cost of raising a child. I think it's great that the rich aren't getting richer and low to moderate income families are getting the extra hand they need! "

Greed??? Most people making this kind of money likely spent years in university/post secondary training and are paying off large debts because they are trying to further themselves. Not always the case, but in this case the government seems to be reinforcing the fact that if you work really hard, spend tons of time and money doing post secondary education and are lucky enough to land yourself a job that makes you good money - they'll reward you by taking half your paycheck and not giving you any extras along the way.

I have 3 kids, two of which are under the age of 6, and my Child tax benefit is going up by 200$, my universal was 300 and something. therefore I will be receiving less monthly. Im assuming both your children are over the age of 6, seeming as you almost have an 18 year old. So you either have extremely low income (for fun I tried the calculator at 2 kids over 6 at an annual income at 10,000$ and the benefit was 900$) or your full of it.  
 
And again you assume that because people do not make over 200k they didn't spend years in university. That is just not the case.

I must have extremely low income. Try doubling that. You must be offended and there for in the group I'm talking about. (Welfare) And because you think it's your business... I have a 3 year old and an almost 18 year old. See I wait to have more children (unlike others with 3 children under the age of 6).

2 under the age of 6.

Your child tax just isn't enough. Is that why your so uptight about my post starblanket. Lmao. Go try the calculator again since you seem to have a lot of time on your hands.

If you have an online account you can check benefits & credits july 2016 - June 2017 PAYMENT schedule is already up!

Well I figured justmy2cents must have been off on the estimate. So I looked up the calculator. 30k or less one child under 6 one under 18 comes in at 983 a month.