Inheritance tax revision
Discussion
Is this Sunak’s latest lie in his desperate attempt to buy votes?
How can people be dumb enough to believe a word any of them say? All political parties may as well write their manifestos on used toilet paper for the value they represent.
He claims the tax is unfair but it could be argued that poncing off others (in his case his father in law) is equally unfair.
How can people be dumb enough to believe a word any of them say? All political parties may as well write their manifestos on used toilet paper for the value they represent.
He claims the tax is unfair but it could be argued that poncing off others (in his case his father in law) is equally unfair.
They keep tempting us with this one don't they.
I'm sure Cameron promised to review or remove Inheritance tax a few years ago, then went back on it.
Judging by the state of the economy / debt / deficit, at the moment, I doubt very much if any parties will be reducing or removing any taxes in the near future.
I'm sure Cameron promised to review or remove Inheritance tax a few years ago, then went back on it.
Judging by the state of the economy / debt / deficit, at the moment, I doubt very much if any parties will be reducing or removing any taxes in the near future.
All it will do is enrage those for whom IHT isn't relevant and who will see 'rich' people getting richer. The fact that IHT is 40% tax on money that's already had tax paid on it over decades isn't taken into account. Perhaps 'revision' is designed to stop people drifting away from voting Conservative, but I think it will be counter-productive because it so clearly fuels the left.
Interesting that friends of oneself are called friends, whilst friends of people one doesn't like are called 'cronies'.
Interesting that friends of oneself are called friends, whilst friends of people one doesn't like are called 'cronies'.
There’s some interesting polling on this.
It’s a deeply unpopular tax, perceived as very “unfair”.
Even when you tell the participants the threshold and the fact that only 5% of estates will pay it, there’s still a decent majority against the tax - far more than who would support cutting income tax >£100k (which would impact a similar proportion of people)
There’s something broader about its perceived unfairness that cuts through. Interestingly I haven’t seen Labour come out strongly in opposition yet.
It’s a deeply unpopular tax, perceived as very “unfair”.
Even when you tell the participants the threshold and the fact that only 5% of estates will pay it, there’s still a decent majority against the tax - far more than who would support cutting income tax >£100k (which would impact a similar proportion of people)
There’s something broader about its perceived unfairness that cuts through. Interestingly I haven’t seen Labour come out strongly in opposition yet.
There is so much misinformation around inheritance tax. A married couple leaving their estate including a house to their children have a IHT allowance of £1M before IHT at 40% is payable. Maybe people think they will be caught for IHT but only a small proportion of the population have estates worth more than £1M especially after care costs.
Actual said:
There is so much misinformation around inheritance tax. A married couple leaving their estate including a house to their children have a IHT allowance of £1M before IHT at 40% is payable. Maybe people think they will be caught for IHT but only a small proportion of the population have estates worth more than £1M especially after care costs.
But a large percentage of the population are not married, or have no children or are divorced, in which case you can’t make use of the transferable inheritance tax nil rate.Bobtherallyfan said:
But a large percentage of the population are not married, or have no children or are divorced, in which case you can’t make use of the transferable inheritance tax nil rate.
Could cause some dilemma for choosing a beneficiary.Time to send your forgotten great aunt or uncle a Christmas card?
Simpo Two said:
All it will do is enrage those for whom IHT isn't relevant and who will see 'rich' people getting richer. The fact that IHT is 40% tax on money that's already had tax paid on it over decades isn't taken into account. Perhaps 'revision' is designed to stop people drifting away from voting Conservative, but I think it will be counter-productive because it so clearly fuels the left.
Interesting that friends of oneself are called friends, whilst friends of people one doesn't like are called 'cronies'.
We are “double taxed” on lots of things - VAT, council tax, VED, fuel duty, TV license, all paid out of taxed money. It’s very normal. Interesting that friends of oneself are called friends, whilst friends of people one doesn't like are called 'cronies'.
I’d love to know how much of the IHT tax receipts are made up of primary residences: Massive untaxed capital gain for many older people, especially in the SE.
It’s a very emotive tax, 96% of the population don’t pay it.
I think IHT should go up if anything. Wealth gap is a big problem and it suits Sunak to entrench it rather than fix it.
