Quick question - inheritance tax...
Discussion
Jim1556 said:
RobinOakapple said:
You have paid tax on it, possibly, but she hasn't. And btw, inheritance isn't a gift, if you want it to be a gift, then you will need to give it while you are still alive. Dead people are not able to give anything, or to do anything else apart from decompose.
1) The 7 year rule ignores gifts, whichever way you look at it, the government wants a chunk!2) As an employee, there's no possibly about it, I've always paid my tax (not like I have a choice with PAYE).
2) We don't know how much of your estate is due to house price inflation.
Toltec said:
JacquesMesrine said:
Toltec said:
So when did that come in? I thought it was £650K if the estate is that of a widow/er.
If someone is that fussed about these things, then said person should keep their knowledgeup to date before ranting. http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/mortgages/20...
Only slightly bitter this is going to cost me the equivalent of all I will earn for the next five years because they failed to honour an election promise five years ago.
For most people their house is their principal asset. If that is taken out of the equation IHT would only affect a tiny fraction of the population. When it was introduced it was a tax on the truly wealthy. Government then cottoned on to the fact that it could be used as a stealth weapon by flatly refusing to increase the threshold at which it operated. Such increases are were grudgingly allowed were few and far between. They also lagged far behind the rate of inflation. This tactic brought a very significant number of people for whom it was never originally intended within its reach.
The reason for this (which successive governments exploited) is house price escalation which massively distorts the national economy. The cause is a national housing shortage (the number of new builds in the last 25 years is woeful). Supply and demand makes the result inevitable. Couple that with a equally drastic reduction in social housing which distorts the rental market and pushes those prices as well and you have a perfect storm. The upshot is that saving for a deposit becomes more and more difficult. The chances of owning their own home is vastly reduced for today's younger generation compared with mine.
Jim1556 said:
Some people have issues with multi millionaires, but if they've earned that, think how much tax they've already paid on that!
I have no issues with multi millionaires. But I think the children of multi millionaires who inherit multi millions should be taxed on it. And I speak as someone whose children may well end up paying IHT, although hopefully we'll live long enough for my wife and I to blow most of my money in retirement. That's the plan.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
I have no issues with multi millionaires. But I think the children of multi millionaires who inherit multi millions should be taxed on it.
And I speak as someone whose children may well end up paying IHT, although hopefully we'll live long enough for my wife and I to blow most of my money in retirement. That's the plan.
It's an admirable sentiment, but I'd rather my family get everything I leave rather than the state...And I speak as someone whose children may well end up paying IHT, although hopefully we'll live long enough for my wife and I to blow most of my money in retirement. That's the plan.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Jim1556 said:
Some people have issues with multi millionaires, but if they've earned that, think how much tax they've already paid on that!
I have no issues with multi millionaires. But I think the children of multi millionaires who inherit multi millions should be taxed on it. And I speak as someone whose children may well end up paying IHT, although hopefully we'll live long enough for my wife and I to blow most of my money in retirement. That's the plan.
RobinOakapple said:
Burwood said:
It's not the same for someone who has, say 3-4M, has 3 kids under 10 and all the costs and worries to go with it.
The sympathy I feel for people in that unfortunate situation is difficult to express.RobinOakapple said:
Burwood said:
It's not the same for someone who has, say 3-4M, has 3 kids under 10 and all the costs and worries to go with it.
The sympathy I feel for people in that unfortunate situation is difficult to express.How many children under 10 lose both parents and get clobbered by IHT?
Most people don't leave and estate worthy of IHT. Those that do rarely have young children. Don't play the emotional blackmail card. In reality, we're talking about men and women 30+ inheriting large sums of money from parents.
BTW, I would be all in favour of orphaned children under 18 being IHT exempt. I doubt such a move would cost the govt much at all.
Burwood said:
RobinOakapple said:
Burwood said:
It's not the same for someone who has, say 3-4M, has 3 kids under 10 and all the costs and worries to go with it.
The sympathy I feel for people in that unfortunate situation is difficult to express.If you think you have a good point them make it without resorting to name calling.
RobinOakapple said:
The sympathy I feel for people in that unfortunate situation is difficult to express.
You soft bugger you!Taking that as an example, an estate worth £3m, both parents killed in an accident leaving 3 kids under 10.
IHT would be £940k (without complex accounting like trusts etc)...
£940,000 that the government is going to help themselves to!!!
Disgusting!
Burwood said:
this thread is like the religious threads- no moving someones opinion-well almost as bad. 
flogging a dead horse-time to move on.
It's always a good debate anyway - even though they are wrong!flogging a dead horse-time to move on.
Ricky Gervais said it best:
'There have been nearly 3000 Gods so far but only yours actually exists.The others are silly made up nonsense. But not yours. Yours is real...'
