9.9bn Quid, 0% tax. Tell me PH, How is this fair?

[Oakey]

Vizsla said:

Distant relatives who the deceased probably didn't know from Adam, might as well leave it to ones favourite charity, what's so magical about distant biological links? Btw, nice one Mum, good luck if it happens.

My mum was one of, I think it was 12, distant relatives who were to benefit from this. The other upside was that it brought her together with new relatives who previously she'd never met. They all still stay in touch now and it's helped fill in some of the family tree she'd been putting together over the last few years.

[sugerbear]

Oakey said:

Vizsla said:

Distant relatives who the deceased probably didn't know from Adam, might as well leave it to ones favourite charity, what's so magical about distant biological links? Btw, nice one Mum, good luck if it happens.

My mum was one of, I think it was 12, distant relatives who were to benefit from this. The other upside was that it brought her together with new relatives who previously she'd never met. They all still stay in touch now and it's helped fill in some of the family tree she'd been putting together over the last few years.

Was it 9 billion though ? and did she manage to avoid IHT by virtue of it being put into a trust?

I really would love to hear some peoples tales of IHT woes on here. if you can take them with #FWP that would be a real help

[PurpleMoonlight]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Being divorced or lifelong single makes you more likely to fall in the group that doesn't pay any IHT due to not having enough.

What a strange thing to state.

[Oakey]

sugerbear said:

Was it 9 billion though ? and did she manage to avoid IHT by virtue of it being put into a trust?

I really would love to hear some peoples tales of IHT woes on here. if you can take them with #FWP that would be a real help

It was a property that sold for £300k so exempt from IHT. Unfortunately it hadn't been maintained but if it had it'd have been more like £500k.

[Halb]

As an amendment to the above question, does the tax impact land and businesses?

[johnfm]

BJG1 said:

johnfm said:

What I find most amusing in his whole thread is the insistence that being comfortable without having to work is a bad thing.

Don't think anyone has suggested this.

If you read a few pages back there is someone suggesting that 'having a mortgage for 25 years gives one a sense of achievement and satisfaction when you pay it off", a further back someone decrying people who inherit money "without having to do anything" and quite a few comments about taxing all this "unearned income".

There is no badge of honour for working for money. That's no great life achievement - though agree it is preferable that healthy people work to pay for the things they want I don't see why those fortunate enough to never have to work should be singled out as somehow lesser than the worker bee because they don't work in the traditional sense (or at all).

Edited by johnfm on Monday 22 August 16:22

[RYH64E]

Halb said:

As an amendment to the above question, does the tax impact land and businesses?

Shares in family businesses are exempt, afaik.

[Randy Winkman]

johnfm said:

There is no badge of honour for working for money. That's no great life achievement - though agree it is preferable that healthy people work to pay for the things they want I don't see why those fortunate enough to never have to work should be singled out as somehow lesser than the worker bee because they don't work in the traditional sense (or at all).

Edited by johnfm on Monday 22 August 16:22

I thought the suggestion was that the people in question benefit from having achieved something. Not that others should see them as better.

[ellroy]

RYH64E said:

Shares in family businesses are exempt, afaik.

Trading business typically are, so many family firms fall under this, but a property business or a family investment company would not be exempt.

I'd suggest anyone who has specific questions around this complex area go take professional advice rather than getting half answers on her.

[Mr Whippy]

ellroy said:

RYH64E said:

Shares in family businesses are exempt, afaik.

Trading business typically are, so many family firms fall under this, but a property business or a family investment company would not be exempt.

I'd suggest anyone who has specific questions around this complex area go take professional advice rather than getting half answers on her.

I do worry when there is a potential liability of hundreds of thousands of pounds, possibly more, on millions of pounds of inheritance, and people don't *already* have a plan as those twilight years approach!

[Jockman]

Mr Whippy said:

I do worry when there is a potential liability of hundreds of thousands of pounds, possibly more, on millions of pounds of inheritance, and people don't *already* have a plan as those twilight years approach!

I don't know anyone with that size of liability who doesn't have a plan.

Remember the future is a moving object. Plans need to be reviewed regularly. Care Home fees can wipe out many inheritances.

[Welshbeef]

Jockman said:

I don't know anyone with that size of liability who doesn't have a plan.

Remember the future is a moving object. Plans need to be reviewed regularly. Care Home fees can wipe out many inheritances.

Care homes £70k MIn a year for 2 then add on normal living costs above than and gobble gobble before you know it its all gone.

[HoHoHo]

DELETED: Comment made by a member who's account has been deleted.

