What is the suggested wealth tax?

David49

So IHT is a tax on spending after you have died

No.

Those inheriting, should there be anything to inherit above the threshold, have effectively paid IHT before receiving inheritances.

Or one could leave all assets to charity, no IHT due.

On this thread two proposed Wealth Taxes have been outlined and we have been given direction to an apparent third. I would have thought, if you want a discussion, there is enough to start with and you could bring in any other versions you know of Elegran.

However, this thread was started to give outlines of proposals that are around so people could see just how unlikely such taxes were to affect them. I'd be pushed to highlight any actual economic dogma on this thread, a little bit of what might be considered bullying perhaps, and a bit of going off topic, but that seems commonplace on threads about any such topic.

Why would people who have not, so far, shown an interest have to join this discussion now. That's a bit like someone whose interest is quilting being expected to join a train-spotting thread.

This thread may well have served its purpose for now so let's not anticipate goading where "ding-dong battles" have shown no sign of existence as yet.

MaizieD

^Hopefully we will be able to see many more of those with views in this area on these threads and get a real cross section of views we can discuss.^

I await this 'discussion' with great interest.

If this thread (hopefully) encourages the contributions of posters who are not prominent in the N & P threads, and are without total comittment to any of the established theories, then I hope they will be welcomed. It could easily become a ding-dong battle between proponents of one economic dogma and another.

Sorry, should have checked my "facts". The Green Party has called for progressive taxation measures, including wealth taxes targeting the ultra-rich, in various policy debates and proposals. However, it was not specifically mentioned in there manifesto.

David, the dead do not pay tax. IHT will be paid by my children, who will inherit money / property from me on which they have not paid tax.

David49

growstuff

David49

growstuff

David49 That's precisely why I personally (and others) think a wealth tax is not a good idea. In addition to the reason you've given, it would take ages to draft the regulations, so that there are no loopholes.

It would be far better to adjust existing legislation, such as the tax relief on pension contributions. Why is it right that higher rate taxpayers receive a higher level of subsidy from the government?

There is plenty of scope to change existing taxation legislation and rates to achieve more revenue, but I dont rule out a wealth tax for idealogical reasons.

Sorry, I don't understand what you're saying. What do you mean when you say you don't rule out a wealth tax? Do you mean that the government won't won't rule out a wealth tax?

Because Labour left wingers are being belligerent I don’t rule out a wealth tax for idealogical reasons, like private schools and IHT on farmland.

That seems a strange comparison. Add to that the fact that there was no Wealth Tax in the Labour Manifesto but there was, for example, in the Greens, makes me wonder if your bias isn't getting the better of the analytical thinking we need to solve complex issues.

So IHT is a tax on spending after you have died

'Wealth' is the total value of all someone's assets, liquid and illiquid. The 'wealth tax' being proposed is a tax on the total value of these assets if it's over a certain sum.

While IHT and VAT on private school fees might affect the wealthy more than the not so wealthy (though many in the second bracket would strongly disagree) they are not taxes on wealth. Just taxes on some spending of the wealthy. We all have to pay taxes on spending. Even the very poorest of us.

I doubt the 'wealth tax' proposal would be implemented. a) Labour is intimidated by the wealthy and b) it would be so costly and time consuming to implement that it wouldnt be cost effective.

growstuff

David49

MaizieD

Taxes on private schools and IHT are not the same as 'a wealth tax'.

There is a clue in the word “Wealth”, it’s pretty closely allied with Private Schools and Land Ownership

It's nothing like the same. There's some correlation, but they're not even related.

They are all extra taxes the wealthy have to pay, or may have to pay under Labour.

David49

MaizieD

Taxes on private schools and IHT are not the same as 'a wealth tax'.

There is a clue in the word “Wealth”, it’s pretty closely allied with Private Schools and Land Ownership

It's nothing like the same. There's some correlation, but they're not even related.

MaizieD

Taxes on private schools and IHT are not the same as 'a wealth tax'.

There is a clue in the word “Wealth”, it’s pretty closely allied with Private Schools and Land Ownership

Taxes on private schools and IHT are not the same as 'a wealth tax'.

growstuff

David49

growstuff

David49 That's precisely why I personally (and others) think a wealth tax is not a good idea. In addition to the reason you've given, it would take ages to draft the regulations, so that there are no loopholes.

