Chancellor George Osborne has been accused of forcing families to "take the hit" for the financial crisis after he announced the withdrawal of child benefit payments for higher earners.
But while several groups warned the cut would be a damaging blow for hard-working families, the UK's largest children's charity, Barnardo's, said the move would protect the poorest while saving the country money.
Around three million families will be hit by the stoppage, with middle-class parents losing out to the tune of £1,055 a year if they have one child and almost £2,500 for three.
Barnardo's chief executive Martin Narey said: "We don't want to see reductions in child benefit - we are a children's charity - but we are trying to be grown-up about it.
"We have to do something about the budget deficit so, when a proposal is made that will save significant amounts of money without affecting the poorest, we welcome it."
Mr Narey said this option is "hugely preferable" to withdrawing child benefit for older teenagers, adding: "The poorest will be protected."
Critics argued it is unfair that families with an income of almost £88,000 will still receive child benefit if neither parent earns more than the £44,000 threshold.
At the same time a family with a single earner or single parent who receives more than the threshold will have their benefit removed.
There was also concern that mothers who had controlled the child benefit will lose out if their partners earn more than the threshold but fail to support them.
Family Action chief executive Helen Dent said: "This cannot be fair or sensible and will disproportionately hit single parents or families where one partner is working part-time or has caring responsibilities."
Chancellor George Osborne has been accused of forcing families to "take the hit" for the financial crisis after he announced the withdrawal of child benefit payments for higher earners.
But while several groups warned the cut would be a damaging blow for hard-working families, the UK's largest children's charity, Barnardo's, said the move would protect the poorest while saving the country money.
Around three million families will be hit by the stoppage, with middle-class parents losing out to the tune of £1,055 a year if they have one child and almost £2,500 for three.
Barnardo's chief executive Martin Narey said: "We don't want to see reductions in child benefit - we are a children's charity - but we are trying to be grown-up about it.
"We have to do something about the budget deficit so, when a proposal is made that will save significant amounts of money without affecting the poorest, we welcome it."
Mr Narey said this option is "hugely preferable" to withdrawing child benefit for older teenagers, adding: "The poorest will be protected."
Critics argued it is unfair that families with an income of almost £88,000 will still receive child benefit if neither parent earns more than the £44,000 threshold.
At the same time a family with a single earner or single parent who receives more than the threshold will have their benefit removed.
There was also concern that mothers who had controlled the child benefit will lose out if their partners earn more than the threshold but fail to support them.
Family Action chief executive Helen Dent said: "This cannot be fair or sensible and will disproportionately hit single parents or families where one partner is working part-time or has caring responsibilities."