Lift the benefit cap only for the support component and the people HB reg 75F and UC reg 83 name, and cap only the family's benefits

[MaxGhenis]

Summary

The benefit cap lifted in two cases the law does not, and counted benefits it should not:

1. ESA without the support component. Any income-related ESA of the claimant or partner, and any member's contributory ESA (here and again in is_benefit_cap_exempt_other), lifted the cap. HB Regs 2006 reg 75F(1)(a) and UC Regs 2013 reg 83(1)(a) need ESA "which includes a support component".
2. Other members' benefits.
   • The exemption summed every benefit-unit member's attendance allowance, DLA, PIP, industrial injuries benefit, Carer's Allowance and Carer Support Payment.
   • It also counted any member's armed forces compensation (in is_benefit_cap_exempt_other), LCWRA flag or caring.
   • Reg 75F(1) and reg 83(1) name the claimant and partner, plus, for some benefits, a child or young person they are responsible for. A non-dependent adult's attendance allowance lifted the family's cap.
3. Other members' benefits in the capped total. benefit_cap_reduction summed every member's contributory ESA and JSA, incapacity benefit and SDA, and the whole unit's income-related ESA and income-based JSA. UC Regs 2013 reg 80(1) and HB Regs 2006 reg 75A count the benefits "to which the single person or couple is entitled". With UC of £20,000 before the cap, a non-dependent adult's £5,000 of ESA cut the family's UC from £14,753 to £9,753. Count only the claimant's and partner's legacy awards in means tests and passports #2027's review found this, and Count only the claimant's and partner's legacy awards in means tests and passports #2027 now leaves the whole cap to this PR.

A third defect hid the first. Datasets set is_disabled_for_benefits, the default for uc_limited_capability_for_WRA, from receipt of any of ten benefits, ESA included (policyengine-uk-data disability_benefits.py). So the UC LCWRA exception lifted the cap for every ESA recipient, whatever their ESA group. Universal Credit takes the ESA work capability assessment (UC Regs 2013 reg 40(1)(a)(ii)). So a person whose own ESA lacks the support component is now taken not to have LCWRA, whatever the flag. The work allowance and the reduced minimum age need only limited capability for work, so they get a separate uc_limited_capability_for_work, which such a person keeps.

Stacked on #2027 (legacy-award-readers-claimant-partner, head f551e542b, last merged in at 19a13f2c5), which is stacked on #2013, #2001 and #1896.

Law

Fetched verbatim from legislation.gov.uk (/data.xml, current revised text) on 2026-10-02.

HB Regs 2006 regs 75A, 75E(2), 75F; UC Regs 2013 regs 2, 40(1), 79(1), 80(1), 83(1); UC (TP) Regs 2014 reg 19(4); WRA 2007 ss.2(2), 4(4); WRA 2012 s.96(10); HB Regs 2006 regs 2(1), 19, 20(1); UC Regs 2013 regs 4(6), 5(5)

HB Regs 2006 (SI 2006/213) reg 75F:

(1) The benefit cap does not apply where— (a) the claimant or the claimant's partner is receiving an employment and support allowance under Part 1 of the Welfare Reform Act which includes a support component; (b) the claimant or the claimant's partner is receiving an industrial injuries benefit by virtue of Part 5 of the Act; (c) the claimant or the claimant's partner is receiving an attendance allowance; (ca) the claimant or the claimant's partner is receiving pension age disability payment; (d) the claimant or the claimant's partner is receiving a war pension; (e) the claimant, the claimant's partner or a child or young person for whom the claimant or the claimant's partner is responsible, is receiving a disability living allowance; (eza) the claimant, the claimant's partner or a child or young person for whom the claimant or the claimant's partner is responsible, is receiving child disability payment; (ezb) the claimant, the claimant's partner or a young person for whom the claimant or the claimant's partner is responsible, is receiving Scottish adult disability living allowance; (ea) the claimant, the claimant's partner or a young person for whom the claimant or the claimant's partner is responsible, is receiving a personal independence payment, adult disability payment or an armed forces independence payment under the Armed Forces and Reserve Forces (Compensation Scheme) Order 2011; (f) [entitled but not receiving, in hospital or a care home] ... (g) the claimant is receiving universal credit. (h) the claimant, the claimant's partner, or a young person for whom the claimant or the claimant's partner is responsible, is entitled to a carer's allowance under section 70 of the Act; (ha) the claimant, the claimant's partner, or a young person for whom the claimant or the claimant's partner is responsible, is entitled to carer support payment; (i) the claimant, the claimant's partner or a young person for whom the claimant or the claimant's partner is responsible, is entitled to a guardian's allowance under section 77 of the Act.

(2) In this regulation "war pension" has the meaning in regulation 2 (interpretation) and includes— (a) a guaranteed income payment; ...

Reg 75E(2):

This paragraph applies where the claimant is, or the claimant and the claimant's partner are jointly, entitled to working tax credit.

UC Regs 2013 (SI 2013/376) reg 83(1):

The benefit cap does not apply in relation to any assessment period where— (a) the LCWRA element is included in the award of universal credit or the claimant is receiving an employment and support allowance that includes the support component; (b) a claimant is receiving industrial injuries benefit; (c) a claimant is receiving attendance allowance; (ca) a claimant is receiving pension age disability payment; (d) a claimant is receiving a war pension; (e) a claimant is receiving a payment under article 15(1)(c) or article 29(1)(a) of the Armed Forces and Reserve Forces (Compensation Scheme) Order 2011; (f) a claimant, or a child or qualifying young person for whom a claimant is responsible, is receiving disability living allowance; (fa) a claimant, or qualifying young person for whom a claimant is responsible, is receiving Scottish adult disability living allowance; (g) a claimant, or a qualifying young person for whom a claimant is responsible, is receiving personal independence payment; (h) [entitled but not receiving, in hospital or a care home] ...; (ha) a claimant, or a child or qualifying young person for whom a claimant is responsible, is receiving child disability payment; (hb) a claimant, or qualifying young person for whom a claimant is responsible, is receiving adult disability payment; (i) a claimant, or a qualifying young person for whom a claimant is responsible, is entitled to carer's allowance; (ia) a claimant, or a qualifying young person for whom a claimant is responsible, is entitled to carer support payment; (j) the carer element is included in the award of universal credit; (k) a claimant is entitled to guardian's allowance under section 77 of the Contributions and Benefits Act.