It would be far better to adjust existing legislation, such as the tax relief on pension contributions. Why is it right that higher rate taxpayers receive a higher level of subsidy from the government?

There is plenty of scope to change existing taxation legislation and rates to achieve more revenue, but I dont rule out a wealth tax for idealogical reasons.

Sorry, I don't understand what you're saying. What do you mean when you say you don't rule out a wealth tax? Do you mean that the government won't won't rule out a wealth tax?

Because Labour left wingers are being belligerent I don’t rule out a wealth tax for idealogical reasons, like private schools and IHT on farmland.

David49

growstuff

David49 That's precisely why I personally (and others) think a wealth tax is not a good idea. In addition to the reason you've given, it would take ages to draft the regulations, so that there are no loopholes.

It would be far better to adjust existing legislation, such as the tax relief on pension contributions. Why is it right that higher rate taxpayers receive a higher level of subsidy from the government?

There is plenty of scope to change existing taxation legislation and rates to achieve more revenue, but I dont rule out a wealth tax for idealogical reasons.

Sorry, I don't understand what you're saying. What do you mean when you say you don't rule out a wealth tax? Do you mean that the government won't won't rule out a wealth tax?

growstuff

David49 That's precisely why I personally (and others) think a wealth tax is not a good idea. In addition to the reason you've given, it would take ages to draft the regulations, so that there are no loopholes.

It would be far better to adjust existing legislation, such as the tax relief on pension contributions. Why is it right that higher rate taxpayers receive a higher level of subsidy from the government?

There is plenty of scope to change existing taxation legislation and rates to achieve more revenue, but I dont rule out a wealth tax for idealogical reasons.

David49 That's precisely why I personally (and others) think a wealth tax is not a good idea. In addition to the reason you've given, it would take ages to draft the regulations, so that there are no loopholes.

It would be far better to adjust existing legislation, such as the tax relief on pension contributions. Why is it right that higher rate taxpayers receive a higher level of subsidy from the government?

The fault with the logic of a wealth tax based on all wealth is that much of that wealth is based on the notional value of assets that do not produce much income. Country Estates, Farmland, Amenity land and Woodland, none of which are likely to yield 1% of return after existing taxes are paid.

To pay such a tax assets have to be sold, more land being sold depresses value in a market that taxation has made less attractive, reducing the amount of IHT and CGT being levied . I understand the idealogical attractions of wealth tax, the amount of extra revenue is going to be small if any.

That’s not including the many that will domicile overseas £100k + a year is a big incentive to move elsewhere - anywhere.

It might be worth, at this point, re-establishing what the thread was about.

My intention was to reasure those Gnetters who felt concern when discussions about a wealth tax arose. It was to show that the ideas being put forward were incredibly unlikely to affect them.

If just a few see that then GN has, yet again, done a good job.

David49

growstuff

David49

If you think that .06% of the UK population are going to pay £100,000+ annually for the privilege of living in the UK you are living in fairyland

Eh? Where did those figures come from?

Time to go to bed Growstuff !.

In actual fact, David that £100,000 would be recouping some of the state issued money that the wealthy have acquired more of their fair share of by means of excessive profits, high interest rates and a low taxation regime. They certainly are privileged to live in the UK when treated so indulgently.

In the context of £10million it is a drop in the ocean. It is exactly what it says, one percent.

growstuff

David49

If you think that .06% of the UK population are going to pay £100,000+ annually for the privilege of living in the UK you are living in fairyland

Eh? Where did those figures come from?

Time to go to bed Growstuff !.

growstuff

David49

If you think that .06% of the UK population are going to pay £100,000+ annually for the privilege of living in the UK you are living in fairyland

Eh? Where did those figures come from?

1% of £10 million?

David49

If you think that .06% of the UK population are going to pay £100,000+ annually for the privilege of living in the UK you are living in fairyland

Eh? Where did those figures come from?

MaizieD

^Hopefully we will be able to see many more of those with views in this area on these threads and get a real cross section of views we can discuss.^

I await this 'discussion' with great interest.

It’s gathering a pace, isn’t it. Not filled a page yet 😂

David49

If you think that .06% of the UK population are going to pay £100,000+ annually for the privilege of living in the UK you are living in fairyland

That is not what I think of as a sensible discussion, patronising and ill mannered.

If you think that .06% of the UK population are going to pay £100,000+ annually for the privilege of living in the UK you are living in fairyland