Back to my piece over on Eamonn's Rainy Day and the topic of taxing childless couples, Maynard has got the point. It would be a bureaucratic minefield, and very unjust.
Well there's a bright idea. How exactly is a "couple" to be defined?
Expect to see a large decline in marriage applications if marriage is what's used. And what about them gay folks and them catholic priests and them couples who, sure are living together to save money, but claim (and dare you to prove them wrong) that they refuse to have sex because it's against their religious beliefs and them "conscientious objectors" who refuse to have kids on the grounds that the world is overpopulated and consists of more than just Germans? And what about those who want children and can't conceive. Are they now entitled to state aid indefinitely as they try one fertility treatment after another? I can see this really leading to a whole lot of fun once civil rights lawyers get into the game.