UC Regs 2013 reg 2: "attendance allowance" includes "armed forces independence payment under the Armed Forces and Reserve Forces (Compensation Scheme) Order 2011". WRA 2012 s.40: "claimant" means a single claimant or each of joint claimants.

UC Regs 2013 reg 40(1):

A claimant has limited capability for work and work-related activity if— (a) it has been determined that— (i) the claimant has limited capability for work and work-related activity on the basis of an assessment under this Part, or (ii) the claimant has limited capability for work related activity on the basis of an assessment under Part 5 of ESA Regulations; ...

UC (Transitional Provisions) Regs 2014 reg 19(4): where it had been determined that a claimant moving from old style ESA "had limited capability for work-related activity ... (b) the claimant is to be treated as having limited capability for work and work-related activity for the purposes of regulation 27(1)(b) of those Regulations".

Welfare Reform Act 2007 s.2(2) (contributory allowance), and s.4(4) in the same words (income-related allowance):

The conditions of entitlement to the support component are— (a) that the assessment phase has ended, (b) that the claimant has limited capability for work-related activity, and (c) that such other conditions as may be prescribed are satisfied.

UC Regs 2013 reg 79(1) and reg 80(1), the capped total:

79(1) Unless regulation 82 or 83 applies, the benefit cap applies where the welfare benefits to which a single person or couple is entitled during the reference period exceed the relevant amount ...

80(1) ... the amount of a welfare benefit to be used when determining total entitlement to welfare benefits is the amount to which the single person or couple is entitled during the reference period ...

HB Regs 2006 reg 75A:

Unless regulation 75E or 75F applies, a benefit cap applies where the relevant authority makes a determination that during the reference period the total amount of welfare benefits to which— (a) where the claimant is a member of a couple, each member of the couple is or jointly are entitled; or (b) in any other case, the claimant is entitled, exceeds the relevant amount.

Welfare Reform Act 2012 s.96(10): "welfare benefit" means bereavement allowance, child benefit, child tax credit, employment and support allowance (including income-related), housing benefit, incapacity benefit, income support, jobseeker's allowance (including income-based), maternity allowance, severe disablement allowance, universal credit, widow's pension, widowed mother's allowance or widowed parent's allowance.

HB Regs 2006 reg 2(1): "child" means a person under the age of 16. Reg 19(1): a "young person" is a person who falls within the definition of qualifying young person in section 142 of the Act; reg 19(2) excludes a person on income support, income-based JSA or income-related ESA, or entitled to universal credit. Reg 20(1): a person is responsible for a child or young person who is normally living with them. UC Regs 2013 reg 5(5): "A person who is receiving universal credit, an employment and support allowance or a jobseeker's allowance is not a qualifying young person." Reg 4(6): a child or qualifying young person looked after by a local authority is treated as not being anyone's responsibility.

Changes

ESA with the support component

• New has_own_esa_award (Person): the person claims ESA themselves. That means reported contributory ESA or a reported income-related award. When the family's income-related award is entered directly, the award goes to the claimant or partner who heads the benefit unit (else the eldest), so a couple's award has one recipient.
• New esa_includes_support_component (Person): whether the person's ESA includes the support component (WRA 2007 ss.2(2), 4(4)).
  • Datasets and users can supply it.
  • Otherwise it is assumed for anyone with an ESA award of their own.
  • FRS 2024-25 supports the default: of the ESA recipients in FRS-sourced records who answered the ESA group question, 584 of 629 (93%) are in the support group.
• The exception needs a claimant or partner who receives ESA with the support component. Receiving means their own contributory ESA, or the couple's income-related award (is_on_income_related_esa, from Count only the claimant's and partner's legacy awards in means tests and passports #2027).
• The esa_contrib > 0 term leaves is_benefit_cap_exempt_other.

On the default: policyengine-uk-data also builds esa_support_group_proxy, from labour-market status (working age, reported status long-term sick or disabled, no hours of work, and its ESA health-condition proxy). It agrees with the survey's own answer for 524 of those 629 records (83%). Assuming the support component agrees for 584 (93%). So the model uses the constant default and does not read the proxy. The survey's own answer is the better source; see the follow-ups.

Who counts

Benefit or circumstance	Law	Lifts the cap when held by
ESA with the support component	75F(1)(a); 83(1)(a)	claimant or partner
Attendance allowance, industrial injuries benefit, armed forces compensation (guaranteed income payments)	75F(1)(b)-(d), (2)(a); 83(1)(b)-(e)	claimant or partner
DLA	75F(1)(e); 83(1)(f)	claimant, partner, or a child or young person they are responsible for
PIP, Carer's Allowance, Carer Support Payment	75F(1)(ea), (h), (ha); 83(1)(g), (i), (ia)	claimant, partner, or a young person they are responsible for
Armed forces independence payment	75F(1)(ea); UC reg 2 (counts as attendance allowance)	claimant, partner, or a Housing Benefit young person
LCWRA element, carer element	83(1)(a), (j); regs 27(1), 29(1)	a claimant with limited capability, or with caring responsibilities; or an element entered directly
Working tax credit	75E(2)	the claimant or couple (unchanged)