The most sensible suggestion I've seen is to simplify it by moving the tax burden from the deceased to the receiver. Treat it like any other capital gain.
Lucky enough to be extruded from a gilded uterus and a sole inheritor? Hefty tax bill for you.
The most sensible suggestion I've seen is to simplify it by moving the tax burden from the deceased to the receiver. Treat it like any other capital gain.
Lucky enough to be extruded from a gilded uterus and a sole inheritor? Hefty tax bill for you.
It's an easy vote winner or secured position for a number of voters . Late 50 onwards whole demographic will like it . It's false to say taxing the dead who cares. If you are old you want to leave as much as you can to your kids , so you will like it . There is the very real taxed twice argument too.
The retired group may be wavering from voting Tory, I know I am after only ever voting Tory all my life . But a few things will secure my vote and that , private pension changes and moving on the green stuff all appeals to me .I am back in.
That and the fact the opposition is even worse if that's possible.
The retired group may be wavering from voting Tory, I know I am after only ever voting Tory all my life . But a few things will secure my vote and that , private pension changes and moving on the green stuff all appeals to me .I am back in.
That and the fact the opposition is even worse if that's possible.
ILikeCake said:
I think IHT should go up if anything. Wealth gap is a big problem and it suits Sunak to entrench it rather than fix it.
The most sensible suggestion I've seen is to simplify it by moving the tax burden from the deceased to the receiver. Treat it like any other capital gain.
Lucky enough to be extruded from a gilded uterus and a sole inheritor? Hefty tax bill for you.
Have to say I'm with this. Significant inherited wealth is an issue that is a primary cause of inequality in modern society. Some people here will probably accuse me of being a communist but I would prefer to see a large increase in IHT coupled with investment in quality state-funded end-of-life care as being a good way to discourage people from holding onto all their accumulated wealth until they die. Spend it or give it away, but don't hoard it.The most sensible suggestion I've seen is to simplify it by moving the tax burden from the deceased to the receiver. Treat it like any other capital gain.
Lucky enough to be extruded from a gilded uterus and a sole inheritor? Hefty tax bill for you.
Car bon said:
It needs to be properly reformed and not just abolished IMHO
What most people miss is that the seriously wealthy avoid most of their IHT as they plan for it and it moves through the generations.
It's a very selective tax, property is hit, but money in SIPP's is exempt etc.
I agree. IHT, if we are going to have this tax, should be levied on total assets not a selective number of them.What most people miss is that the seriously wealthy avoid most of their IHT as they plan for it and it moves through the generations.
It's a very selective tax, property is hit, but money in SIPP's is exempt etc.
R.
I think the widespread unpopularity of IHT( despite so few estates paying it) is driven by a few narratives
a) That a family’s grief and sadness on losing a loved one shouldn’t be a payday for HMRC
b) That the state taxing you along the way is OK, but appropriating what you already own (having paid your taxes) is deeply unfair
c) A belief that it’s widely avoided by “the rich” and so it hits “ordinary people”
I think the relatively high 40% rate contributes to this - the line against IHT goes
“You work hard all your life and pay your taxes, but then when you die the state takes 40% of everything you own; but not if you’re really rich”
The consensus in the policy wonk world seems to be the middle ground solution is
- Lower the headline rate to c25%
- Remove the piles of exemptions (such as AIM shares, business property, farms and woodlands, foreign property of non-doms, etc.)
a) That a family’s grief and sadness on losing a loved one shouldn’t be a payday for HMRC
b) That the state taxing you along the way is OK, but appropriating what you already own (having paid your taxes) is deeply unfair
c) A belief that it’s widely avoided by “the rich” and so it hits “ordinary people”
I think the relatively high 40% rate contributes to this - the line against IHT goes
“You work hard all your life and pay your taxes, but then when you die the state takes 40% of everything you own; but not if you’re really rich”
The consensus in the policy wonk world seems to be the middle ground solution is
- Lower the headline rate to c25%
- Remove the piles of exemptions (such as AIM shares, business property, farms and woodlands, foreign property of non-doms, etc.)
Gassing Station | Finance | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff