So-many million better off under UC?

We keep seeing figures about how many will be better off under UC, but we’re struggling to come up with a definitive example of who could be better off than they would be at present. There seem to be so many ways benefit is reduced as work is taken up under UC (loss of premiums/components along with the taper, combined with the separate taper for and reduction in CTB.) Does anyone have a specific example of someone who will be better off?

The lack of a 16/24 hour limit (as in IS/JSA(IB)) and the lack of a 16/24/30 hour requirement (as in WTC) means there will be various groups you might expect to get more UC than legacy benefits (assuming they can meet the conditionality and aren’t subject to floor income)

For example a single 25 year old working 14 hours at NMW wouldn’t get any JSA/WTC but might get about £32.22 (weekly equivalent) UC.

A couple age 25 working 20 hours at NMW between them would not get JSA/WTC but might get about £49.04 (weekly equivalent) UC.

Useful, thanks. I think we’ve been focussing our thoughts on existing claimants and more complex cases so I missed the obvious there.

It does raise a suspicion that perhaps 1) gains are poorly targetted at those least in need and 2) gains might be targeted at those less likely to claim.

and 3) contain some very perverse (non) incentives to take / increase work