• One cap, two schemes. The model applies one cap to Universal Credit and Housing Benefit, so an exception in either scheme counts. It already does this for the family rate (is_responsible_for_child_or_young_person_for_uc_or_housing_benefit).
  • A child or young person is anyone is_child_or_young_person_for_legacy_benefits (HB regs 2, 19) or is_child_or_qualifying_young_person_for_universal_credit (UC regs 4-5) counts.
  • A 16-year-old also counts (UC reg 5(1)(a), the same annual approximation the family rate uses), unless they receive benefits in their own right (UC reg 5(5); HB reg 19(2)) or are looked after by a local authority (UC reg 4(6)).
  • The UC LCWRA and carer exceptions also reach Housing Benefit families, as before, but now only through a claimant.
• LCWRA inferred from ESA, in one direction. uc_limited_capability_for_WRA still defaults to is_disabled_for_benefits. A person whose own ESA award lacks the support component is now taken not to have LCWRA, whatever the flag. A determination of limited capability for work-related activity is what gives ESA its support component, and Universal Credit takes it (UC Regs 2013 reg 40(1)(a)(ii); UC (TP) Regs 2014 reg 19(4)).
  • This is an inference. Someone still in the ESA assessment phase may yet be found to have LCWRA, and users can set the variable directly.
  • It feeds uc_LCWRA_element, the cap and the disability_basic_income contrib reform.
  • Datasets flag every ESA recipient as disabled and the support component is assumed, so no dataset value of it changes until a dataset reports the ESA group.
  • The opposite inference, LCWRA from the support component alone, would be legally right too. It is left out because uc_LCWRA_element and the work allowance still read every member of the benefit unit: a non-dependant's own ESA would add an LCWRA element to the family's Universal Credit. Count only the claimant's and partner's legacy awards in means tests and passports #2027's legacy-award invariance test caught exactly that. It can follow Give the UC LCWRA and carer elements, the work allowance and the benefit cap exceptions on the claimants' circumstances only #1989's claimant-only element.
• Limited capability for work. New uc_limited_capability_for_work = uc_limited_capability_for_WRA or is_disabled_for_benefits.
  • The work allowance (reg 22(1)(b)) and the reduced minimum age (reg 8(1)(a)) read it. So an ESA recipient outside the support group, who loses LCWRA, keeps both, and their results are as before for every input that does not set the new variables.
  • Reg 39(1)(a) would also give limited capability for work to any ESA award of the person's own. The model does not infer that yet, for the same every-member reason.
• Carer element. For calculated elements, "a claimant who has limited capability or is a carer" is the same test in this model as "the award includes the LCWRA or carer element". Where reg 29(4) gives a carer with limited capability only the LCWRA element, that element lifts the cap instead.
  • The model does not have the reg 28 waiting period, reg 29(5)-(6) or reg 30(3).
  • An element entered directly also lifts the cap. It is recognised by value, as Count only the claimant's and partner's legacy awards in means tests and passports #2027 now recognises a directly entered esa_income: the element is positive although no member's circumstances give it.
• AFIP. Armed forces independence payment now lifts the cap (Benefit cap applies to 2x too many households (5.3% of UC vs 1.6% administrative) #1818 defect 1; Fix benefit cap exemption defects (#1818) #1820 defect 3). It is a pure input that no dataset populates.
• Clean-up. is_benefit_cap_exempt_earnings and is_benefit_cap_exempt_other lose the benefit sums they computed and never used. The earnings test and the State Pension age test return what they returned before. The labels that named the wrong test are corrected.

The capped total

benefit_cap_reduction now counts:

• the claimant's and partner's own contributory ESA, contributory JSA, incapacity benefit and SDA;
• the claimant's and partner's income-related ESA and income-based JSA (claimant_or_partner_esa_income and claimant_or_partner_jsa_income, from Count only the claimant's and partner's legacy awards in means tests and passports #2027);
• the family's Child Benefit, CTC, Income Support (already the claimant's or partner's, Apply the Income Support conditions to the claimant and partner only #2013), Universal Credit and Housing Benefit.

Another member's own award no longer reduces the family's Universal Credit or Housing Benefit. esa, jsa, household_benefits and household income keep the full awards. Maternity allowance and the bereavement benefits are welfare benefits too (s.96(10)); they were not in the model's total and are not added here.

Review of the other exceptions

• Earnings (is_benefit_cap_exempt_earnings, UC reg 82): unchanged here. Its defects (total income tax, the hard-coded £846 threshold, any member's earnings) are fixed by Use each rule's own Universal Credit earned income in the benefit cap, targeted childcare and local CTR #1999 (on Deduct only each person's own tax and NI on earnings from UC earned income #1949) and Fix benefit cap exemption defects (#1818) #1820.
• Age (is_benefit_cap_exempt_other): unchanged. It still exempts a family with any member over State Pension age, including a non-dependant. Apply the benefit cap to mixed-age couples on Universal Credit, and keep them off pensioner Council Tax Reduction #1944 replaces it with housing_benefit_pension_age_regulations_apply (UC regs 79-83 have no age exception; HB (SPC) Regs have no cap), and Use the State Pension Credit qualifying age, and start-of-year status for Class 4 NI #1907 uses the Pension Credit qualifying age.
• Heads not modelled:
  • pension age disability payment, Scottish adult DLA, child disability payment and adult disability payment (no variables; Benefit cap applies to 2x too many households (5.3% of UC vs 1.6% administrative) #1818 defect 2);
  • war pensions other than AFCS, and guardian's allowance;
  • the "entitled but not receiving" hospital and care home cases (75F(1)(f); 83(1)(h)).
• Entitlement, not payment. Reg 75F(1)(h) and reg 83(1)(i) say "entitled to" Carer's Allowance. Reduce Carer's Allowance and Carer Support Payment by overlapping benefits #1994 switches the carer test to is_entitled_to_carer_benefit.

Invariants (property-tested)

test_benefit_cap_specified_benefits_properties.py draws up to six families per simulation.

