David Cameron unveils marriage tax breaks plan

Wedding rings The prime minister said some four million couples would benefit from the move

Plans for some married couples to get tax breaks worth up to £200 a year have been announced by David Cameron.

The prime minister said four million couples would benefit from a £1,000 transferable tax allowance from 2015.

The move, announced ahead of the Tory conference, comes after a deal with the Liberal Democrats to introduce free school meals for children under eight.

Labour said Mr Cameron was "out of touch" if he thought the people would get married "for £3.85 a week".

The tax break would apply if couples are both basic rate tax payers with one spouse earning less than the personal allowance - the amount of income you can receive each year without having to pay tax on it. This will be just over £10,000 in 2015.

The measure would also include 15,000 couples in civil partnerships.

The basic tax rate of 20% is currently in place for up to £32,010 of taxable income. That means that - including a personal allowance - at current rates people would have to earn less than £41,451 a year to be eligible.

'Happiest day'

Benefits from the scheme would come through initially at the end of the tax year in 2016.

David Cameron: "Other countries recognise marriage properly in the tax system and that's what we're doing"

Writing in the Daily Mail, Mr Cameron said: "I believe in marriage. Alongside the birth of my children, my wedding was the happiest day of my life.

"Since then, Samantha and I have been a team. Nothing I've done since - becoming a Member of Parliament, leader of my party or prime minister - would have been possible without her.

"There is something special about marriage: it's a declaration of commitment, responsibility and stability that helps to bind families.

"The values of marriage are give and take, support and sacrifice - values that we need more of in this country."

He later tweeted: "The £1000 marriage tax allowance will apply to straight and gay couples, as well as civil partners. Love is love, commitment is commitment."

Election pledge

The Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby praised the initiative, saying in a statement: "We welcome all support for married life and we're pleased that this initiative includes both married couples and those in civil partnerships."

Mr Cameron said stay-at-home mothers and women who worked part-time would be the main winners.


David Cameron and the Conservative party made a solemn commitment eight years ago.

He told them marriage should be recognised in the tax system.

Come the 2010 election campaign he renewed his vow.

Some backbenchers doubted he would make good on his pledge in this parliament.

As their conference begins, they are reassured, although they will fight for the tax break to be bigger in future.

The prime minister says he is not trying to bribe people to to get married or engage in social engineering.

Critics will ask why the government should spend £700m a year on a policy that is not designed to change anyone's behaviour.

Explaining how the scheme would work, he wrote: "From April 2015, if neither of you are higher rate taxpayers, you will be able to transfer £1,000 of your tax-free allowance to your spouse.

"In effect, if you pay the basic rate of tax and your partner doesn't use all of their personal allowance, you'll be able to have some of it.

"Most couples who benefit will be £200 a year better off as a result."

He promised tax breaks for married couples when he ran for the leadership of his party in 2005, and it was also part of the Conservative election manifesto in 2010.

The Liberal Democrats are opposed to the measure but under the coalition agreement they would not be able to vote against it in any parliamentary vote but could abstain.

The party's Treasury spokesman Stephen Williams branded the move "a tax cut for some, paid for by everyone else".

He said: "You don't build a fairer society by using the tax system to favour one type of family over another.

"We should support all families, not just the minority of married ones where one person stays at home."

It has been suggested the Lib Dems were able to announce plans for every child in England between reception and year two to get free school lunches in exchange for the Conservative's proposed tax break.

The free school meals policy will begin in September next year and will be worth about £437 per child.

Paul Johnson, director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies said that each political party had launched policies which were roughly equal in their cost.

"So the Liberal Democrats had something on free school meals, Labour had something on childcare, the Conservatives have got something on tax allowances," he said.

"Each one is a small lollipop in the context of £25bn of cuts being expected over the following two years - none of them have said much about how they're going to do that."

'All families'

Labour said the Conservatives were "out of touch" and the move was outweighed by higher VAT and cuts to child benefit and tax credits.

Ed Miliband's party said around two-thirds of married couples would not save money under the plans, including higher rate taxpayers and couples in which both partners earn more than the personal allowance.

Shadow chief secretary to the Treasury Rachel Reeves said: "The vast majority of children will see their parents get not a single extra penny from this so if you are a mum and dad and you're both earning £20,000-£25,000 a year, so on average earnings, you won't get any extra support.

"So it's not a proper tax allowance for married couples. And even for those who do benefit it's just £3.85 a week."

But Conservative Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt said the policy recognised the value of the institution of marriage.

"It is an institution that is the building block of our society and we want to recognise that and this is a measure that's going to help four million hard working couples where life is pretty tough."

Dr Samantha Callan, the director of families at the think tank Centre for Social Justice that seeks to address poverty and its causes, also welcomed the announcement.

"We've been calling for this since 2007," she said.

"We did a report into the state of the nation and why family breakdown is such a problem in the UK today. Half of all children born today will not still be with both their parents by the time they're 15 and marriage is a more durable relationship."

She added: "Ninety-three percent of all couples still together by the time the child is 15 are married."

'Promoting a fantasy'

Tim Yeo, the Conservative MP for South Suffolk, told BBC Radio Suffolk that while he welcomed any institutions that support stability in society, in 2013 marriage "is not the only model for a family".

"I don't see why, for example, someone who has been widowed, whether it's a man or a woman, at a young age, and is trying to bring up children perhaps on a relatively low income, I regret the fact that the current proposal may exclude those people," he said.

