Time to tackle the rentier economy.

growstuff

GrannyGravy13

Growstuff whatever inheritance our AC and GC receive will more than likely be spent fairly quickly. If it is on home improvements, furnishings, cars, holidays or University it will be circulating and benefiting both them and whoever provides the products or services.

Great! So let it circulate amongst other people's children too. Why should yours have an advantage?

growstuff but it will circulate amongst other people's children if they do any of the work, manufacture and sell any of the goods purchased, thus others will benefit from the spending by those inheriting.
It will keep people in work.

And, unless those benefitting indirectly are tax dodgers, then tax will be paid on work done, goods purchased etc.

Maizie Alt codes ç (Alt + 0231)

I'm intensely relaxed with the status quo as far as inheritance tax is concerned.

What I do want is tax dodgers to be made to pay their dues instead of hiding their money or escaping overseas.
The Greens, the Bezos, the Jimmy Carrs of this world.

GrannyGravy13

Growstuff whatever inheritance our AC and GC receive will more than likely be spent fairly quickly. If it is on home improvements, furnishings, cars, holidays or University it will be circulating and benefiting both them and whoever provides the products or services.

Great! So let it circulate amongst other people's children too. Why should yours have an advantage?

dramatic, damn it....

You could argue that there is little point building up a business, buying a home or saving if on your death it is dissipated into the ether.

Well, you could also argue that a) your business provides you with an income, b) you live in your house and c) apart from saving for a rainy day, no, not much point..

'Dissipated into the ether is a trifle dramtic; IHT isn't 100%.

There are allowances

In addition to the standard rate of Inheritance tax relief, which sits at £325,000, an allowance for family homes that are passed on to direct descendants (children and grandchildren) was also introduced which started at £100,000 in 2017 and increased to £175,000 for the tax year 2020/21.

So this tax year (2020/21) is the final year of the major increases to the property portion of the allowance, that finish up with a total allowance of £500,000.

www.uktaxallowances.com/inheritance-tax-increase-2020-21/

The balance is taxed at 40%

So there is a soupcon left for your heirs... (how do you get an accent into UK text?)

I don't think that inheritance tax is going to greatly affect most Gnetter's children...

Growstuff whatever inheritance our AC and GC receive will more than likely be spent fairly quickly. If it is on home improvements, furnishings, cars, holidays or University it will be circulating and benefiting both them and whoever provides the products or services.

pen50

At the time that Jackie Stewart moved to Switzerland he would have been taxed at - in fact - 98%, made up of 83% income tax and 15% investment income surcharge. This was the cause of the brain drain which incentivised a vast swathe of high earners to get the hell out of the UK. The IIS was the first to be dropped, then Mrs T's governments reduced the top rate of tax to 60% and then 40%. The total tax take increased dramatically with both those changes.

You are forgetting that the likes of Jackie Stewart would have received tax relief on their pension premiums and mortgage interest at their marginal rate. Back in the 70s I worked on the tax returns of various wealthy people (mostly those without inherited wealth) and they still managed to have a lifestyle that most people couldn't achieve.

Callistemon

Many people only have the value of their house so, if they dont want to take out dodgy equity release, how dan they give enough to their children to help them?

There is an upper limit on gifts anyway, which has never been updated.

Exactly! Most people don't have extra cash. Others, however, have loads - and in many cases, they haven't earned it themselves. They inherited it.

Don't you think everybody would like the chance of leaving an inheritance, but there's fat chance that some people will ever be able to leave anything? Does that mean their lives have been worthless, according to your logic?

Many people only have the value of their house so, if they dont want to take out dodgy equity release, how dan they give enough to their children to help them?

There is an upper limit on gifts anyway, which has never been updated.

GrannyGravy13

Dinahmo yes there are several avenues open regarding handing down to your children and grandchildren

I just get miffed that as far as some posters on GN are concerned anyone who wishes to leave an inheritance is committing the crime of the century!!!

Don't exaggerate! Of course it's not the crime of the century, but it's still increases inequality, which isn't good for social justice or the economy as a whole.

Callistemon

^If you're clever there's several things you can do^

And there we have it! The rich will always find ways around paying their due taxes by employing expensive accountants and finance experts, setting up trust funds for their heirs. Even die hard Labour politicians did that.

Those striving to achieve, to put a little aside for a comfortable old age, dutifully paying their taxes every step of the way but hoping there may be something left to help their children to get a foothold in life are always the ones targeted.

So close the loopholes! Where's there's a will (there isn't), there's a way.

Dinahmo yes there are several avenues open regarding handing down to your children and grandchildren

I just get miffed that as far as some posters on GN are concerned anyone who wishes to leave an inheritance is committing the crime of the century!!!

If you're clever there's several things you can do

And there we have it! The rich will always find ways around paying their due taxes by employing expensive accountants and finance experts, setting up trust funds for their heirs. Even die hard Labour politicians did that.

Those striving to achieve, to put a little aside for a comfortable old age, dutifully paying their taxes every step of the way but hoping there may be something left to help their children to get a foothold in life are always the ones targeted.

I see you've just suggested the same Dinahmo and know much more about tax than I do.

What's interesting about this and similar threads is the number of people that have been complaining about the Duke of Westminster and tax avoidance but don't want IHT to be deducted from their estates.