• Members: a claimant and an optional partner. Up to three dependants, each a child (0-15), a looked-after child, a young person (16-18 in non-advanced education), a 16-year-old out of education, or a 16-year-old receiving benefits in their own right. One non-dependent adult (17-60, not in education).
• Circumstances: every person starts with none. Each family gets up to two of sixteen circumstances on random members, and the non-dependant always gets one or two. The sixteen are AA, IIB, AFCS, DLA, PIP, AFIP, CA, CSP, contributory ESA, income-related ESA, contributory JSA, income-based JSA, incapacity benefit, SDA, the disability flag, and 35 hours of caring.
• Support component: each simulation either supplies it for every person or for none. Policyengine-core gives a partly supplied input its default for the rest.
• Coverage: hypothesis.event records every role and circumstance drawn.

1. Adding a non-dependent adult never changes is_benefit_cap_exempt_health_disability, is_benefit_cap_exempt_other, is_benefit_cap_exempt, benefit_cap, benefit_cap_reduction or universal_credit (with £30,000 of UC before the cap), whatever disability or carer benefits, ESA, JSA, incapacity benefit, SDA, disability flag or caring they have.
2. Differential. The exemption equals an independent reading of regs 75E(2), 75F(1), 83(1) and 40(1)(a)(ii), with the roles fixed by construction.
3. An exempt family has no cap and no reduction. Any other family has the cap its roles imply: £14,753 for a single claimant with no child or young person, £22,020 otherwise (2025-26, outside London). Its reduction is at least UC less the cap. For the rate, any 16-year-old counts, as the model's family-rate helper still does (follow-up).
4. Each head alone, exhaustively. For every role × every circumstance, one family whose only circumstance is that one, held by that member, matches the reference. There are 8 roles (claimant, partner, child, looked-after child, young person, 16-year-old, 16-year-old with own-right benefits, non-dependant) and 16 circumstances, so 128 families. The table runs once for each support mode: supplied true, false, and unset.

Properties 1-3 run 40 random examples each. Property 4 is a deterministic table. #2027's legacy-award invariance test reads the cap exemption again (#2027 had dropped it when it handed the cap over). All pass: 16 tests across the two files.

Known violations, out of scope. A non-dependant's age and earnings still lift the cap, through is_benefit_cap_exempt_other (#1944, #1907) and is_benefit_cap_exempt_earnings (#1999, #1820). The draws keep the non-dependant under State Pension age and without earnings.

On the base (3803dda0d), in the single-head table with the support component left to the default, 60 of the 128 families disagree with the reference. For example:

• a non-dependant's or a looked-after child's anything lifts the cap;
• a child's attendance allowance lifts it;
• the claimant's AFIP does not.

On #2027's earlier head 200a1cdc4, Hypothesis's minimal counterexample for properties 1 and 2 was a 25-year-old claimant whose benefit unit adds a 17-year-old non-dependant receiving attendance allowance: the family became exempt.

Tests

YAML: gov/dwp/benefit_cap/benefit_cap_specified_benefits.yaml has 56 cases, each hand-computed from the regulation and the 2025-26 caps (UC reg 80A(2), HB reg 75CA). Every head has a case where a non-dependent adult holds the benefit.

• ESA, claimant and partner, with and without the support component:
  • contributory ESA on UC: no reduction against £10,247 (18,000 + 7,000 − 14,753);
  • income-related ESA on Housing Benefit: HB of £9,000 against £8,753 (reduction £247, reg 75D(1));
  • couple: no reduction against £2,980.
• ESA, other cases:
  • income-related ESA stopped by the capital test;
  • the default for a person's own ESA;
  • no ESA;
  • a directly entered award, for a single claimant and for a couple (one recipient);
  • a partner who reports the couple's award.
• LCWRA inferred from ESA:
  • an ESA recipient flagged disabled but without the support component has no LCWRA and no element, and is capped (£10,247);
  • with the support component, LCWRA and the £5,079.24 element (423.27 × 12, 2025-26) without a flag;
  • the support component alone does not add LCWRA (the ESA head still lifts the cap);
  • a directly entered award with the flag gives the claimant the element, and without the support component no LCWRA and a reduction of £247.
• Limited capability for work: an adult ESA recipient outside the support group, flagged disabled, keeps the work allowance, and a 17-year-old one meets the reduced minimum age.
• IIB: for the partner, a young person and a non-dependant.
• DLA:
  • for a child, a young person and a 16-year-old out of education (exempt);
  • for a 16-year-old receiving benefits in their own right, a 19-year-old out of education, a looked-after child, and a non-dependant (reduction £3,247) (not exempt).
• PIP, Carer's Allowance and CSP: for a young person, the claimant and a non-dependant.
• AFIP: for the claimant, a young person in education, a 16-year-old out of education, and a non-dependant.
• LCWRA flag: for the claimant, a non-dependant and a child.
• Other:
  • caring without a Carer's Allowance claim;
  • a carer or LCWRA element entered directly (reduction £0 with UC £18,000);
  • a non-dependant with every benefit at once;
  • working tax credit;
  • the unchanged earnings and age tests.

YAML, the capped total: gov/dwp/benefit_cap/benefit_cap_capped_total.yaml has 5 cases on UC and Housing Benefit amounts.

• A non-dependant's £5,000 of income-related ESA with UC of £20,000: reduction £5,247 and UC £14,753.
• A non-dependant's contributory ESA, JSA, incapacity benefit and SDA with UC of £18,000: reduction £3,247.
• The claimant's own contributory JSA of £3,000 with UC of £15,000 counts: reduction £3,247 and UC £11,753.
• A non-dependant's £6,000 of income-based JSA leaves the family's £9,000 of Housing Benefit alone.
• The claimant's own £6,000 of income-based JSA counts: reduction £247 and HB £8,753.

Other YAML:

• benefit_cap.yaml: a 16-year-old out of education gives the family rate (£22,020). This is unchanged; it pins the reg 5(1)(a) approximation. The family-rate helper does not yet apply reg 5(5), because the LHA non-dependant test shares the rule and must change with it (follow-up).
• legacy_award_readers/passports.yaml (from Count only the claimant's and partner's legacy awards in means tests and passports #2027): the two benefit cap cases now state the support component.

