Reply To: Legislation for Start Dates – Help!

Kevin D

Ok, I’ll take the bait. Or should that be “be” instead of “take”? Especially as I still haven’t got up to speed on tax credits…

This response is made without having access to all of the SIs for amendment regs. If this has resulted in error(s) below, please feel free to point that out.

The only regs where I have been able to find specific (relevant) reference to tax credits are:

HBR 33(2B); HBR 40(9); HBR 68(1A); Sched 4 – para 58, Sched 5 – para 8(f)
(sticking with HB refs)

Assuming that I have interpreted the sum of the above regulations correctly, tax credits count as income for HB/CTB purposes with effect from the first day after any period of “[b:61b1fb3f59]of arrears[/b:61b1fb3f59]”.

“[b:61b1fb3f59]Of arrears[/b:61b1fb3f59]” is counted as capital in accordance with HBR 40(9).

There does not appear to be any provision within HB/CTB legislation for the date of a change in Tax Credit to take effect from a [u:61b1fb3f59]payment[/u:61b1fb3f59] date. No relevant changes seem to have been made to HBR 68 (with the exception of 7 April awards).

HBR 33(2B) seems to be clear (?:21:?) that any tax credit should be counted as income over the period it is payable [u:61b1fb3f59]in respect of[/u:61b1fb3f59] (unless it falls under the “of arrears” disregard).

At great risk to what little credibility I don’t have, an example follows taking into account the above:

Tax Credit commences with effect from date “a”. Payment is made on date “c” and this includes “of arrears” for dates “a” to “b”. The effective date of Tax Credit, strictly for HB/CTB purposes, is the Monday following date “b”. “b” is the actual date of the change in circumstances – NOT the change in payment.

The guidance (from hereonin referred to as “The Hindrance”) makes various references to Sundays etc, but this is not supported (as far as I can see) by changes to HB/CTB legislation.

I’d suggest that any offering(s) in The Hindrance are irrelevant if not supported by legal provision(s). If there are in fact provisions to support The Hindrance, presumably the DWP won’t have any difficulty in offering cross references…..

Oh well, at least it’s started the ball rolling – or should that be “marbles” + losing?

Peter: Somewhere in the above, I think there is a kind of response to your original post……*cough*

Kevin D (going back to the tranquil world of backdates….) :28::21: