Do two child regs do what they said they were going to do?

I’m hoping they do (though I’d rather they didn’t exist at all), but struggling with this at the moment.

Amended CTC reg 7(2A) says you can get a child element for a child born on or after 7 April (A) if you are not claiming the child element for more than one other child/QYP - (2A)(a)- OR an exception applies - (2A)(b).

Lets says a single parent female client has one child and then has twins. So she is claiming the child element for 3 children in total (or is she?) Therefore, para (a) doesn’t apply. Looking at para (b) we can use reg 10. But that requires that the child is not the first in order of the multiple birth. So no child element for A, but a child element for the second twin.

We know that is not what the government intended. If a client already has 2 children and then has twins, then reg 10 works as it was intended, I think - she gets the child element for her eldest two, then not for the first twin, but for the second.

But it doesn’t appear to work for those who only have one child, and then a multiple birth. Unless I am misreading reg 7(2A)(a).... what do people think? Is reg 7(2A)(a) intended to capture all the multiple births that happen where there is already only one or no other child/QYP?

I think you’re misreading the regs.  They exclude the first child in a multiple birth (1 of 2, 1 of 3 etc.) and include the rest as an exception.

In your case though the first child qualifies anyway because A is the second child in the family.

“(2A) Where the claimant, or either or both of the joint claimants, is or are responsible for a child or qualifying young person born on or after 6th April 2017 (“A”), the maximum rate referred to in paragraph (2) shall not include an individual element of child tax credit in respect of A unless—

(a)the claimant is, or the joint claimants are, claiming the individual element of child tax credit for no more than one other child or qualifying young person… “

A is included as the mother is “claiming the individual element of child tax credit for no more than one other child or qualifying young person… ” for the previous child.

OK, so we take it to mean claiming for previous children in para (2A)(a). That must be what they meant! Otherwise, it just doesn’t work. They may or may not have been claiming for the other child(ren), of course, but they are at the time we apply the regs.

But I think you’re right and anyway, intention is going to win over my reading of these in general.