On the base (3803dda0d):

• benefit_cap_specified_benefits.yaml fails 36 of 56 cases.
  • 21 fail because the new variables do not exist there.
  • 15 fail on value:
    • every case where a non-dependent adult, a dependant with a claimant-only benefit, a 19-year-old, a looked-after child, a 16-year-old with own-right benefits or a disabled child without DLA lifted the cap;
    • AFIP for the claimant and for a young person;
    • an LCWRA element entered directly.
• benefit_cap_capped_total.yaml fails 3 of 5 cases, all on value. A non-dependant's ESA exempts the whole family there, and a non-dependant's income-based JSA takes £247 off the family's Housing Benefit.

Runs:

• Targeted runs on 19a13f2c5: gov/dwp and finance/benefit YAML, 669 passed; the cap and legacy-award properties, 16 passed.
• Full suites on 830306211 (before the merge of f551e542b): YAML 1,635 passed; pytest 2,086 passed, 45 skipped. Full suites on 19a13f2c5: running.
• ruff format and ruff check are clean.

Enhanced FRS impact

Real Microsimulation runs on a private copy of the Enhanced FRS 2024-25 (sha256 e433e532…), one per package state:

• the base 3803dda0d (Count only the claimant's and partner's legacy awards in means tests and passports #2027's head when this branch merged it);
• 521373814, the exemption changes;
• 830306211, which adds the capped total.

Then again on #2027's newer head f551e542b (payee-only "on") against this branch's 19a13f2c5. The results are identical in every aggregate and every benefit array.

Aggregates only.

The dataset as it stands: £0 in every year 2025-2030. Every benefit, household total (including gov_spending and hbai_household_net_income) and poverty rate is unchanged, and no benefit unit loses the overall exemption.

• The exemption (3803dda0d → 521373814, and f551e542b → 19a13f2c5). Only the component flags move.
  • is_benefit_cap_exempt_other loses its armed forces and contributory ESA terms. That flips it for 912 records, about 780,000 benefit units weighted. All stay exempt: 845 through is_benefit_cap_exempt_health_disability, now limited to the claimant and partner, and the other 67 through earnings.
  • is_benefit_cap_exempt_health_disability turns false for 69 benefit units, about 27,000 weighted, in every year. All 69 stay exempt through earnings.
    • In 67, the only holder of PIP and contributory ESA is a child under 16. That is a data artefact: 89 children in SPI-synthetic households report both, which no child can receive, and it is filed separately.
    • In the other 2, the holder of PIP is a 19-year-old outside education, who is neither claimant nor young person.
  • The ESA rule changes nothing because the dataset does not report the ESA group. The support component takes its default for every ESA recipient, and every ESA recipient is flagged disabled.
  • The person scopes change nothing because every exempting benefit held by a non-dependant or a dependant sits in a family that is exempt another way.
• The capped total (521373814 → 830306211). No benefit unit's reduction changes by more than a penny; the largest difference is £0.002, from the order of summation. The dataset has 74 non-dependant records, about 18,000 people weighted, and none reports ESA.

Sensitivity: the survey's own ESA group. The same copy, with esa_includes_support_component taken from FRS 2024-25 ESAGroup for the 629 ESA recipients in FRS-sourced records who answered it. Of those, 584 are in the support group. The stacked SPI-synthetic and capital-gains copies do not link back to FRS records and keep the default.

Base run on the same copy against the branch (f551e542b → 19a13f2c5; 3803dda0d → 830306211 gives the same table):

Year	Lose the exemption (k)	Newly capped on UC (k)	Capped UC families, base → branch (k)	LCWRA element (£bn)	UC before cap (£bn)	Cap reduction (£bn)	UC (£bn)	AHC poverty (pp)
2025	8.6	3.2	133.6 → 136.8	−0.194	−0.132	+0.021	−0.153	+0.008
2026	8.7	4.5	268.4 → 272.9	−0.175	−0.124	+0.025	−0.149	+0.008
2027	8.7	5.1	303.8 → 308.9	−0.179	−0.127	+0.027	−0.154	+0.008
2028	8.7	5.1	341.8 → 347.0	−0.177	−0.126	+0.030	−0.156	+0.008
2029	8.5	4.9	359.1 → 363.9	−0.181	−0.129	+0.029	−0.158	+0.007
2030	8.5	4.9	397.3 → 402.2	−0.110	−0.075	+0.031	−0.106	+0.006

• About 38,000 benefit units lose the UC LCWRA element because a claimant's own ESA is outside the support group.
• UC before the cap falls by less than the element, because some awards are already tapered to nil.
• The cap then takes £0.02-0.03bn more from the families that lose the exemption. Housing Benefit does not change.
• Since only about 62% of weighted ESA recipients link to an answer, this understates what a complete survey column would do.
• For scale: the model already caps 268,000 UC families in 2026, against DWP's administrative count of 111,000 for November 2025 (Benefit cap applies to 2x too many households (5.3% of UC vs 1.6% administrative) #1818). These rules move it a little further from that figure.

Axiom

axiom: TheAxiomFoundation/rulespec-uk#425 queued

None of these provisions is in the corpus: HB Regs 2006 regs 75A, 75E and 75F; UC Regs 2013 regs 79, 80 and 83; WRA 2007 ss.2 and 4; WRA 2012 s.96. rulespec-uk encodes UC regs 80A, 81 and 82, and its reg 81 takes the capped total as an input. The issue holds the verbatim law, the required outputs, a pasteable review_finding and companion tests taken from this PR's YAML. It extends #389 (regs 79/83, the age question) and #416 (reg 75F(1)(a), from #2027).

Coordination

• Count only the claimant's and partner's legacy awards in means tests and passports #2027 reverted its own change to is_benefit_cap_exempt_health_disability and left the cap to this PR.
  • This PR's merge of 3803dda0d keeps this branch's version of that file and of the cap cases in passports.yaml, and takes Count only the claimant's and partner's legacy awards in means tests and passports #2027's deletion of utils/inputs.py.
  • The merge of f551e542b takes its payee-only "on". The cap's ESA head reads is_on_income_related_esa for receipt, and two YAML cases now expect only the payee to be on the award.
• Count only claimants' income in Universal Credit #1978 edits benefit_cap_reduction.py too. Keep this PR's claimant-or-partner lists when resolving.

