Tax Havens

However, why shouldn't people pay for their own end of life care?
Well, yes, precisely my argument.
And the private sector is subsidising those unable to pay for their care home. However, people may get rid of much more of their money if they thought that the Government would take anything left when they died - and possibly leave themselves short of enough to pay for the amount of care they may need.

The majority of people work hard for themselves and their families, not for the good of the state; the amount of tax they pay throughout their working lives is their contribution to the nation. Many give substantial sums to charities too.

Taking any surplus that someone has earned and died before they can spend it is grave-robbing.

www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2016/04/12/we-have-a-right-to-know-who-is-committed-to-the-politics-of-jealousy-and-who-to-accountability/

This is Richard Murphy's take on Alan Duncan's statements. Alan Duncan is committed to the politics of jealousy. Otherwise he would not have said what he did.

Interesting that the Telegraph complains that Corbyn hasn't paid anything like as much tax as Cameron and Osborne.
One of the reasons they paid so much is because they have grace and favour houses and can take rent from letting out their own.
Should they not pay spare room tax on their Downing Street homes? After all, they are the equivalent of council houses.
I hope someone asks them.

grumppa- just how we feel- and yes, AFTER due tax is paid.

pogs Just a couple of points.

If inheritance tax was abolished then presumably the government would have a hole. Opt/out tax is not something possible within the UK tax system, and would make planning for the future quite difficult. The government would either have to make more cuts or find an alternative revenue stream.

I think your idea of class warfare is a tad dated, as is the suggestion that the left is somehow jealous of someone's wealth, quite a few people who support left wing ideology are vastly wealthy. What a large body of opinion in the country is concerned with and it is by no means restricted to left wing parties, is the fact that at the moment the tax system is not deemed to be fair. That is all that is wanted so hardly a revolutionary thought.

Of course Cameron was going to get it in the neck, the left and right wing press saw to that, both with different agendas , but nevertheless inevitable. The circus will move on, but some mud will stick, just ask Corbyn, Milliband and Major they are all victims of the same thing whether deemed fair or not, and we know that the press is never about fairness.

My concern as a voter and democrat is that there is clearly a gap between the stakeholders (the tax payers) and the extremely wealthy who appear to be buying political clout throughout the world without feeling the need or desire to have any stake in the society in the form of tax.

www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2016/04/12/caroline-lucas-demands-country-by-country-reporting/

Good for the Green party and Plaid Cymru.

www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2016/04/12/christian-aid-slams-eu-country-by-country-reporting-proposals/

I don't believe in elaborate estate planning to avoid Inheritance Tax, and I believe that as far as possible we should pay for our own care in later life. But for the life of me (by then the death of me) I can't see why any residue should not pass to my children and grandchildren, after IT has been paid.

Good point Jane if earning wealth and saving are no longer acceptable then the economy is on a downward spiral. I do sometimes wonder if all the things we have done to save for our retirement and help our children mean that we have been mugs. Maybe we should have been drinking, driving expensive cars, having lots of holidays and generally having a great time so the state can look after us.

Excellent idea daphnedil if you want to strangle all human effort and enterprise. The economy would nosedive so fast that we'd be looking to Greece for handouts! Thank God you're not the real Chancellor. Actually that might be the only reason I'd vote SNP as it would mean that England had even worse economic strategists than Scotland which is virtually unimaginable!

Jalima, I expect people would do more to dispose of their assets during their lifetime, which wouldn't be such a bad thing.

However, why shouldn't people pay for their own end of life care? Who else is supposed to pay for it? Why should the cost be borne by taxpayers, many of whom won't inherit anything and are already struggling, just so the children of wealthy people can inherit? If they want their inheritance, maybe they could earn it by looking after their parents at the end.

Nope! As far as I'm concerned life is from birth until death. People can do what they like when they're alive, but death should mean putting wealth back into the kitty for somebody else to earn it.

