Time to tackle the rentier economy.

A supertax for the super rich sounds fair.
No one needs millions in the bank.
And tax evaders should be made to pay up too.
The ordinary worker never gets away with owing tax.

Surprise, surprise!! Donald Trump is not a fan of social housing.

Don’t Call Trump’s Housing Order a YIMBY Plan

www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-06-26/trump-s-housing-order-could-worsen-affordability

Social housing so that people don't have to spend a disproportionate amount of their income on rent.

Find the super rich first and then tax them.

Perhaps people are posting about their own experiences because they feel they are being targeted.

toscalily YES!!!
I wonder why people can only post about their own experiences. If there are people on GN who have huge amounts of cash in property or investments they are a rarity. Never mind what you will or won't leave, what can be done to narrow the gap between the poor and the superrich? I do believe social housing at reasonable rents would help after all its how many of our parents lived and it gave us our first chance.

We've never inherited much.
I bought myself a small secondhand ( fourth hand) car with my inheritance and DH's bit from his mother, who had lived on the poverty line until her last two or three years, went to pay off the rest of our mortgage after our endowment failed.
I do have friends who have inherited larger sums from their parents but I don't begrudge them a bit.

It's the tax evaders I would target.
I think that 40% tax on inheritance over a certain level is more than fair, particularly as many countries do not have death taxes.

People claim the right to wealth because they worked for it! ?
What’s the point of working then?

Any one else get fed up with the copy box copies of the copy boxes?

I do wonder what people’s ideas of inheriting loads is. Have you got an amount that suddenly goes from acceptable to unacceptable?

I know what mine is.

Fennel

I inherited a small amount from my parents, my husband, nothing from his.
Before he died my Dad said he knew that he could transfer their home into our names but thought that was fraudulent. Anyway the value of the house ( a very modest one) could pay for Mum's future care as she was younger than him and died much later. Which was what happened. We sold the house to pay for her care.
As for those who make huge profits from inheritance, I'm not going to comment. Except to say they should be taxed at a much higher rate.
The problem has got worse over the last ?30 years because of the distorted inflation of real estate values.

Yes, it has got worse. And, yes, I think people who inherit loads should be taxed at a much higher rate.

I inherited a small amount from my parents, my husband, nothing from his.
Before he died my Dad said he knew that he could transfer their home into our names but thought that was fraudulent. Anyway the value of the house ( a very modest one) could pay for Mum's future care as she was younger than him and died much later. Which was what happened. We sold the house to pay for her care.
As for those who make huge profits from inheritance, I'm not going to comment. Except to say they should be taxed at a much higher rate.
The problem has got worse over the last ?30 years because of the distorted inflation of real estate values.

icanhandthemback

We live off the rental income we get and there isn't enough left to save. As such, any of our spending helps the economy. It is not a vast amount but at least we can keep our heads above water. The money we invested in the house, had we lived off it, would not have gone far so we would be on benefits by now. I can't help thinking that there is an awful lot of sour grapes about unearned income however there are some mega rich people out there who could probably be taxed more.

Are you sure you'd be "on benefits" now? Do you know how little you have to have to be eligible for benefits?

icanhandthemback

We live off the rental income we get and there isn't enough left to save. As such, any of our spending helps the economy. It is not a vast amount but at least we can keep our heads above water. The money we invested in the house, had we lived off it, would not have gone far so we would be on benefits by now. I can't help thinking that there is an awful lot of sour grapes about unearned income however there are some mega rich people out there who could probably be taxed more.

I guess I'm one of the "sour grapes" people.

As it happens, my former husband will become a multi-millionaire (a few times over) when his mother dies . My children will very probably inherit some of it.

For all I know, my former mother-in-law is a member of GN and I make no secret of the fact that I thoroughly despise the woman and what she did to her son (my former husband) and the rift she's caused with my own children. Of course they're not going to upset Grandma because she signs the cheques.

However, I'm also mature enough to know that life's too short to be angry and be consumed by a sour grape attitude. I actually feel a bit sorry for people who think the only purpose in life is to leave something for children when you're dead.

I still think from a social justice and macro-economic point of view, large inheritances are bad.

MaizieD

Callistemon

£500,000:

With care home fees running at about £1,200 per week per person, if both parents needed to go into a care home that wouldn't last long.

So, what's the problem? Parents are catered for their old age, nothing left for children to inherit.

Goodness, we're all making heavy weather of this. It's 'nice' to be able to inherit something, but it's not a flipping God given right.

Posters are recommending giving it away to your children in your lifetime which amounts to the same thing as leaving them an inheritance.
Most people don't need care so there remains the thorny problem of inheritance again.

Yes, I may be making heavy weather out of it because it's not simple.

What is simple is that the rich fail to pay billions in tax and, if they did, ordinary people who have been careful and don't want to see their children struggle as they did would not be targeted.

icanhandthemback you are making your money work for you in a way that suits you best. May it continue to do so.

We live off the rental income we get and there isn't enough left to save. As such, any of our spending helps the economy. It is not a vast amount but at least we can keep our heads above water. The money we invested in the house, had we lived off it, would not have gone far so we would be on benefits by now. I can't help thinking that there is an awful lot of sour grapes about unearned income however there are some mega rich people out there who could probably be taxed more.

Callistemon

£500,000:

With care home fees running at about £1,200 per week per person, if both parents needed to go into a care home that wouldn't last long.

So, what's the problem? Parents are catered for their old age, nothing left for children to inherit.

Goodness, we're all making heavy weather of this. It's 'nice' to be able to inherit something, but it's not a flipping God given right.

£500,000:

With care home fees running at about £1,200 per week per person, if both parents needed to go into a care home that wouldn't last long.

the need to tax large fortunes

There is a system in place to do so.

There is no way I am leaving my savings to be captured by the taxman to be given to people who have led the high life and spent.

Why should you make that very strange assumption, craftyone?

Anway, the taxman only wants 40% of whatever you leave over £500,000 (assuming part of your legacy is a house). Not all of it...

The OP was about the tax system being changed but it is not the system at fault - it is that some who are extremely rich are able to dodge round it.

growstuff

Maizie Alt codes ç (Alt + 0231)

Thanks ?

I don`t think I am so unusual. My parents were incredibly hard working but very poor eg we used to buy one egg to make a cake. I was the oldest of seven and we were all given aspirations by our parents and were fortunate to live by a library. We all ended up in professional jobs

My husband was similar but his father had a regular wage, working in a docklands factory in liverpool. We saved, while engaged, lived with our own parents and scraped enough for a deposit and a mortgage. We took various exams and went through all the stresses of ladder climbing, while rearing 3 children. Anything we had was hard earned

Now I am comfortable because I was also a saver and a sensible investor. There is no way I am leaving my savings to be captured by the taxman to be given to people who have led the high life and spent. My children have already had dollops, all invested into their homes. My grandchildren have no idea but they have all had dollops too. More dollops will follow and my house can be surety for potential care. Maybe I will have one last house move, who knows and that is when I will be able to work out my finances, finally. Maybe by then we will have care insurances

If they were not using the money wisely then there would be no dollops

If you're on a tablet you can hold your finger on the vowel and a box appears.

ėęèéěëēəĕě

I don't know what some of them are.

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.

How many Gnetters have houses worth more than £500,000 Callistomen?

I realise that in some parts of the country they 'might', but even so, isn't £500,000 (plus 60% of the balance) a reasonable amount to pass on?

Relatively few people pay IHT; I think some of you are getting steamed up unnecessarily...

growstuff other people’s children will benefit 40% of ours and anybody’s estate which is over the IT threshold under current tax law.