Jim1556 said:
RobinOakapple said:
The sympathy I feel for people in that unfortunate situation is difficult to express.
You soft bugger you!Taking that as an example, an estate worth £3m, both parents killed in an accident leaving 3 kids under 10.
IHT would be £940k (without complex accounting like trusts etc)...
£940,000 that the government is going to help themselves to!!!
Disgusting!
I'm not sure which is worse.RobinOakapple said:
You may have paid tax on it, but your daughter hasn't. All the money you pay to anybody has already had tax paid on it, when it transfers to someone else they have to pay tax on it too. That's how tax works.
Wow, I wonder on what knowledge basis you are saying that. I wonder it because just the other day, I was chatting to a tax advisor about this issue, and her point was that in the UK, IHT is taxed on the source, NOT on the beneficiary. So for example, if someone in the cayman islands or some jurisdiction with no IHT died, and left me a wedge of cash I wouldnt be taxed a penny on it. The UK doesn't tax the beneficiary, so taking that into consideration, you are utterly, and totally incorrect about your assertion that the money being transferred to someone else has to pay tax on it, the person who died (and yes already paid tax on it) is taxed again....
Burwood said:
you don't need the caymans-NZ and australia have zero IHT. go live there in retirement
Isn't the current tax rate at the highest rate at 49% in Australia? Plus there's all the hassle of being allowed to live there and gaining residence and it's the other side of the world, so your kids that you're so fond of are nearly 10,000 miles away. Still much more important to sacrifice everything to gain a little when you're dead. JacquesMesrine said:
Burwood said:
you don't need the caymans-NZ and australia have zero IHT. go live there in retirement
Isn't the current tax rate at the highest rate at 49% in Australia? Plus there's all the hassle of being allowed to live there and gaining residence and it's the other side of the world, so your kids that you're so fond of are nearly 10,000 miles away. Still much more important to sacrifice everything to gain a little when you're dead. HotJambalaya said:
Wow, I wonder on what knowledge basis you are saying that.
I wonder it because just the other day, I was chatting to a tax advisor about this issue, and her point was that in the UK, IHT is taxed on the source, NOT on the beneficiary. So for example, if someone in the cayman islands or some jurisdiction with no IHT died, and left me a wedge of cash I wouldnt be taxed a penny on it. The UK doesn't tax the beneficiary, so taking that into consideration, you are utterly, and totally incorrect about your assertion that the money being transferred to someone else has to pay tax on it, the person who died (and yes already paid tax on it) is taxed again....
If you're so convinced dead people pay the tax, then as none of them have complained about it after the event, we can safely assume they aren't bothered about it.I wonder it because just the other day, I was chatting to a tax advisor about this issue, and her point was that in the UK, IHT is taxed on the source, NOT on the beneficiary. So for example, if someone in the cayman islands or some jurisdiction with no IHT died, and left me a wedge of cash I wouldnt be taxed a penny on it. The UK doesn't tax the beneficiary, so taking that into consideration, you are utterly, and totally incorrect about your assertion that the money being transferred to someone else has to pay tax on it, the person who died (and yes already paid tax on it) is taxed again....
The fact is neither the dead person nor the recipient is taxed. The estate is taxed. And as for your assertion that tax has already been paid on it, we've already established that in many cases, with house price inflation, that isn't true. And even when it is, so what. Every time I pay vat, I am paying tax on money that's already been taxed. It's nothing special.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
If you're so convinced dead people pay the tax, then as none of them have complained about it after the event, we can safely assume they aren't bothered about it.
The fact is neither the dead person nor the recipient is taxed. The estate is taxed. And as for your assertion that tax has already been paid on it, we've already established that in many cases, with house price inflation, that isn't true. And even when it is, so what. Every time I pay vat, I am paying tax on money that's already been taxed. It's nothing special.
absolutely agree. Every penny I spend has already been taxed, yet when someone else relieves it they will have to pay tax on it, I'm paying VAT too. Often the taxed income that I'm spending goes in full to pay another form of tax, such as Council Tax, VED, stamp duty, then I've got my airport taxes, insurance premium tax and so on that I have to spend it on. The fact is neither the dead person nor the recipient is taxed. The estate is taxed. And as for your assertion that tax has already been paid on it, we've already established that in many cases, with house price inflation, that isn't true. And even when it is, so what. Every time I pay vat, I am paying tax on money that's already been taxed. It's nothing special.
I said it earlier in thread, but I think a fairly progressive tax on death is far fairer than flat rate taxes such as VAT or fuel duty. Plus, I have the benefit of not giving two hoots, as I'm dead. Let me pay all my taxes after I'm dead (and live tax free) by taxing the hell out of what I have left when I die and I'd be a happy man.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff