Reply To: Capital and UCDS files

Peter Barker

In a conventional, default-derived scheme, the only reason why you want a separate amount for capital would be if the scheme has a lower capital limit than UC. Otherwise, you only need three pieces of data:

– Max UC (for the CTS applicable amount)
– UC award (counts as income)
– DWP income assessment (also counts as income and includes tariff income already)

It would not be correct to add additional tariff income under your scheme’s rules for non-UC claimants – the income and capital rules for non-UC cases are completely replaced by the above method in a UC case. If you applied tariff income in addition to the DWP income you would end up reducing the CTR award incorrectly.

In a David Airey drafted scheme where the claimant has earnings, it is necessary to split the DWP income assessment into separate components because these attract the same disregards that are applied to different income types for non-UC cases. There is no need to do this if the claimant doesn’t have earnings because they should qualify for max CTR in any case (as they do in a conventional default-based scheme). But even if there are earnings, you still shouldn’t be double-counting tariff income.