It's an interesting exercise that's for sure and I don't understand the entire process and it can get very complicated but as I understand it:

In short everything has a value and if that means getting it valued then that's the road you go down,

The total is then subject to IT as per guidelines (an amount per person and doubled if your parents are still married when one passes on)

The estate goes into probate and once all of the paperwork etc. is done you get presented with a bill which is due to be paid to the tax man

If you can't pay it without selling something then you have to sell it.

You can avoid paying some tax and I have for example got a huge amount in trust for my wife and children which means it's out of my estate. I also have a business and commercial property which will shortly be placed in trust (all legal and above board).

[walm]

HoHoHo said:

You can avoid paying some tax and I have for example got a huge amount in trust for my wife and children which means it's out of my estate. I also have a business and commercial property which will shortly be placed in trust (all legal and above board).

Like the Duke of Westminster, then.

[HoHoHo]

walm said:

HoHoHo said:

You can avoid paying some tax and I have for example got a huge amount in trust for my wife and children which means it's out of my estate. I also have a business and commercial property which will shortly be placed in trust (all legal and above board).

Like the Duke of Westminster, then.

Perhaps a few less 0's but in essence, yes.

[Vizsla]

Welshbeef said:

Jockman said:

I don't know anyone with that size of liability who doesn't have a plan.

Remember the future is a moving object. Plans need to be reviewed regularly. Care Home fees can wipe out many inheritances.

Care homes £70k MIn a year for 2 then add on normal living costs above than and gobble gobble before you know it its all gone.

Yep, being alive costs! I know many people who are outraged that one has to pay Care Home costs out of ones assets ('it's not fair, why be prudent when wastrels get it for free' etc), but how many would be willing to pay higher income tax or hugely increased NI contributions during their working life so that Care Homes are 'free' to all?

No tax is ever popular and we're all selfish to varying degrees: 'pay more tax for a better NHS' is never going to be a vote winner as most people are not ill most of the time, but oh my, how it's suddenly a big issue when they need it.

[sidicks]

Vizsla said:

Yep, being alive costs! I know many people who are outraged that one has to pay Care Home costs out of ones assets ('it's not fair, why be prudent when wastrels get it for free' etc), but how many would be willing to pay higher income tax or hugely increased NI contributions during their working life so that Care Homes are 'free' to all?

No tax is ever popular and we're all selfish to varying degrees: 'pay more tax for a better NHS' is never going to be a vote winner as most people are not ill most of the time, but oh my, how it's suddenly a big issue when they need it.

Eh?

All parties have repeatedly argued that they will spend £xm more on the NHS, to try and win votes.

In the moan, the people voting for such things aren't the ones who will pick up the bill!

[Vizsla]

sidicks said:

Vizsla said:

Yep, being alive costs! I know many people who are outraged that one has to pay Care Home costs out of ones assets ('it's not fair, why be prudent when wastrels get it for free' etc), but how many would be willing to pay higher income tax or hugely increased NI contributions during their working life so that Care Homes are 'free' to all?

No tax is ever popular and we're all selfish to varying degrees: 'pay more tax for a better NHS' is never going to be a vote winner as most people are not ill most of the time, but oh my, how it's suddenly a big issue when they need it.

Eh?

All parties have repeatedly argued that they will spend £xm more on the NHS, to try and win votes.

In the moan, the people voting for such things aren't the ones who will pick up the bill!

I can't remember any party having the slogan 'pay more tax for a better NHS' or for that matter anything else which even hinted at the need to pay more taxes. Spend more, certainly, but tax more to pay for it, political suicide. It might be a vote winner with the non-taxpayer minority, but it would scare the hell out of every taxpayer! Or are you suggesting that non-taxpayers are the majority of voters?

[walm]

Vizsla said:

I can't remember any party having the slogan 'pay more tax for a better NHS' or for that matter anything else which even hinted at the need to pay more taxes.

2015
Tory manifesto: £8bn more for the NHS every year up to 2020.

Since the NHS budget was already forecast to include growth - this was truly "extra".

So where did you think it was coming from?

Either:
1. More tax.
Or
2. Less spending elsewhere. i.e. services being cut and people fired - which is clearly going to be quite taxing for them!

I don't remember the manifesto saying exactly which services would be slashed nor any "get crappier schools for a better NHS" or "fewer policemen for a better NHS" but it's either that or more taxes.
Or realistically BOTH.

[sidicks]

Vizsla said:

I can't remember any party having the slogan 'pay more tax for a better NHS' or for that matter anything else which even hinted at the need to pay more taxes. Spend more, certainly, but tax more to pay for it, political suicide. It might be a vote winner with the non-taxpayer minority, but it would scare the hell out of every taxpayer! Or are you suggesting that non-taxpayers are the majority of voters?

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jul/16/poll-raise-taxes-nhs-funding

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-96659/Labo...

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labo...

Etc