In fact the Grosvenor Estates Trust does pay tax on income and gains and the family would have paid IHT on inheritances from the previous Duke on assets outside the family trusts.

You should really be complaining about those companies who don't pay the full amount of tax due in the UK because of offshore operations.

GrannyGravy13

growstuff

Inheritance makes nonsense of any idea of meritocracy and any arguments that poverty is caused by laziness and fecklessness are blown out of the water.

Many people with very little strive to leave something for their children or grandchildren. Should they be denied that privilege?

I have not seen any comments on this thread accusing people of being lazy or feckless

You could argue that there is little point building up a business, buying a home or saving if on your death it is dissipated into the ether.

No, you have the use of the money while you're alive and will be able to use the money for a better lifestyle. You can (and probably have) use the money to make your children's lives better while you're alive.

Why should the children of those who have nothing to leave have a harder start in life than those who've inherited their parents' wealth?

How about cutting income tax, so people keep what they earn during their lives and can spend it as they wish - and then taking away the surplus when people die, so that everybody starts from the same starting point?

GrannyGravy13

growstuff

Inheritance makes nonsense of any idea of meritocracy and any arguments that poverty is caused by laziness and fecklessness are blown out of the water.

Many people with very little strive to leave something for their children or grandchildren. Should they be denied that privilege?

I have not seen any comments on this thread accusing people of being lazy or feckless

You could argue that there is little point building up a business, buying a home or saving if on your death it is dissipated into the ether.

No one is suggesting that you can't leave something to your family. If you're clever there's several things that you can do.

GrannyGravy13

Sueki44

No one seems to have mentioned inheritance tax. We paid 40% on everything over £300+ when both sets of parents died. As the remainder was shared between 10-12 each time it wasn’t a fortune. This was on top of £78, ooo a year care home fees for parent with Alzheimer’s and vascular dementia. How come if you get cancer treatment is free but Alzheimer’s will often cost You your house and savings.

I agree it is terribly unfair that Alzheimer’s, Vascular Dementia and Dementia are treated totally differently to other terminal diseases.

I feel very strongly that what DH has accrued through hard work (and yes I know lots of people work hard for very little return) should be inherited by our children not the government of the day.

He (we) have paid all taxes on the business along with personal taxes on income, investments and pensions, and when we die we get taxed on that!!!!

The level of our income tax is quite low compared with some other European countries and that is one reason why people are able to accrue wealth. IHT is a better solution in some ways because it is taken from your estate and so won't affect you, rather than you having a larger income to spend or save as you see fit.

Furthermore, for most people of our age their wealth comes from an increase in property values. We could have be an example in that we bought a house in South London for £18,500 in 1979. it was a wreck and we did it up ourselves so the final cost was probably about £29,000. Had we stayed in that house we would now own property worth around £1,250,000. That increase has nothing to do with our cleverness, or nouse or whatever you'd like to call it.

We're not an example however, because we moved to Suffolk and from there to France. In the former prices are a long way behind London and in the case of the latter, prices have stagnated.

growstuff

Inheritance makes nonsense of any idea of meritocracy and any arguments that poverty is caused by laziness and fecklessness are blown out of the water.

Many people with very little strive to leave something for their children or grandchildren. Should they be denied that privilege?

I have not seen any comments on this thread accusing people of being lazy or feckless

You could argue that there is little point building up a business, buying a home or saving if on your death it is dissipated into the ether.

Inheritance makes nonsense of any idea of meritocracy and any arguments that poverty is caused by laziness and fecklessness are blown out of the water.

NoddingGanGan

I am somewhat amused by the assertion up thread that we are a country with "a tradition of home ownership" . I think you'll find that home ownership, except among the upper and upper middle class, is a relatively new trend.
Until WW2 it was very rare for the working and lower middle classes to own their own home and in the middle middle stratum it was about 50/50.
I am reminded of a line from, "Brief Encounter" where one very middle class female characer remarks to another (and they all seem to employ cook/housekeepers) "I'd been to see Bob's solicitor about renewing the lease on the house".
I think we're just moving back a century with regards to home ownership.

We're also moving back a century - and more - on equality.

GrannyGravy13

growstuff

Why you’ve had use of the money while your alive. It’s not yours to control when your dead

No it’s whoever I bequeath it to to spend/invest as they see fit, not the Government of the day. As often pointed out by several posters on the political threads the government hasn’t got any money of its own, so it doesn’t need mine!

I could of course spend every last penny and let the State take care of me in my twilight years?

You could! Maybe you should!

Why do your children deserve any more money than those whose parents don't have any?

It really is only your money while you're alive. It should go back into the mythical "pot" when you have no further use of it.

This is the root cause of inequality, not because some people are more/less deserving than others.

I am somewhat amused by the assertion up thread that we are a country with "a tradition of home ownership" . I think you'll find that home ownership, except among the upper and upper middle class, is a relatively new trend.
Until WW2 it was very rare for the working and lower middle classes to own their own home and in the middle middle stratum it was about 50/50.
I am reminded of a line from, "Brief Encounter" where one very middle class female characer remarks to another (and they all seem to employ cook/housekeepers) "I'd been to see Bob's solicitor about renewing the lease on the house".
I think we're just moving back a century with regards to home ownership.