The same lines are edited by several other open PRs; whichever lands second resolves by hand:

• Give the UC LCWRA and carer elements, the work allowance and the benefit cap exceptions on the claimants' circumstances only #1989 (draft, UC stack on Count only claimants' income in Universal Credit #1978):
  • It scopes the cap's benefit list with is_uc_assessed_claimant and UC's QYP test, and reads uc_LCWRA_element > 0. It still lets any esa_income or claimant esa_contrib lift the cap.
  • Keep this PR's ESA test, its LCWRA link to ESA, and its person sets, which also count HB young persons and 16-year-olds.
  • Use is_claimant_or_partner until Count only claimants' income in Universal Credit #1978 lands, then is_claimant_or_partner | is_uc_assessed_claimant.
  • Its LCWRA and carer exceptions are equivalent to this PR's once its claimant-only elements land.
• Fix benefit cap exemption defects (#1818) #1820 (Vahid): its AFIP and dead-code changes are covered here. Its earnings-test fixes stand, with Use each rule's own Universal Credit earned income in the benefit cap, targeted childcare and local CTR #1999.
• Apply the benefit cap to mixed-age couples on Universal Credit, and keep them off pensioner Council Tax Reduction #1944, Use the State Pension Credit qualifying age, and start-of-year status for Class 4 NI #1907: keep their age test, and drop the afcs and ESA terms from is_benefit_cap_exempt_other. Those terms now live, scoped, in is_benefit_cap_exempt_health_disability.
• Reduce Carer's Allowance and Carer Support Payment by overlapping benefits #1994: put is_entitled_to_carer_benefit in YOUNG_PERSON_BENEFITS, and drop its hunks in the dead QUAL_PERSONAL_BENEFITS lists that this PR deletes.

Follow-ups

• ESA group from the survey. FRS 2024-25 asks every ESA recipient which group they are in (ESAGroup, benefits table VAR3 for BENEFIT 16: 1 work-related activity group, 2 support group, 3 assessment phase). policyengine-uk-data can supply a complete esa_includes_support_component column from it. Until then, no dataset result depends on the support component.
• Children with adult benefits in the data. 89 children under 16 in SPI-synthetic households report enhanced PIP and contributory ESA (policyengine-uk-data).
• Reg 5(5) for the family rate and LHA. is_responsible_for_child_or_young_person_for_uc_or_housing_benefit and lha_renter_has_non_dependant should stop counting a 16-year-old who receives benefits in their own right or is looked after. Both have to change together.
• Split the exceptions by scheme. UC reg 83 would apply only to UC awards and HB reg 75F only to Housing Benefit. That would remove the union's LCWRA and carer-element exceptions for Housing Benefit families, the young-person AFIP and WTC heads for UC, and so on.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[MaxGhenis]

Coordination with #2084 (UC claim by a member of a couple as a single person, UC Regs 2013 reg 3(3)).

This PR counts is_claimant_or_partner as the people UC reg 83(1) names ("a claimant"). Under reg 3(3), the other member of a couple claiming as a single person is a partner but not a claimant (WRA 2012 s.40). Their PIP, DLA, AA, IIDB, AFCS, carer's allowance, contributory ESA or LCWRA does not lift the UC cap. HB reg 75F names the claimant's partner, but Housing Benefit has no single claim by a member of a couple, so the UC rule decides here.

That PR edits main's versions of is_benefit_cap_exempt_health_disability.py and is_benefit_cap_exempt_other.py to exclude that member through other_member_of_single_claim_in_shared_rules(person, period) (in utils/uc_work_related_requirements.py). That helper is false unless a single claim actually exists, and false for a family claiming legacy benefits, because the cap is shared with Housing Benefit, which has no such single claim.

Whichever PR lands second should make the claimant set in the rewritten file is_claimant_or_partner & ~other_member_of_single_claim_in_shared_rules(person, period) for the reg 83 limbs. It should also keep the YAML cases "Reg. 83(1)(g) ..." and the legacy-family case in claims_as_single_person.yaml passing.

A separate point from that PR's review, not caused by either PR: has_pensioner (any member over State Pension age lifts the cap) has no basis in UC regs 82-83. ADM E5054 has a pension-age rule only for managed migration. HB reg 75C(2)(a) does have one, so it may belong to the Housing Benefit side only.

[MaxGhenis]

Coordination with #2088, which models the UC childcare work condition's partner exceptions (UC Regs 2013 reg 32(1)(b)). Limb (i) is "has limited capability for work". On main the only LCW proxy is uc_limited_capability_for_WRA, so #2088's new uc_unable_to_provide_childcare reads that, just as the work allowance and the reg 8 minimum age do on main.

What changes once both merge. Under this PR, an ESA award without the support component removes LCWRA but not LCW. So whichever of the two merges second should switch limb (i) in policyengine_uk/variables/gov/dwp/universal_credit/childcare_element/uc_unable_to_provide_childcare.py from uc_limited_capability_for_WRA to uc_limited_capability_for_work. The documentation string there names the proxy, so update it too.

If this PR merges first, I'll make the switch in #2088. If #2088 merges first, please switch it here when you merge main.

Tests to add with the switch. A working claimant whose partner has has_own_esa_award: true and esa_includes_support_component: false, plus is_disabled_for_benefits: true:

• uc_childcare_work_condition should stay true (LCW holds);
• uc_limited_capability_for_WRA is false.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[MaxGhenis]

Coordination with #2089 (each scheme its own benefit cap and LHA shared-accommodation rules), which is stacked on #2084.