If we cannot pass on any honestly acquired money to our children or grandchildren, or to whomsoever we wish, then people will be looking for all kinds of schemes (possibly legal or possibly not) to pass on any money in their lifetime.

The care homes will be filled with people who will expect the state to pay and the homes will not be subsidised by private residents who at present pay through the nose.

I don't find the argument logical.

Brilliant speech by Corbyn:

scontent-fra3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xtl1/v/t1.0-9/12920484_824621170998708_1024189805622694871_n.jpg?oh=0731dbdb4450eee608272783608c8f00&oe=57BAD40E

I don't think wealth should pass from one generation to the next
Who should have anything that is left daphnedil, if we don't manage to spend it in our lifetime?
Should the Government claim our hard-earned, carefully saved cash?
I can think of no reason why the Government should have any money which has been honestly earned, taxed at source, taxed on purchases including housing, taxed, taxed, taxed all the way through our lives and which happens to have been saved to eke out our old age, for possible care home fees, funeral expenses etc and which has not been needed to be spent.
[astonished]
Blatant theft!!

I am not including moneys dishonestly or honestly acquired and on which the proper tax has not been paid.

Daphnedil

" I don't think wealth should pass from one generation to the next"

Then I can only surmise you would be the first one to 'opt in' to a voluntary, reduced threshold Inheritance Tax.

In fact you raise a proposal for another Tax that could be instigated. The 'opt in, Treasury Take It All Tax". Perhaps there should be a proviso the State would pay for all funeral costs and outstanding debts but providing there is enough to cover it then why not. I admit it is not for my liking but if that is your feeling on the matter then I won't argue with you.

I am sure any Chancellor of the Exchequer , The Treasury would be delighted with that tax.

Whitewave

Replace it with the 'opt in' Inheritance Tax and reducing the threshold. That would help those who are adament it is a good tax but don't have the opportunity to pay it because their estate is below the threshold do so.

After all we are determining it is a minority of wealthy individuals who are dodging the ball in some peoples minds. so maybe it would be offset by those who are only allowed to talk about it to engage in paying 40% of some of their estate on their death too.. We will know that those who are wealthy and shouting about others being devious can prove they are putting their money where their mouth is. It will appeal to those who are adamant it is not a jealousy of wealth to show their words are not hollow.

I understand why the attention is on the Tory Party and obviously Cameron at the moment but I also find the hypocrisy of the Opposition Benches, some commentators, some journalists et al astounding. If we wanted to engage in naming and shaming then there is plenty of information out there! . I will move away from party politics by mentioning the BBC. We are watching interviews being carried out, reports being given by presenters and journalists who may 'possibly' be doing the exact same thing as they are showing such indignation over, or 'possibly' worse. Has the pay structure of the BBC not been in the spotlight ? Or am I wrong.

As for Cameron I am sick to death of watching and listening to individuals time after b----y time calling him a tax avoider who has done something wrong , yet, when pinned down to answer honestly or say why they make that statement they admit he has not avoided tax and he has done nothing wrong. Then comes the BUT. The BUT is based on nothing illegal has happened. The BUT is based on class warfare. The BUT is based around a desire to change the system, fine but please stop with the single party offending rhetoric it simply diminishes any argument for change.

Well I truly believe that you should look after your hard earned savings and pass them on to the next generation to help them in life. There's nothing wrong with that aspiration. If govts feel that they have to tax this money which has already been taxed before being available to save then that's up to them. Double taxation isn't fair though.

Just listened to a programme about IHT and the comment was made that the people who thought it was fair were all the ones who would never have to pay it!

CGT on houses would be completely unfair to those who move for their jobs because all the other properties would have gone up in value too.

POGS, It wasn't your friend's father's FAULT that his house increased to £300,000. Equally, he hadn't worked for/earned the increase. There are plenty of people who live in areas of the country where house prices haven't increased exponentially. There are also plenty of people who stand to inherit nothing.