Campaign group Don't Judge My Family criticised the move as "promoting a fantasy 1950s family" and it would not benefit many of the families who needed most support..

The Conservative Party conference takes place in Manchester from Sunday. Mr Cameron will close the conference with his keynote speech on Wednesday.


More on This Story

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external Internet sites


This entry is now closed for comments

Jump to comments pagination
  • rate this

    Comment number 318.

    Sexual discrimination- abhorred. Laws in place against it.
    Racial discrimination- abhorred. Laws in place against it.

    Social discrimination? Actively used as a political weapon.

    Why should "Single" people pay extra for the social choices of others to live under a contractual agreement?

  • rate this

    Comment number 317.

    'Conservative Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt said the policy recognised the value of the institution of marriage'

    And that value is £3.85 per week? Not a particularly economically valuable institution then, unless you think in terms of the average spent on a wedding is now around £18,000.

    Whether you agree with tax breaks for married couples or not, this policy is a pretty derisory token gesture

  • rate this

    Comment number 316.

    @294 Alistair Bull
    That's not the key to a happy married life. My future father in law said the way to a happy marriage was for the husband to have the last words in any argument, and for a very happy marriage the last words should be "Whatever you say dear".

  • rate this

    Comment number 315.

    Should I feel patronised or full of sympathy for Cameron. Does he really think people don't get hitched because they love each other? Do they need £3.85, despite all the costs or marriage, to encourage them to formalise their relationship? Apparently they don't need such a bribe if they are in a higher tax bracket.
    Is he saying well done, but only to average and below average earners?
    No hope DC!

  • rate this

    Comment number 314.

    Enticing people to marry for money is ridiculous. It's like saying "if your a good wee girl/boy and eat up all your veggies mummy will let you have an ice-cream". For God sake let's have some policy with substance. As a single person I resent this proposed policy. Cameron is living in his own little fairytale world, a world where is is deaf.

  • rate this

    Comment number 313.


  • rate this

    Comment number 312.

    Hmm. I'm married. I go to work and so does my wife. So no tax break for us unless one of us stops working. Also, when I was a child, my parents divorced. My dad remarried but my mum, who brought my sisters and me up didn't. If a similar thing happened today, with the new rules, a remarried father would get the tax break, but not the mother bringing up the children.

  • rate this

    Comment number 311.

    High and mighty and fortunate Cameron is rewarding those lucky enough to be married,which is probably him and most of his friends. What about those who aren't so fortunate?Discriminate against them?

  • Comment number 310.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • rate this

    Comment number 309.

    I strongly believe that marriage and the basic family unit enrich society, but by giving tax cuts to married couple makes you wonder whether the Tories think that in future people will only get married for financial reasons. And it's only a token amount which could be better spent on tax cuts elsewhere.

    And the government could have done more for families by not legalising gay marriage.

  • rate this

    Comment number 308.

    I would vote for the party that say we have this billion spare and instead of wasting it on an election bribe we will pay off some of the national debt with it. That is after all our biggest problem.

  • rate this

    Comment number 307.

    So, if you are single, you end up being vilified!

    If you are married, you receive a tax break!

    What message is Cameron and his pals sending out? 'Married couples are less dependent on the STATE, than singletons, when times of hardship rears it's ugly head'

  • rate this

    Comment number 306.

    Looks good to me. Missus and me will benefit greatly as it will actually add money to our meagre pensions. You know, the income that is eroding because of the cost of existing is eating it.

  • rate this

    Comment number 305.


    It is ok for bbc to cook story, but its not allowed for anyone else to think differently and express their opinion anymore. What a trash you have become bbc! Ps: I don't approve of gays either, how about that.
    I can imagine only one thing worse than being disapproved of by you.

  • rate this

    Comment number 304.

    194. scotmac1968

    "My colleague and his wife earn approx £40k each which means they will be entitled to this tax break even although their joint income is far greater than ours."

    How does that work then, it's about tax allowance transfer, are you saying one of these does not pay tax?

  • rate this

    Comment number 303.

    Re 146 Plant5man

    Nonsense. Cameron has £30m, Farage a fraction of that.

    If UKIP was the party of the rich why did most of Thanet and North Kent vote for them? This is one of the poorest areas in the UK with high unemployment.

    The difference is that UKIP are listening to voters.

  • rate this

    Comment number 302.

    David Cameron is often misrepresented : he has been pilloried for stating that the tories are the party of the NHS, but he wasn't speaking about our former health service, no he was referring to core tory policy on managed decline:
    No Hope Society.

    Now give Dave a break and let him get on with fighting the EU over limiting the bonuses for the poor little banker boys.

  • rate this

    Comment number 301.

    What the governments proposals and the comments miss is that costs are for a household not an individual. Child tax credits are household income based, so should be child benefit and this tax proposal. Otherwise it is structurally unfair - a couple both earning just under the higher rate threshold get child benefit, two tax allowances and this tax break compared to a single income household?

  • rate this

    Comment number 300.

    Og course marriage is about love and not money. But it is also a Government duty to encourage good things and discourage bad. We would not have the Criminal Law or any law if that were not the case. Holy Matrimony does tend to lead to more stable couples and this has been shown many times by scientific studies that this leads to a better environment for raising children

  • rate this

    Comment number 299.

    I thought marriage was all about love and the rewards of self sacrifice? Who's sacrificing what here..... other than the rest of society who is going to have to fund this extra money. Give it to the old folk struggling to pay their winter fuel bills...many of them now single again through no fault of their own having lost their other half.


Page 35 of 50


More Politics stories



BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.