#2089 deletes the shared exception files this PR rewrites, is_benefit_cap_exempt_health_disability.py, _other.py, _earnings.py and is_benefit_cap_exempt.py, and replaces them with one set per scheme:

• UC (UC Regs 2013 regs 79, 82, 83): is_uc_benefit_cap_exempt = is_uc_benefit_cap_exempt_earnings (reg 82) | is_uc_benefit_cap_exempt_specified_benefit (reg 83).
• HB (HB Regs 2006 regs 75A, 75E, 75F, 5): is_housing_benefit_benefit_cap_exempt = is_housing_benefit_benefit_cap_exempt_working_tax_credit (75E) | is_housing_benefit_benefit_cap_exempt_specified_benefit (75F) | housing_benefit_pension_age_regulations_apply (reg 5).
• Capped total: benefit_cap_reduction is now uc_benefit_cap_reduction + housing_benefit_benefit_cap_reduction. The total of welfare benefits moved to benefit_cap_welfare_benefits.

Porting this PR onto the split (whichever of the two merges second):

1. Person scopes.
   • UC reg 83(1) "a claimant": is_claimant_or_partner & ~other_member_of_single_claim(...). Its child-or-QYP tests use the UC definitions (reg 5, including the 16-year-old window).
   • HB reg 75F(1) "the claimant or the claimant's partner": is_claimant_or_partner. Its child-or-young-person tests use is_child_or_young_person_for_legacy_benefits and the Child Benefit qualifying young person.
   • The union of both schemes' person scopes that this PR builds is no longer needed: each scheme's file takes its own scope.
2. ESA support component (esa_includes_support_component, has_own_esa_award) goes into both specified-benefit files: UC reg 83(1)(a) and HB reg 75F(1)(a).
3. LCWRA and carer elements: UC file only (reg 83(1)(a), (j)). Working tax credit: HB file only (75E). AFIP: UC via reg 83(1)(c) (reg 2 "attendance allowance"); HB via 75F(1)(ea), which also covers a young person.
4. is_benefit_cap_exempt_other (any member at State Pension age) is gone. UC has no age exception, and HB reads reg 5 (the variable from Apply the benefit cap to mixed-age couples on Universal Credit, and keep them off pensioner Council Tax Reduction #1944).
5. Claimant/partner-scoped capped total: goes into benefit_cap_welfare_benefits (one total for both schemes; the model never pays a family both).

I will push a pre-resolved composition of the two branches, uc-hb-split-on-2076, and link it here. Its per-scheme exception files carry this PR's scopes, so the second to land can take them as they are.

[MaxGhenis]

The pre-resolved composition of this PR with #2089 is pushed: branch uc-hb-split-on-2076, head 31fb9dc.

• a6f071d merges this branch (at e648b2d) into Give Universal Credit and Housing Benefit their own benefit cap and LHA shared-accommodation rules #2089. It ports this PR's person scopes into each scheme's file:

  • UC reg 83: is_uc_benefit_cap_exempt_specified_benefit. "A claimant" is the claimant or partner minus the reg 3(3) other member. A UC child or qualifying young person counts for DLA; a UC qualifying young person counts for PIP, CA and CSP. AFIP counts as attendance allowance (reg 2), claimant only. Also the ESA support component, and the LCWRA and carer elements via a claimant or an element entered directly.
  • HB reg 75F: is_housing_benefit_benefit_cap_exempt_specified_benefit. The claimant or partner. An HB child or young person counts for DLA; an HB young person counts for PIP, AFIP, CA and CSP. Also the ESA support component. No UC elements.
  • Elsewhere: WTC stays in HB's 75E file, the claimant-scoped capped total moves to benefit_cap_welfare_benefits, and is_benefit_cap_exempt_other (any member at State Pension age) is gone. UC has no age exception, and HB reads reg 5.

• 15c5815 converts this PR's and Count only the claimant's and partner's legacy awards in means tests and passports #2027's tests to the per-scheme variables. Every changed expectation names its regulation:

  • the LCWRA and carer elements are UC only;
  • WTC is HB only;
  • a 16-year-old outside education is a UC qualifying young person but not an HB young person;
  • AFIP is a young person's exception only in HB;
  • a claimant aged 70 gets HB's reg 5 and no UC age exception.

  The capped-total amounts are unchanged.

• 31fb9dc merges Give Universal Credit and Housing Benefit their own benefit cap and LHA shared-accommodation rules #2089's review fixes.

Checked on this branch, one process at a time:

• policyengine-core test policyengine_uk/tests/policy: 1,943 passed.
• test_benefit_cap_specified_benefits_properties.py: 6 passed.
• test_benefit_cap_lha_scheme_split_properties.py: 7 passed.
• test_legacy_award_readers_properties.py: 10 passed.
• test_uc_single_claim_properties.py: 8 passed.

Whichever of #2076 and #2089 merges second can take these files as they are. git rerere in the local clone has the content resolutions recorded.

[MaxGhenis]

#2088 has merged to main (99d0448), ahead of this PR. As my earlier comment said, the switch now falls to this PR: when you merge main, change limb (i) in policyengine_uk/variables/gov/dwp/universal_credit/childcare_element/uc_unable_to_provide_childcare.py from uc_limited_capability_for_WRA to uc_limited_capability_for_work, and update its documentation string to match.

The test to add with the switch: a working claimant whose partner has has_own_esa_award: true, esa_includes_support_component: false and is_disabled_for_benefits: true. It should give uc_childcare_work_condition: true and uc_limited_capability_for_WRA false.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[vahid-ahmadi]

Thanks Max. The scoping is right, and the tests support it. I reviewed head e648b2db5 against #2027 (b8b4d7b50).

