Note the tax add-back in the carer supplement invariant; record the carer_support_payment meaning change - #2049
Merged
Conversation
…upport_payment meaning change Review follow-ups to #1952: the property docstring now says invariant 3 adds income tax back because the model deducts tax on income Pension Credit does not count (SPC reg 17(10); #1954). Adds a .changed fragment for the new meaning of carer_support_payment, and drops a stale pre-#1909 cliff figure from a YAML comment. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
…codes model behaviour The docstring no longer quotes the pre-#1909 cliff figure and names both passports (HB and CTR). Invariant 3 is described as encoding the model's current tax deduction rather than the law (SPC Regs reg 17(10); HB (SPC) Regs 2006 reg 33(12)), to be tightened when #1954 is fixed. The changelog fragment says the meaning change dates from 2.106.0. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Council Tax Reduction's income list has carers_allowance but not carer_support_payment (#1955), so the docstring no longer says CTR counted both. Renames the couple YAML test to name both passports. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Follow-up to #1952, covering nits 3 and 4 from @vahid-ahmadi's review. This PR changes only comments, a docstring and a changelog fragment, so no outputs change.
test_pension_credit_carer_income_properties.pychecks that removing the Scottish Carer Supplement leavespension_credit_income + income_taxunchanged. The docstring now says this is weaker than the law. SPC Regs reg 17(10) disregards tax only on income taken into account, so the supplement should leave Pension Credit income unchanged on its own. The model deducts all income tax (Pension Credit income still omits IIDB, SDA, the AFCS guaranteed income payment and other countable income #1954), so the test adds the tax back..changedfragment records thatcarer_support_paymentnow means the Carer Support Payment component only. This follows SI 2026/246's redefinition. Code that summed the variable for a Scottish carer's total must addscottish_carer_supplement. Count Carer's Allowance and Carer Support Payment as Pension Credit income #1952's.addedfragment already says so; this puts it under Changed too.Tests:
pension_credit_carer_income.yamlpasses 10 of 10, and the property file parses.axiom: n/a: comments and changelog only
🤖 Generated with Claude Code