IHT- how to avoid if you have enough wealth

Very few estates are liable for IHT, I guess that's partly because the vet wealthy knows how to avoid. Couples can have an estate worth £1 million and still have no liability.

Mollygo

Does everything have to be a dig at Labour governments old and new?

I mentioned Kenneth Clarke, who was a Conservative, just in case you weren’t aware. I’m happy to share the blame where it applies to both.

I have never condoned some of the actions of the previous government, and I don’t understand the need to protect the current one from well deserved criticism.

Now you've mentioned Kenneth Clarke, Mollygo, it's made me think of who Keir Starmer reminds me of. It's been niggling me because I couldn't put my finger on it.

Yes, Kenneth Clarke in some ways, but probably no-one else will agree. A "Steady as you go" type demeanour.

Having a fantastic holiday in Galapagos. The experts here say that things climate wise are improving and that without tourism which employs 80 per cent of young people the country would plunge into poverty. Sad that so many are eaten with jealousy. Raining on parade is a synonymous phrase for sticking in the knife and assuaging my resentments!

Are you really in the Galápagos Rondoallaturc?
Because I am and am on the Silver Origin. Which ship are you on? Or are you doing land/ferry holiday?

Thank you to those who have wished me a lovely holiday.
It’s definitely a once in a lifetime trip.
We’re not avoiding IHT with this trip, as at the moment we don’t have enough to pay INT, but who knows what the budget in October might bring?

Cadenza, bear in mind the singletons.
IHT starts at £500K and many, me included, will find their house takes them there( modest semi in the SE)
I am not complaining about this, merely reminding everyone that the £1 million sum ( which does sound as if it applies only to the wealthy) applies to couples, not the long - divorced.

Chocolatelovinggran yes 👍

Agree CLG.
It’s our house in the south that could eventually take us over the limit for IHT. I’m concerned about that. We’re not rich, we were both teachers, but we have some savings and we both inherited small legacies from our parents. We’re not liable for IHT now but I wondering if the budget will change IHT so that we become liable. For example, the additional amount for home owners could be abolished which would pull us into liability. This is a big concern for ordinary people such as ourselves.

Chocolatelovinggran

Cadenza, bear in mind the singletons.
IHT starts at £500K and many, me included, will find their house takes them there( modest semi in the SE)
I am not complaining about this, merely reminding everyone that the £1 million sum ( which does sound as if it applies only to the wealthy) applies to couples, not the long - divorced.

Agreed.

The home bit is unfair not only by homes in South - nobody considers many homes that are worth far less than £350K.

To fix unfair IHT - raise the threshold for everyone.

maddyone

Agree CLG.
It’s our house in the south that could eventually take us over the limit for IHT. I’m concerned about that. We’re not rich, we were both teachers, but we have some savings and we both inherited small legacies from our parents. We’re not liable for IHT now but I wondering if the budget will change IHT so that we become liable. For example, the additional amount for home owners could be abolished which would pull us into liability. This is a big concern for ordinary people such as ourselves.

You won't ever be liable to IHT because you'll be dead when/if it's paid. It's your children who would have to pay it.

Hope you're having a wonderful time maddy.

Have a wonderful time , the Galapagos goers. Sounds amazing .

Hear hear - have a great time in Galapagos.

Im leaving my house to a nephew who lives in a council flat so regardless of whether he decides to live in it or sell it he wil still profit. However I believe my estate will be under the limit for IHT. Governments has squandered too much of my tax money in the past on causes I dont approve of.

biglouis

Hear hear - have a great time in Galapagos.

Im leaving my house to a nephew who lives in a council flat so regardless of whether he decides to live in it or sell it he wil still profit. However I believe my estate will be under the limit for IHT. Governments has squandered too much of my tax money in the past on causes I dont approve of.

A few months ago I recall you telling of an illness - how are you feeling?

We cannot all pick and choose what we want taxation to be spent on. I doubt there is a person in the country who doesn't disapprove of some aspect of government spending.

But we are a society under th rule of law and we accept that if there are things money is being spent on that one person disaproves of, there are other people who disapprove of the expenditure the first person approves of, so it evens out.

Personally, I put the common good ahead of other considerations. if I am fortunate enought to pay IHT, then I am more than happy that, even after death I contribute to the maintenance of the safe and stable country that has enabled me to have such a successful life.

I'm going to spend, spend, spend without feeling any remorse in order to avoid my children incurring IHT. With help, their homes are all paid for, so they're now the ones who are property rich because I have no need to be. I've just ordered a new car, and am going to South Africa next year.

My theory is that I paid a big wodge of IHT on my own parent's estate when I was 20 something, so I'm insuring this same estate won't be taxed again and again after my demise.

I'm happy for others to do what they like, but I'd rather people I know and love had the benefit of my wealth rather than any wasteful government. They manage to get you all round if not, and I've already given more than enough.

I still dislike the premise that it is not the deceased who pays IHT, it is their heirs because that t me is fairly illogical.

The money/estate belonged to a person who has presumably bought property and saved with money which has been taxed by the Governmet. Is is right or moral for that Government to decide that they are entitled to take nearly half of someone's s savings (over a certain amount) because they have died?

I say that as someone whose estate, unless we won a sum of money, would probably not attract IHT. if I thought it would be over the limit, I'd spend it asap too.

Yes, d'you know what Allira, I didn't even question paying the big wodge of IHT when I was 20. I just accepted it as what you had to do. Since then, older and wiser, I've realised how absurd it is. My children have had the lecture, and in a sort of sad way, for me and my experience, they are now well past 20 anyway.

Allira Most people's main asset is their house, so not easily turned into spendable money. You can get Equity Release schemes but these roll up interest in such a way that you end up giving as much away to the company with whom you have the release scheme with as you would in IHT - even if the house is below IHT.

As far as I am concerned, and there is likely to be IHT paid on my estate, IHT is my last thank you to the country who provided me with a politically stable regime to grow up in, (state) educated me, paid me to go to university, which enabled me to have a well paid professional career, and looked after my health without me worrying about the cost.

escaped enjoy your savings, they are yours to do with as you wish.

They are not and never should be a source of revenue for the Government of the UK!!

GrannyGravy13

escaped enjoy your savings, they are yours to do with as you wish.

They are not and never should be a source of revenue for the Government of the UK!!

Hear hear!!

M0nica the general taxation system should be such that we can afford to educate our young, look after the health of the nation and maintain our public services without robbing graves.

M0nica you are as entitled to your opinion as the next person.

My opinion is and will remain that I have said enough thank yous to successive Governments over my lifetime.

My Estate is a thank you to my family for all the love, support and encouragement they have given me since they came into my life 💙🩷

It is an iniquitous tax.

Mollygo

Not all on GN or not, enjoyed the benefit of MIRAS. We had it for a few years from 1995

^In 1994 the rate of relief was reduced by Kenneth Clarke, with further reductions in 1995 and 1997. MIRAS was completely abolished in April 2000 by *Gordon Brown, who argued it had become a middle class perk.*

But Gordon Brown retained that tax relief for landlords, which IMO was one reason for the explosion in buy to let. I still think it was a cynical exercise - it was thought that a huge rise in the availability of private rentals would absolve them from having to bother too much about the provision of social housing.

Of course they could have done away with Right to Buy - they had 13 years in which to do it - but of course that would almost certainly have lost them a lot of votes.