Inheritance tax

Well, millions of people do including millions who strive to improve their situation and at the end of the day have nothing to leave. Nevertheless they still struggle and many make an improvement, but not one that leaves them with any cash at the end of their lives.

Taxes are the price you pay for succeeding in improving your situation and your financial position.

Look around you. There are roads and schools and hospitals and civil order and rubbish collection, The energy infrastructure was built by state-owned companies. Much of this infrastructure is in poor order because governments have put personal greed over public interest and protection of the weak and failing comes second to letting the majority of the population pay less tax to win their votes.

If we want Scandinavian quality public services, and most do, we cannot get them if we have American tax rates. I am happy to pay taxes on my income, my investments and estate at death. I am fortunate to be in a position to do so.

Whitewavemark2, it is only one of the many advisory papers I know,

£125,000 would hit an awful lot of LP voters. It is not in the 21st Century a huge amount of money to be distributed amongst AC and GC.

Go after the multi-millionaires!!!

What Labour is addressing is the staggering wealth inequality in the UK.

So we know that the most wealthy receive the biggest %of breaks, and what I think needs looking at is the fairness of the tax system. Wealth inequality is undoubtedly underpinned by the inheritance tax relief, and it seems to be grossly unjustified to continue to operate the system as it is where the most wealthy can save millions on the assets left by a dead person. Using the tax loopholes by these extraordinarily wealthy individuals is costing the tax payer £2bn a year.

The OECD, recognising this problem, consider tackling inheritance tax the best way to deal with this wealth inequality, which is of course different from and far worse than income inequality. It recognises the fact that great wealth bring with it great power and entrenched inequality.
In the absence of taxation, this wealth will accumulate and bring with even greater power. Power which many now see as part of the elite who are being challenged, particularly by the populist parties.

Now, before everyone starts jumping up and down and screaming Marxists and other such tripe, bear in mind that this is at the moment ideas only, as a result of a report which looked at land ownership and its many conclusions and re commendations.

Nothing has yet been decided.

Monica

Not only on this thread.

Monica

Yes I have read Gillybob posts.

Monica I am sorry but I would totally begrudge paying IT on £125,000 and over.

We pay all our taxes (some we now have to pay upfront, which those on paye do not).

Labour are going after “easy targets”, why not go after the “big boys” Google, Amazon to name just 2!!

We have not spent the last 40yrs building up a business and saving whenever there was anything spare so that the LP can balance its books.

Might sound harsh, but that is how I feel.

Tax it when it is earned then tax it while it's invested then tax it again when you're dead? Why would anyone bother to strive to improve their situation?

Grannygravy If it increases in value due to the overall economic situation in the country why are they going to be penalised???

But why should they not pay part of these unearned and unexpected gains in tax to the government?

POGS Why would the next generation bother to work hard, maybe start a business, buy their own home, if all they are doing is working hard, paying their taxes and paying for the privilege by not being able to keep the reward or look after their families leaving the state to provide for those who genuinely can't. It is what millions of people who cannot afford houses do by perforce. It doesn't stop them working hard, starting businesses etc. Have you never read any of gillybob's posts.

Many of us had parents who have died in the last 60 years who as a result of buying houses had goodly sums to leave to their descendants. I have yet to hear that any of those were put off starting businesses or providing for their families

Labour are not suggesting taking away every penny a family has accumulated by the time they die, just a small part of it. My children and grandchildren will still inherit more than they would had we been less fortunate in jobs and inheritance.

I feel the same way as Monica on this. My children will be affected so that it is certainly not envy of others that makes me think this is a good way to try and reduce the inequality in our society. My husband is of the same mind.

It is not just money that is of value to our children and grandchildren, a secure welfare state and a more equal society is of equal importance for their future.

A very unequal society is a dangerous society, do we really want to end up with the most fortunate having to live in gated communities.

I can't see another way to address this other than taxation and if those of us who are more fortunate have to pay a bit more then so be it. Without the welfare state we would not have been so fortunate.

You cannot penalise people for buying their own home.

