Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-8kt4b Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-30T18:58:21.479Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Tax Credits and In-Work Poverty in the UK: An Analysis of Income Packages and Anti-Poverty Performance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2018

Rod Hick  and
Alba Lanau
Rod Hick
Affiliation:
School of Social Sciences, Cardiff University E-mail: hickr@cardiff.ac.uk
Alba Lanau
Affiliation:
School for Policy Studies, University of Bristol E-mail: alba.lanau@bristol.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article examines the relationship between tax credits and in-work poverty, drawing on the findings from a major national study on in-work poverty. We present an analysis of (i) the income packages of working families and (ii) the performance of tax credits in relation to anti-poverty objectives, drawing on data from the Households Below Average Income survey between 2004/5 and 2014/15. Our study generates five novel findings, including that tax credits reduce the poverty gap of recipient households by two-thirds; that tax credit cuts post-2010/11 have served to focus payments on single parent families and households with greater numbers of children; and that tax credits make up just one third of the social security income of working households. We argue that understanding in greater depth the interaction between tax credits and income adequacy amongst working families is necessary to provide a firmer foundation for an effective assault on in-work poverty.

Keywords

In-work povertytax creditspovertysocial security
Type
Articles
Information
Social Policy and Society , Volume 18 , Issue 2 , April 2019 , pp. 219 - 236
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Barr, N. (2012) Economics of the Welfare State, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bradshaw, J. and Finch, N. (2002) ‘A comparison of Child Benefit packages in 22 countries’, DWP Research Report No. 174, London: DWP.Google Scholar
Brady, D. (2009) Rich Democracies, Poor People: How Politics Explain Poverty, Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Brewer, M. (2003) ‘The new tax credits’, IFS Briefing Note No. 35, London: IFS.Google Scholar
Brewer, M. and Browne, J. (2006) ‘The effect of the working families’ tax credit on labour market participation’, IFS Briefing Notes, No. 69, London: IFS.Google Scholar
Cracknell, R. (2004) 2005 Benefit Uprating, London: House of Commons Library, Standard Note SN/SG/3275.Google Scholar
Cracknell, R. (2007) 2007 Benefit Uprating, London: House of Commons Library, Standard Note SN/SG/4177.Google Scholar
Cracknell, R. (2010) 2010 Benefit Uprating, London: House of Commons Library, Standard Note SN/SG/5198.Google Scholar
Crettaz, E. (2011) Fighting Working Poverty in Post-Industrial Economies: Causes, Trade-Offs and Policy Solutions, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Dilnot, A. and McCrae, J. (1999) ‘The family credit system and the working families’ tax credit in the United Kingdom’, Institute for Fiscal Studies Briefing Note 3, London: IFS.Google Scholar
Dwyer, P. and Wright, S. (2014) ‘Universal credit, ubiquitous conditionality and its implications for social citizenship’, Journal of Poverty and Social Justice, 22, 1, 27–35.Google Scholar
Eurofound (2017) In-Work Poverty in the EU, Dublin: European Foundation for the Improvement of Work and Living Conditions.Google Scholar
Gardiner, K. and Millar, J. (2006) ‘How low paid employees avoid poverty: an analysis by family type and household structure’, Journal of Social Policy, 35, 3, 351–369.Google Scholar
Ghelani, D. and Tonutti, G. (2017) ‘The impact of the two-child limit to tax credits’, Policy in Practice Briefing Paper, April.Google Scholar
Hick, R. and Lanau, A. (2017) In-Work Poverty in the UK: Problem, Policy Analysis and Platform for Action, Cardiff: Cardiff University.Google Scholar
Hick, R. and Lanau, A. (2018) ‘Moving in and out of in-work poverty in the UK: an analysis of transitions, trajectories and trigger events’, Journal of Social Policy, doi: 10.1017/S0047279418000028.Google Scholar
Hills, J. (2015) ‘The Coalition's record on cash transfers, poverty and inequality 2010–2015’, CASE Working Paper 11, London: LSE.Google Scholar
HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) (2016) Child Benefit, Child Tax Credit and Working Tax Credit: Take-up rates 2014–15, London: HMRC.Google Scholar
HM Treasury (2010) Budget 2010 [June], London: The Stationary Office.Google Scholar
Hobson, B. (1994) ‘Solo mothers, social policy regimes, and the logics of gender’, in Sainsbury, D. (ed.), Gendering Welfare States, London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Kenworthy, L. (2015) ‘Do employment-conditional earnings subsidies work?’, ImPRovE Working Paper No. 15/10, Antwerp: Herman Deleek Centre for Social Policy.Google Scholar
Maître, B., Nolan, B., and Whelan, C.T. (2005) ‘Welfare regimes and household income packaging in the European Union’, Journal of European Social Policy, 15, 2, 157–71.Google Scholar
Millar, J. and Bennett, F. (2017) ‘Universal Credit: assumptions, contradictions and virtual reality’, Social Policy and Society, 16, 2, 169–82.Google Scholar
Rainwater, L. (1995) ‘Poverty and the income package of working parents: the United States in comparative perspective’, Children and Youth Services Review, 17, 1–2, 11–41.Google Scholar
Sainsbury, D. and Morissens, A. (2002) ‘Poverty in Europe in the mid-1990s: the effectiveness of means-tested benefits’ Journal of European Social Policy, 12, 4, 307–27.Google Scholar
Skinner, C. and Main, G. (2013) ‘The contribution of child maintenance payments to the income packages of lone mothers’, Journal of Poverty and Social Justice, 21, 1, 47–60.Google Scholar
Watson, D. and Maître, B. (2013) Social Transfers and Poverty Alleviation in Ireland: An Analysis of the Survey on Income and Living Conditions 2004 – 2011, Dublin: Department of Social Protection and Economic and Social Research Institute.Google Scholar