Skip to content

Document reproducing fully rolled-out two-child limit estimates and absolute child poverty - #2614

Queued
vahid-ahmadi wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
docs-two-child-limit-full-rollout
Queued

vahid-ahmadi wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
docs-two-child-limit-full-rollout

Conversation

@vahid-ahmadi

@vahid-ahmadi vahid-ahmadi commented Oct 23, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Summary

Adds docs/book/validation/two-child-limit-full-rollout.md, a page on reproducing published two-child limit estimates that assume full roll-out and report absolute child poverty, such as the IFS Green Budget 2025 comment Options for reforming the two-child limit. An external replication using raw FRS 2024-25 found PolicyEngine UK's children lifted out of absolute poverty well short of the IFS figures. Most of that comes from settings that are easy to miss:

  • the baseline already removes the limit from 6 April 2026, so the comparable year is 2025-26;
  • current law protects children born before 6 April 2017, so full roll-out needs the UC and CTC born_before dates moved (this alone roughly doubles the headcount);
  • in_poverty_ahc/_bhc are the HBAI absolute flags, now on the FYE 2025 reference line, while estimates published before March 2026 use the FYE 2011 line (the page shows a parameter override);
  • children should be counted at person level with is_hbai_dependent_child;
  • full UC take-up is a set_input on would_claim_uc.

With full roll-out and full take-up, cost (£3.58bn) and families gaining (778k) match the IFS (about £3.6bn, over 800,000 households), but children lifted are 25-30% short (455k against 630k for abolition; 293k against 420k for a three-child limit, AHC on the FYE 2011-based line). The page attributes that to the data: the release has about 21% fewer children in 3+ child families in relative low income than HBAI FYE 2025 (filed as PolicyEngine/microcosm#1371).

It complements child-poverty-tcl.md (2029-30, DWP/OBR/RF benchmarks), which #1724 is revising, and does not touch that file.

Evidence

The snippet on the page was run end to end on policyengine-uk 2.147.2 with Microcosm release microcosm-uk-2024-25-national-20261023T075039Z-a133f37a (SHA-256 verified); the results table is its output. The current-law row's affected count (467k benefit units, 1.64m children) is checked against DWP's April 2025 two-child limit statistics (453,600 households, 1.61m children).

Reproducer: n/a: documentation only, no model source or dependency change
axiom: n/a: documentation only

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

vahid-ahmadi and others added 2 commits October 23, 2026 19:07
…bsolute child poverty

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
@vahid-ahmadi

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

853b588 fixes the Lint failure (ruff format on the page's Python snippet) and replaces the microcosm#ISSUE placeholder with PolicyEngine/microcosm#1371, in the page and the body.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

@vahid-ahmadi
vahid-ahmadi marked this pull request as ready for review October 23, 2026 22:06
@vahid-ahmadi
vahid-ahmadi added this pull request to the merge queue Oct 23, 2026
Any commits made after this event will not be merged.

@juaristi22 juaristi22 left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Reviewed at 853b588a29e69566152bd09b19ad3aea2c3228bb. One P2 finding is attached inline: the final comparison attributes the remaining poverty gap entirely to data without isolating that cause.

Independent primary-source checks support the quoted benchmark values. The actual published Python helpers also passed model/API assertions on a small synthetic H5, including weighting, full take-up and both reform comparisons. The private national totals were not reproduced; the synthetic checks do not establish the claimed causal explanation.

- **Take-up.** With full roll-out and full take-up, the cost (£3.58bn) and the
number of families gaining (778,000 benefit units, against the IFS's "over
800,000 households") match the IFS closely.
- **Who is near the poverty line.** The remaining gap in children lifted, about

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

[P2] Qualify the attribution of the remaining poverty gap to data

The evidence does not isolate data as the cause of the remaining poverty gap. A shortfall in the marginal number of large-family children in relative low income cannot identify how many cross an absolute threshold after reform. This snippet also uses an approximate old-reference line, omits statutory exceptions and has not matched the IFS reported-take-up adjustment. Describe the family-size mismatch as a plausible contributor and retain those other explanations, or show a controlled comparison before ruling them out.

This branch has not been deployed

No deployments
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants