Challenging the sibling tax

The two-child limit, which restricts support in our social security system to two children with limited exceptions, is now firmly on the agenda in this election year. The End Child Poverty coalition coordinates the All Kids Count campaign calling for its abolition. How is the policy affecting families? Why is ending it such a priority? And what pressure can be put on political parties to commit to abolishing it if they form the next UK government?

On 6 April, the two‐child limit turned seven years old. Scrapping the policy, also known as the sibling tax, is the key priority of the End Child Poverty coalition, so we wanted to mark this anniversary with a stunt. On Friday 5 April, parents, children and young people, and representatives from some of our 120+ member organisations, gathered outside the Department for Work and Pensions to protest the policy and call for it to be removed. We handed in a giant ‘Unhappy Birthday’ card bearing the following message to the two‐child limit:

Since you came into the world you've pulled hundreds of thousands of children into poverty. Forty‐six per cent of children in families with three or more children are living in poverty. Like all children, we love to celebrate birthdays, but we will never support yours. The two‐child limit to benefit payments should not last for another year.

The stunt was an opportunity for us to come together and make our voices heard directly, but it also attracted media attention. It was covered on Channel 4 News that evening, and in The Observer the following Sunday. This helps bring pressure to bear on the government, which is currently sticking with the policy despite the evidence of its harm, and on opposition parties, which will be vying for seats at the forthcoming general election.

Why is ending the two-child limit a priority?

Poverty in larger families has been rising. Forty‐six per cent of children in families with three or more children now live in poverty, up from 36 per cent in 2011/12.1 The two‐child limit is a key driver of that increase. It denies support to a child just because they have older siblings. That lost support is worth up to £3,455 a year. Research has time and again shown that the policy has a devastating impact on children and families.

The Benefit Changes and Larger Families study, led by academics at the universities of York and Oxford and the LSE with CPAG as a project partner, has looked at the impacts of the two‐child limit and the benefit cap. Through both quantitative research and interviews with affected families, the study has found that neither policy is meeting supposed aims, and instead they are leaving families unable to meet basic needs and deeper in poverty.2

As well as causing families to miss out materially, the study found the two‐child limit harms relationships between parents and children:

The two‐child limit also causes children to grow up too quickly, worrying about their parents’ worries:

It’s clear that the policy is causing great harm, by denying support where it’s desperately needed.

Who does the two-child limit affect?

We already know that the two‐child limit affects 1.5 million children: one in every 10 children.3 There are 422,000 households affected, half of these being single parent households. Fifty‐nine per cent of families affected have at least one parent in paid work. But we wanted to understand more about who is disproportionately affected by the policy, so we asked a series of questions via freedom of information requests. They showed that some of the most vulnerable families are hardest hit by the two‐child limit.

The government data we received show that 20 per cent of all households affected by the two‐child limit are families with at least one disabled child. We know that caring for disabled children often affects parents’ ability to take on paid work, so parents are unable to increase their income in this way. Looking after a child with a disability could also mean a family faces extra costs, such as an increase in their gas and electricity bills.

The data also reveal that 25 per cent of all families affected by the two‐child limit are single‐parent households with a child under three years old. These parents are also less likely to be able to take on paid work because of their caring responsibilities, and indeed aren’t required to look for a job to receive universal credit.

Rosie is a single mum of three children and is affected by the policy. She had to go back to work when her youngest was just six months old because of the financial pressures caused by the two‐child limit:

‘When my son was born I had to make some hard choices. Because of the lack of money coming in to our household I had to leave him at six months old – and go and wash dishes in a restaurant. Just to ensure that we had money coming in. As my children got older and went to school we have struggled with everyday costs like food and bills. If my wifi goes off because I can’t afford the bill then my children’s homework suffers. What might seem to some to be little things like this can have a big impact on my children.’

The End Child Poverty coalition has also conducted research on how the two‐child limit affects different parts of the UK. Every UK constituency is home to families affected by this policy, but there is huge variation. In some constituencies as many as three in 10 children are living in a household which is affected by this limit to benefit payments. In 89 parliamentary constituencies, at least 15 per cent of all children are living in a family subject to the two‐child limit. This research also showed a strong positive correlation between constituencies most affected by the two‐child limit and those with the highest child poverty rates.4

Value the ‘invisible’ children: scrap the limit

Scrapping the two‐child limit would lift 300,000 children out of poverty overnight, and mean 800,000 children are in less deep poverty. This would make a significant difference to the lives of more than a million children. It would cost £1.8 billion to do.5
Throughout this important election year, we will continue to put pressure on all political parties to commit to scrapping this cruel policy which pushes families into poverty.

I want to give the last word to Rosie:

‘My third child is about to turn 7 years old. He is as old as this policy, one of the first children to be born who was impacted by this. And for all of his life, for seven whole years, it feels as if he is invisible to those who make decisions about benefit payments… removed from the real lives of people like me and so many others I know.

It feels to me that my son’s needs do not matter.

Please scrap the two‐child limit to benefit payments, so that my child is no longer invisible. That he is seen, and his life is valued.’