I truly believe that we come into this world as naked babies with nothing and that people make their own way in life. Some people will be lucky enough to have parents who can afford to pay for better housing, education, etc when you're a child, but then you're on your own. I don't think wealth should pass from one generation to the next.

How about charging Capital Gains Tax on houses? So if an estate includes a house which has tripled or quadrupled in value since it was bought, CGT could be charged on the profit. This was never 'earned' profit. I think a few beneficiaries might start squealing!

PS. Living people never pay inheritance tax. The estate of the deceased pays it, not the beneficiaries. Personally, I think once a person is dead, he/she doesn't need any money and the whole lot should be returned to the general economy/state :-o.

Nonnie, No need to patronise. I don't have a private pension, but I do have occupational pensions. I checked where they invest their money. The Teachers' Pension Fund doesn't invest anywhere, because the contributions are paid directly to the Treasury, who put it into the general 'pot'. My other two pension funds do indeed hold equities in overseas companies (in addition to a number of UK companies and property), but the difference is that I don't benefit personally from any tax avoidance (if there is any). They are defined benefit schemes and it's up to the fund managers to ensure that the money is there to make payments. The funds are transparent about where they invest and I can see that it's not through companies registered in 'tax havens'.

There's a huge difference between investing overseas, for example in an emerging economy or China, and in a fund deliberately set up to avoid UK tax for individuals.

I think it might be hard to find a way to get the same revenue from another source but how about ending Death Duties and putting up Rates for bigger houses? Yes, I meant to call them their real names!

OK let's accept that this tax should end, I have no problem with that. What do you suggest we replace it with?

Eloethan

You asked why I think Inheritence Tax is a shit tax. Because I don't agree with it, full stop.

I am no green eyed monster, I detest class warfare, I can't abide attacking wealth for the sheer joy of doing so. I do not care if when a person dies they have more wealth than I do.

I will give an example . I had a friend who's father died and not long before he had received a ' substantial ' sum for a work related disease that was the cause of his death, he suffered terribly . He had worked hard to provide for his family , bought them a home , obviously had a substantial amount in his bank , mainly due to his award. He in other words was caught in the Inheritance Tax trap.

It was not his fault he bought a 3 bed semi detatched home that increased to just under £300.000.00 in value, it was not his fault he slogged his guts out working to provide for his family and suffered an industrial disease that killed him. He was a typical hard working man , looked after his affairs and didn't piss his money or his life up a wall. All he would have wanted was for his children was to be passed on the fruit of his labour. What did he get, the Treasury taking 'it's fair share' and a very large share too.

Now you and others may not see any problem in the Treasury taking 'it's fair share' but I do. I think Inheritance Tax is a rapacious , money grabbing exercise by the government. I would scrap Inheritance Tax as it stands.

Perhaps there could be an 'opt in' Inheritance Tax for those who believe it is fair and want to support it . It could start at say £50.000.00 so that those who believe it is a good tax but at present cannot support paying into it because their estate doesn't mean they have to pay anything can do so. By opting in and lowering the threshold that could give those who believe in Inheritance Tax a platform to pay into it if they fall below the threshold now, it would dispel a widely held view they are only interested in taxing those who are better off than themselves and it is a good Socialist policy that they could sign up to outside of government interference. Perhaps I should proffer that idea on the DJ for Prime Minister thread.

When I mean political opponent I meant the politicians that I do find fun however I never take part it the back biting with grans if a different political persuasion, it isn't my scene at all.
And yes I think objectivity is generally good, but occasionally it is good to let your hair down and be as subjective as you like, but be prepared to be shot down in flames there are plenty of grans with guns permanently cocked.

white my point is that I am looking at the bigger picture. I am glad you get fun out of "targeting what you see as a political opponent" but that is not an attitude I find pleasant or would ever do. I prefer to be as objective as possible and only give my own opinions rather than trotting out the same old, same old which some on here do. I also answer questions asked of me rather than ignoring the ones I don't like and I don't attribute views to other which they have not shown.