onlooker

Who pays the fees? The same taxpayer who will have to pay for their own care as well. As the saying goes 'what is a fair share of the money someone else has worked for?'

I lived in Libya for 2 years when Ghaddafi ruled. It is now a civil war - a 4 cornered one between the people of Tripoli versus the people of Benghazi versus the tribes of the rest of the country versus the Islamists. Ghaddafi was overthrown by a popular uprising - he and his family were truly appalling, you cannot have any concept of just how bad. It was never a real country to begin with, just a lot of tribes with sheep, and a few people living near the coast around Tripoli who have no reason to be in the same country as the few people living near the coast in Benghazi. Nation building was always going to be an uphill struggle. AIUI Syria suffers from many of the same problems, with the Sunni/Shiite conflict as well for good measure. The democratic civilized West cannot walk away from the people in these places, they are desperate for our help. But sorting out their problems is impossible.

You are entitled to belive that if you want to.

I'm not defending it, just saying that successive Conservative and Labour Chancellors have had the opportunity to change tax law, but have choosen not to, presumably on the grounds that it would damage the farming industry and UK plc. You could always become a farmer yourself. Or found a profitable company.

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2016/aug/11/inheritance-tax-why-the-new-duke-of-westminster-will-not-pay-billions

Evidence for 8K being an accurate figure? It could be 80K for all the Govt knows.

I am no defender of the Duke of Westminster, but as a UK resident I am sure he pays all the required taxes. Family companies and farms (etc etc) are treated diffrently for IHT to ordinary people, with a 10 year recurring payment, and subject to various exclusions which have become long established under UK tax law and accepted by left and right political parties. Otherwise such entities would end up being broken up and sold off, probably to advantage of foreign scavengers, and to the detriment of the UK.

While women earn less during their lifetimes, it would be a harsh measure, but surely there must come a time when it must be considered as a fair measure that mens' pensions are made higher, or retirement age lower?

Traditionally, gifts are not taxed in the UK, but are subject to the 7 year rule on avoiding IHT. Gifts given within 7 years of death are subject to a declining tax take. HMRC taking a cut of every gift anybody makes is regarded as a step too far. I am no tax expert, but if your parents continued to live in the house, and did not pay a commercial (and taxable) rent to the trust for doing so, it counts as a gift with reservation, and thus would still be subject to IHT on death.

You have evidence IHT is a bad joke? I thought it was a tax which was easy to collect and police, whereas most other taxes are full of loopholes and relatively easy to evade.

Life expectancy for women in the UK is more than 3.5 years higher than for men. The fairest arrangement would be if men retired that much earlier.

You mean like Luxemburg, Switzerland, Ireland and Panama?

It might be called "Inheritence Tax"? I'm afraid you can't have it both ways. If kids in London are deprived of a source of finance (ie a legacy) to buy expensive housing, they might think kids in the north are having it easy.

All the increased price of housing is due to (Government caused) debasement of the currency, and (Government caused) filling the land with 10 million immigrants. And you want to be taxed on that?

Harnessing the beats of butterfly wings probably. Do keep up. Have you looked at Gridwatch lately? Virtually no wind generation for days, very little for months, and we are running the 3 remaining coal-fired stations as hard as they can go (even though they will all be closed by September 2024).