This is an obvious way to align incentives that I haven't seen before. Negative income tax (NIT) is also something that might be worth looking into: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_income_tax#Implementa...
If the government is saying the cost will be £14.5B then they must think only 1.5M people will sign up, a tiny portion of the population. I don't quite see how they're expecting this to work.
Which is a shame; 10k could still make a significant difference to someone earning, for example, £35k (not a high earner by any stretch) - starting a business, paying for childcare etc.
Only then can debate begin.
And political parties must be compelled to publish their proposals both normalised to the NAO model specification and atomically for the inputs and outputs of specific effects of the rules, especially of housing rules.
In this way I could throw about ideas like my"basement benefit" contribution to a ring fenced home deposit scheme for all mature children living with parents whilst in work. This could be extended for those with parents over the age of fifty five, to build a capital cushion cover for care for parents, meeting with needs such as home modification and such things as mobility. Specifically I like the idea of subsidy for a station wagon or similar practical vehicle, for the adult carer if parents who are willing to give up their driving license.
EDIT: oh, what's a million or a billion between friends?
It's not a government proposal. It's not even a proposal of the opposition, or anyone who would potentially be in a position to actually enact it.
The headline isn't wrong, but the prominence the BBC has given it could trick people into thinking its an official (or at least serious unofficial) proposal.