What I checked:

• Law. I pulled HB Regs 2006 regs 75A, 75E and 75F, UC Regs 2013 regs 39, 40, 79, 80, 80A and 83, and WRA 2007 s.2(2) from legislation.gov.uk. Your quotes match the current text. The person scopes match the 75F/83 wording head by head, including AFIP: UC treats it as attendance allowance (claimant only), and HB 75F(1)(ea) also covers a young person.
• Tests. All passed:
  • YAML (303): gov/dwp/benefit_cap/, benefit_cap.yaml, legacy_award_readers/ and finance/benefit/family/universal_credit/.
  • test_benefit_cap_specified_benefits_properties.py: 6 passed.
  • test_legacy_award_readers_properties.py: 10 passed.
• Probes (2025, North East), main / #2027 base / this PR:
  • A non-dependant with £5,000 of income-related ESA, and UC of £20,000 before the cap: UC goes from £20,000 (exempt) to £14,753, a reduction of £5,247. That matches the PR body.
  • The claimant's own contributory ESA without the support component, flagged disabled, rent £9,000, earnings £3,000: no LCWRA element, the £4,932 work allowance is kept, and UC is capped at £9,753. With the support component, the LCWRA element is £5,079.24 and the family is exempt.
  • Cases that are exempt on all three: the claimant's LCWRA flag without ESA, a 10-year-old's DLA, and the claimant's attendance allowance on HB only.
  • A 17-year-old in FE with PIP: capped on main and the base (reduction £4,334.60), exempt here. That is a real fix.
  • Breaking-change check. A single ESA claimant entered as esa_contrib_reported + is_disabled_for_benefits with no support-component input gives the same result here as on the base: UC £18,880.92, LCWRA element kept, exempt. Calculator users who don't set the new variables keep the LCWRA element.

Findings:

1. Should fix. uc_limited_capability_for_work.py:29-30 changes results for inputs that set none of the new variables. The body says the opposite ("results are as before for every input that does not set the new variables"). Take someone with uc_limited_capability_for_WRA: false set explicitly, is_disabled_for_benefits: true and £6,000 of earnings, rent £9,000. They now get the work allowance: £0 → £4,932, and UC goes from £10,501.68 to £13,214.28. Before, setting LCWRA to false removed the work allowance. Fix: only add back what the ESA inference took away, e.g. uc_limited_capability_for_WRA | (is_disabled_for_benefits & has_own_esa_award & ~esa_includes_support_component) (reg 39(1)(a): ESA's own LCW determination). Then add a YAML case for the explicit-false input. If you'd rather keep the wider rule, say so in the changelog.

2. Should fix (when you resolve against main). Main has changed all three cap files since this branch's base:

   • The carer test reads is_entitled_to_carer_benefit (378a248, 607a815).
   • benefit_cap_reduction sums over is_uc_assessed_claimant (de51949, c8f3902).
   • is_benefit_cap_exempt_other is the pension-age HB / reg 60C test (a2bd3c4, efd9dd7).

   The body's "Review of the other exceptions" and "Coordination" sections still describe #1994 and #1944 as pending. When you resolve:

   • is_benefit_cap_exempt_health_disability.py:29-31 should list is_entitled_to_carer_benefit, not the carers_allowance / carer_support_payment amounts. Otherwise a claimant whose Carer's Allowance is overlapped to nil stops lifting the cap again, a regression against main. Add a YAML case for it.
   • benefit_cap_reduction.py:46 should combine your claimant-or-partner lists with is_uc_assessed_claimant.
   • Keep main's age test and drop only the afcs / esa_contrib terms.

   Please also refresh those two body sections.

3. Should fix (PR body). The Enhanced FRS section describes a cell of fewer than 10 records together with its members' characteristics. Please change it to "fewer than 10", as #2082 does. The other counts are ≥10 and are aggregates.

4. Nit. is_benefit_cap_exempt_health_disability.py:138-141: take a non-dependant flagged disabled. They still add the £5,079.24 LCWRA element to the family's UC, because uc_LCWRA_element reads every member, but the family is now capped (UC £18,880.92 → £14,753). Capping is the right direction in law. Until #1989 makes the element claimant-only, though, the award "includes the LCWRA element" (reg 83(1)(a)) and is capped at the same time. A one-line note in the docstring would help, or a YAML case pinning it as a known limitation.

5. Nit. benefit_cap_reduction.py:22 cites UC reg 80 while counting housing_benefit_pre_benefit_cap. Reg 80(2A) counts HB as nil for the UC cap, and HB reg 75F(1)(g) switches the HB cap off when the claimant gets UC. This is pre-existing and belongs in your "split the exceptions by scheme" follow-up. It would be worth naming 80(2A) there.

Mergeability: the branch merges cleanly into #2027's current head (fc1ff55d1, one commit ahead of the version merged here). As part of the stack it conflicts with main in the cap files above. Other open PRs editing the same files: #2089, #2084, #1989, #1820, #1999, #1965, #2066, #2085.

[MaxGhenis]

#2081 has merged to main (47df7b08d). As its review agreed (vahid-ahmadi's item 4), this PR lands second, so it should be the one to leave the model with a single limited capability for work (LCW) variable.

On main, uc_work_related_group_apart_from_earnings reads uc_has_limited_capability_for_work for WRA 2012 s.21(1)(a). That is an input that defaults to false. This PR adds uc_limited_capability_for_work, which is uc_limited_capability_for_WRA | is_disabled_for_benefits. When you merge main:

• In policyengine_uk/variables/gov/dwp/universal_credit/work_related_requirements/uc_work_related_group_apart_from_earnings.py, make s.21(1)(a) read uc_limited_capability_for_work.
• Delete work_related_requirements/uc_has_limited_capability_for_work.py.
• Move its inputs to uc_limited_capability_for_work. They are set in income_floor/uc_MIF_applies.yaml, income_floor/uc_minimum_income_floor.yaml, work_related_requirements/uc_work_related_group_apart_from_earnings.yaml and tests/test_uc_work_related_groups_properties.py.

After the switch, a claimant flagged is_disabled_for_benefits without LCWRA falls in s.21, unless s.19 or s.20 applies first. The UC minimum income floor then no longer applies to them (UC Regs 2013 reg 62(1)(b)). That moves UC on the Enhanced FRS, so the impact for this PR needs re-running after the switch.