If it increases in value due to the overall economic situation in the country why are they going to be penalised???

Does the LP really want to see an exodus of entrepreneurs and small business owners?

????

What will the cost to the economy be if our money whether it be in property or savings is taken out of the equation?

Why would the next generation bother to work hard, maybe start a business, buy their own home, if all they are doing is working hard, paying their taxes and paying for the privilege by not being able to keep the reward or look after their families leaving the state to provide for those who genuinely can't.

I have no issue with Inheritance tax as it stands or the threshold lowered, I have no problem in having to pay for my own care should I require it but what is being proposed is not necessarily the right way to raise taxes as at some stage there will be nobody bothering to work to pay it. Nothing to work for let the government pay for my existence.

Possibly that is what is hoped by a Marxist Government who is determined to have the ' big state' where we are all clones who are submissive to our Leaders. Plenty of countries to show us how that system works.

gilly buying a house with money you are earning and paying tax on. The upkeep of the house with money you have earned/are earning and paid tax on

Yes we should all be treat the same . Let’s not forget many of our stately homes ended up in the NT etc. as they couldn’t pay the IT .

Surely we have only paid tax on the original cost of our home and not the final value which can in some areas can increase 10 fold or more ?

Will the Duke of Westminster be treated the same as the rest of us? Din't he manage to dodge massive IT when he inherited the "estate" so tell me why SHOULD that be allowed when people who have earned far less will be punished for wanting to leave enough for their families.

I see it as taking from the hard-working and prudent and giving to the feckless

Well there’s a surprise eazybee .... not !

I applaud your way of thinking M0nica I truly do .

I don't completely disagree with Inheritance Tax but I do feel a lifetime limit of £125,000 is low as it will knock back many working class families who worked hard to give their children a better start in life. This will not bother the very rich but could hold back working class kids.

Having been far more fortunate than most, which enabled us to give our DC a good education when state education hit its lowest level in the 1980s under Mrs Thatcher and support them through further education to good careers, plus we both inherited money from parents and god parents.

I think the very least I can do is help those who have not been so fortunate, apart from paying all tax due on my income, is pay a sum from my capital towards providing the government enough revenue to be able to expand the sadly shrunk welfare state.

Labour are not talking about confiscating money above £125,000 per recipient, just taking a share of it.

I think to do or think otherwise is selfish.

I don't approve of McDonnell's idea at all. I see it as taking from the hard-working and prudent and giving to the feckless.

My savings are from my own already taxed income. I don't think the state should be expected to provide care for me in my old age as I think I should pay for it myself. However, I don't think anything I have left should be taxed when I'm gone.
Two bites of my precious savings cherry? Cheerio Mr McDonnell.

I think there has to be IT,but I think it should be sensibly calculated.The richest of course wont pay because they will have "creative" accountants and trusts in place etc .For the ordinary man/woman who have just a home and a savings account then it would be very unfair to have that taken away.Unless the rich are treated exactly the same then its not workable .

My mother in law who died last week has left her house and savings to my younger daughter and three grandchildren.

It means my two granddaughters will have a deposit for a house , my grandson can pay off some of his mortgage,

Their father is a carpenter, he could never give them this financial help, my younger daughter and grandchildren are inheriting what would have been my husband had he lived .

My in-laws always worked and paid tax , why should it be taxed again

Sort of interesting but as our generation ruined the planet for the upcoming generations - is TAX really going to be in issue any time soon? There will be far more interesting things to worry about other than protecting assets so that the nasty government can't spend all that squirreled away cash on silly things like schools and hospitals and roads... Dear lord.

Inheritance tax is meant to redistribute wealth for the common good (rather than pass it on down the generations in rich families). I'm all in favour of that idea, despite the fact that my children will lose money. Of course, it's an unfair system as there are many legal ways to avoid paying or reduce the amount involved. Only certain types of property and possessions are counted e.g. houses, money in banks, cars etc.

This doesn't affect me as I don't have children but I think a lot of people who worked to buy their homes hoping to leave it to their children will be caught in this, as I recall many GNs were against having to use their property to fund care home fees for that reason