Two-child cap to hit extra 670,000 children in next five years, thinktank warns
An extra 250,000 children will be hit by the two-child benefit cap next year, rising to an extra half a million by 2029, a leading thinktank has warned.
The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) said the number of children who will fall under the cap – which limits child benefits for the first two children in most households – will reach 670,000 by the end of the next parliament if the policy is not reformed.
The two-child benefit cap, which restricts Child Tax Credit and Universal Credit to the first two children, was brought in by the Conservative government in 2017.
Campaigners have long called for it to be abolished on the grounds it would lift thousands of children out of poverty.
It comes as a separate study from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF) found 40% of people who work in primary schools and GP surgeries have considered quitting their job because of a “shameful” level of hardship among the population.
Election latest: Minister says election ‘not about the past’ as poll suggests Tory wipeout on 4 July
The JRF found the service providers were “staggering under the weight of hardship” by having to provide extra support to the nearly four million people struggling to pay for essentials including food, heating and clothing.
The IFS said the two-child cap has helped drive up the share of children in large families who are in relative poverty from 35% in 2014-15 to 46% in 2022 – a period when poverty for families with one or two children fell.
The Labour Party has faced pressure to drop the cap – including from former prime minister Gordon Brown – but has so far refused to commit to ending it, citing the current state of the country’s finances.
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
The pressure intensified further after figures on the right, including former home secretary Suella Braverman and Reform leader Nigel Farage, both called for the cap to be scrapped.
Abolishing the cap does not appear in either the Tory or Labour manifestos, with only the Green Party and Liberal Democrats making the commitment in their offers to the public.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
What do voters think of manifestos?
The IFS said removing the cost of the limit would cost the government about £3.4bn a year, equivalent to freezing fuel duties for the next parliament.
The limit currently affects two million children and more children are added each year because it applies to those born after 5 April 2017.
The IFS said when fully rolled out, the cap will affect one in five children, rising to 38% of those in the poorest fifth of households.
It said 43% of children in households with at least one person of Bangladeshi or Pakistani origin will be affected, while those who fall under it on average will lose £4,300 per year – representing 10% of their income.
IFS research economist Eduin Latimer said: “The two-child limit is one of the most significant welfare cuts since 2010 and, unlike many of those cuts, it becomes more important each year as it is rolled out to more families.”
? Click here to follow Electoral Dysfunction wherever you get your podcasts ?
Mubin Haq, chief executive of the abrdn Financial Fairness Trust, which funded the research, said: “The limit has been a significant contributor to child poverty amongst large families during a period when poverty for families with one or two children fell.
“If the next government is serious about tackling child poverty, it will need to review the two-child limit.”
Read more from Sky News:
Police officer who hit cow with patrol car removed from frontline duties
‘We love you, Papa’: Royal children wish Prince William happy Father’s Day
Alison Garnham, the chief executive of Child Poverty Action Group, said the “biggest driver” of child poverty in the UK was the two-child limit.
“Any government serious about making things better for the next generation will have to scrap the two-child limit, and do so quickly.”
A Labour spokesperson said: “We are under no illusions about the scale of the task ahead if we win the election.
“Labour has already set out how we would make a start, with free breakfast clubs in every primary school, cutting fuel poverty and bringing down energy bills, banning exploitative zero hours contracts, making work pay, ending no-fault evictions and creating more good jobs right across the country.”
After nearly a year of legal proceedings, a South Korean court acquitted former Wemade CEO Jang Hyun-guk of market manipulation charges.
Are Rachel Reeves’s fiscal rules quite as iron clad as she insists?
How tough is her armour really? And is there actually scope for some change, some loosening to avoid big tax hikes in the autumn?
We’ve had a bit of clarity early this morning – and that’s a question we discuss on the Politics at Sam and Anne’s podcast today.
Politics Live: Reeves to reform financial regulations
And tens of billions of pounds of borrowing depends on the answer – which still feels intriguingly opaque.
You might think you know what the fiscal rules are. And you might think you know they’re not negotiable.
For instance, the main fiscal rule says that from 2029-30, the government’s day-to-day spending needs to be in surplus – i.e. rely on taxation alone, not borrowing.
And Rachel Reeves has been clear – that’s not going to change, and there’s no disputing this.
But when the government announced its fiscal rules in October, it actually published a 19-page document – a “charter” – alongside this.
And this contains all sorts of notes and caveats. And it’s slightly unclear which are subject to the “iron clad” promise – and which aren’t.
There’s one part of that document coming into focus – with sources telling me that it could get changed.
And it’s this – a little-known buffer built into the rules.
It’s outlined in paragraph 3.6 on page four of the Charter for Budget Responsibility.
This says that from spring 2027, if the OBR forecasts that she still actually has a deficit of up to 0.5% of GDP in three years, she will still be judged to be within the rules.
In other words, if in spring 2027 she’s judged to have missed her fiscal rules by perhaps as much as £15bn, that’s fine.
A change could save the chancellor some headaches. Pic: PA
Now there’s a caveat – this exemption only applies, providing at the following budget the chancellor reduces that deficit back to zero.
But still, it’s potentially helpful wiggle room.
This help – this buffer – for Reeves doesn’t apply today, or for the next couple of years – it only kicks in from the spring of 2027.
But I’m being told by a source that some of this might change and the ability to use this wiggle room could be brought forward to this year. Could she give herself a get out of jail card?
The chancellor could gamble that few people would notice this technical change, and it might avoid politically catastrophic tax hikes – but only if the markets accept it will mean higher borrowing than planned.
But the question is – has Rachel Reeves ruled this out by saying her fiscal rules are iron clad or not?
Or to put it another way… is the whole of the 19-page Charter for Budget Responsibility “iron clad” and untouchable, or just the rules themselves?
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Is Labour plotting a ‘wealth tax’?
And what counts as “rules” and are therefore untouchable, and what could fall outside and could still be changed?
I’ve been pressing the Treasury for a statement.
And this morning, they issued one.
A spokesman said: “The fiscal rules as set out in the Charter for Budget Responsibility are iron clad, and non-negotiable, as are the definition of the rules set out in the document itself.”
So that sounds clear – but what is a definition of the rule? Does it include this 0.5% of GDP buffer zone?
Read more:
Reeves hints at tax rises in autumn
Tough decisions ahead for chancellor
The Treasury does concede that not everything in the charter is untouchable – including the role and remit of the OBR, and the requirements for it to publish a specific list of fiscal metrics.
But does that include that key bit? Which bits can Reeves still tinker with?
I’m still unsure that change has been ruled out.
The Justice Department says two LA Sheriff deputies admitted to helping extort victims, including for a local crypto mogul, while working their private security side hustles.
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Sports2 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike