Hi there - can anyone help? Any changes to the fact that WTC and CTC are not listed as public funds in terms of 'no recourse'?

The Immigration and Nationality Directorate (IND) website still omits them from its list of public funds.

CTC and WTC have now been added to the list of 'public funds'.

See today's rightsnet news story -

Benefits and \'recourse to public funds\': Government introduces new rules

Re: New rules making WTC/CTC a public fund from 15.03.05.

It would appear from the above date these credits will become a public fund. There are a large number of families in the UK at present that include someone who is subject to immigration control, but who could claim the credit & receive it without any Immigration concerns as it was not a public fund.

It would appear that from 15/03/05, anyone in this situation will be in violation of their status & potentially subject to removal from the UK.

Does anyone have access to any reasources that suggest what the Home offices' position will be in regard to these people? Are the Tax credit office or Home office advising existing claiments effected by these changes?

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the TC (Immigration) Regs. - SI653/03 cover your concern. Reg. 3(2) specifically says that TC can be paid to couples where only one of the couple is subject to imm. control as if that person was not so subject.

from the rightsnet news story ... new reg 6(b)

'A person shall not be regarded as having recourse to public funds if he is a person who is not excluded from specified benefits under section 115 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 by virtue of regulations made under sub-sections (3) and (4) of that section or section 42 of the Tax Credits Act 2002.'

I'm sorry but I'm still not clear about this. I agree that The Tax Credits (Immigration)(SI.No.653) do allow for claims from couples where one person is subject to immigration control and the other is not. However I'm not really clear about who isn't excluded from benefits under section 115 of the Immigration and Asylum Act. Can they still claim for their partner or not?

What about all the other exceptions who could get Tax Credits before, such as: people whose sponsor has died, people who have been here for five years or more, people whose funds are temporarily disrupted, can they still get tax credits.

On the other hand, even if someone can claim under the benefit regulations couldn't they put their residence in danger by claiming them once they have been labelled as public funds. What about people who claimed in the past, before they were public funds, what will happen to them?

SI653/03 was made under S. 42 of TC Act 2002. HC346 therefore covers your concern as it specifically refers to Regs. made under that section. I cannot see how anyone who claims TCs if they qualify under SI653 can be putting their residence at risk - they could simply quote the SI and HC346 and have a complete defence.

Could anyone clarify the current situation re a parent who is not subject to immigration control claiming Tax Credits for a child who is subject to the 'no recourse to public funds' rule. My query relates to a woman who wishes to adopt a baby from China and the rules are that the child must be maintained without recourse to public funds. Public funds now includes WTC and CTC. But HC346 allows for people to not be treated as having recourse to public funds if they are eligible for TC's under s.42 of the TC Act (and regs made under this). The Tax Credit Technical Manual says that entitlement to CTC and WTC is not limited according to the immigration status of the child for whom the claimant is reponsible (TCTMO2106) but this does not actually appear to be in regulations SI653/03. The regs only cover partners as far as I can see. Does anyone know if this woman could claim TC's for her adopted child, and do so without breaching the no recourse to public funds immigration condition of the adoption?

I have a client with ILR whose 11 year old brother has come to join him after losing his whole family in the DemocraticRepublic of Congo. They have been waiting since last September for a decision from the Home Office and in the meantime the client is having to support his brother out of his JSA. Is there any benefit that anyone is aware of that he can claim in respect of the child?

Krista-

This seems to me to be really an immigration question and not a benefits one.

What you have described is one of those situations where a person can claim a benefit but it may be that in doing so they have an additional recourse to funds as a result (which may affect immigration status).

Clearly, the change to the immigration rules from 13/03/05 that Shawn quotes earlier in this thread are designed to stop situations where someone can claim under social security law but will be regarded as breaching immigration conditions by the homeoffice. However, the amendment does not seem to stretch as far as your client's circumstances (where in effect your client is having recourse to funds in respect of her adopted daughter).

So from a benefit point of view the advice would have to be:

1. Your client can claim CTC in respect of child BUT
2. This may be a breach of her daughter's immigration conditions
THEREFORE
3. Client should check the position before claiming with her immigration solicitor.

Martin.