Terms & Conditions

[Mark]

Janis – your question about the accuracy of the 30hr disregard information in the Tax Credits manual is something I have raised elsewhere on these message boards. Firstly, there are so many other inaccuracies in section 1365 that it is clearly not possible to trust it at all – but I will restrict this answer to the disability issue.

I asked the Adelphi some time ago whether the word “are” (implying both members of a couple) in the revised Sch3 para 16(2)(b)(iv) meant that disabled couples could aggregate their hours. I never got a usable answer. I then decided (just because I needed to make up my mind) that the word “are” (as opposed to the word “is” (implying one or the other of the couple) in Sch3 para16(2)(b)(i) had no significance. I decided this because the disability paragraph doesn’t contain the same explicit reference to aggregated hours as in Sch3 para 16(2)(b)(ii)(bb).

Right now – I have changed my mind and decided that disabled couples can aggregate their hours to reach 30 and get the disregard. I say this because if this weren’t true there would be no need for the words “or both members are” to be included in Sch3 para 16(2)(b)(iv). However – I reserve the right to change my mind again!

Either way – the revised Sch3 para 16 is very badly drafted and clearly needs to be amended.