Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
SCUMBAG

Halifax Calls For Rise In Death Duty Threshold

Recommended Posts

Your not seriously suggesting that any government would allow us plebs to enjoy the fruits of our parents' hard work are you.

Since when was sitting in a house for fifty years and watching its price increase over two hundred times thanks to inflation considered 'hard work'?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely it would be better to increase the tax take on people on average earnings by increasing the basic rate tax band 1.5% to 2% (1% increase gives the govt an extra 2bn) rather than see a burden further grieving relative pay any IHT on a modest inheritence of say £300K. <_<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely it would be better to increase the tax take on people on average earnings by increasing the basic rate tax band 1.5% to 2% (1% increase gives the govt an extra 2bn) rather than see a burden further grieving relative pay any IHT on a modest inheritence of say £300K. <_<

be careful about what you wish for. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since when was sitting in a house for fifty years and watching its price increase over two hundred times thanks to inflation considered 'hard work'?

Of course. Nobody ever worked hard way back when. :rolleyes:

What make IHT so unfair is that tax has alreay been paid on everything. Now the government wants to tax what it missed on the first time round.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the threshold should be removed altogether and the rate set at 50% - if a house were sold for £300k but only £150k made it back to the property market then prices would soon fall - i suspect that is what is behind the Halifax's thinking as this money helps keep pries up

as for grieving relatives, well, we're all going to go sooner or later

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What make IHT so unfair is that tax has already been paid on everything. Now the government wants to tax what it missed on the first time round.

No tax has been paid on the capital gain which would have been payable on almost any other asset.

Most people whose houses are now being inherited benefited from tax allowances (latterly MIRAS) on the mortgage interest.

So, how come 'tax has already been paid on everything'?

p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A few people argue that inheritance tax should be scrapped altogther. But if that were to be done, what tax would you increase or introduce to find the shortfall?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No tax has been paid on the capital gain which would have been payable on almost any other asset.

Most people whose houses are now being inherited benefited from tax allowances (latterly MIRAS) on the mortgage interest.

So, how come 'tax has already been paid on everything'?

p

The asset is not being sold for profit, it is being passed on to a member of deceased family.

The bit that isnt interest.

Jason

- I would say increase tax second home ownership. Also Stella, burberry, shiny football t-shirts and big hoop earings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So why should it be liable to CGT. Seeing as its not being sold.

Let's just start again. I was responding to the comment by someone who said 'tax has already been paid on everything' by pointing out that, probably, no tax whatsoever had 'already been paid'. I haven't heard from him/her since.

We could all argue against taxation of any sort. Why should I pay income tax on my very hard-earned salary? Why should I pay fuel tax and VAT on the fuel I use to drive to my life-saving voluntary work? Why should I pay VAT on the very rags that keep me from freezing to death in winter? And, the materials to stop the rain coming through my roof?

The answer is simple. Because it's impossible to do many things on my own I join other members of society to do so. Like jointly organising:

Armed forces to keep me safe from external enemies.

Police forces to protect me from internal enemies.

Medical services to keep me and my family alive and well.

School services to educate all my kids.

Universities to further educate some of them.

Roads, fire services, etc. etc. etc. etc.

We therefore ask our democratically elected politicians to come up with tax-raising methods that are just about bearable to most of society. IHT is one of them, and not a bad choice in my opinion. Whatever is wrong with a relatively small part of a deceased person's estate being put back into the central pool of society's funds. After all - and, in particular residential property - the value is largely made up of inflation and not from payments made by the owners. As I said previously, a lot of the houses now being inherited received tax benefits in any case.

Of course, I'd prefer other people to pay all the tax and for my property to pass wholly to my descedants. Tough!

p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IHT mainly annoys me from this point of view: Family with a small child, buy horrible house, half falling down with wasteland for garden in nice area. Over years they spend most of their time and money completely rebuilding the house and garden. House is worth fortune now it's finished and house prices have also boomed (ie now). Parents both die, child is now a young adult but hasn't found their feet in the world, can't afford the IHT and loses the family home and parents legacy after watching them put everything into it.

Edited by squeek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IHT mainly annoys me from this point of view: Family with a small child, buy horrible house, half falling down with wasteland for garden in nice area. Over years they spend most of their time and money completely rebuilding the house and garden. House is worth fortune now it's finished and house prices have also boomed (ie now). Parents both die, child is now a young adult but hasn't found their feet in the world, can't afford the IHT and loses the family home and parents legacy after watching them put everything into it.

What absolute codswallop!

This poor child would get the first £260,000 or so tax free and the estate would pay 40% on the remainder. Wouldn't you be happy to inherit, say, a £300,000 house and only pay about £16,000 in tax? Bet you'd be happy to go to the building society and tell them you've got 94.67% as a deposit and could they lend you 5.33% of the value! This assumes, of course, that the deceased had no other assets whatsoever. Surely he/she would have ten or twenty grand lying about?

Am I not right in thinking that it's only about 5% of estates that pay IHT? What's the big problem? Greed, perhaps?

p

(Edit - in fact, I think I overestimated the IHT on the above example. It would be next to nothig.)

Edited by patprimer74

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To me this whole argument illustrates how greedy and fearful the British have become. There is no such thing as a stable family home anymore. Either you profit from the value of your house. Or you envy those who do. I feel like those of us who couldn't care less about it's value are getting drowned out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This poor child would get the first £260,000 or so tax free and the estate would pay 40% on the remainder. Wouldn't you be happy to inherit, say, a £300,000 house and only pay about £16,000 in tax? Bet you'd be happy to go to the building society and tell them you've got 94.67% as a deposit and could they lend you 5.33% of the value! This assumes, of course, that the deceased had no other assets whatsoever. Surely he/she would have ten or twenty grand lying about?

Am I not right in thinking that it's only about 5% of estates that pay IHT? What's the big problem? Greed, perhaps?

Lets say the house was bought for £70k 20 years ago, and is valued at 650k after all the work having been done on it.

If this child inherits the house they wouldn't get get any money.

The child wants to keep the house and isn't bothered about getting the £260k tax free, as they just want to keep their family home, they don't happen to have "10 to 20 grand knocking about" (I don't really understand the implication that a lot of people who are 18-21 have this lying about). They can't get a mortgage for the house (40% of 650k - 390k is 156k), so have to sell it. But I'm sure they'd be really happy having no mortgage, if they'd just lost both their parents and their house. Or maybe not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest mattsta1964

Since when was sitting in a house for fifty years and watching its price increase over two hundred times thanks to inflation considered 'hard work'?

Point taken. But there's still no reason why Gordon Brown should see a penny of that money

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's just start again. I was responding to the comment by someone who said 'tax has already been paid on everything' by pointing out that, probably, no tax whatsoever had 'already been paid'. I haven't heard from him/her since.

That was me and you would have heard from me since if you had read my reply. Tax has been paid on the money to buy the house. Although I grant that some tax may have been avioded on the interest on any mortgage.

I agree that we need fair and proportionate taxation. What you and other IHT proponents fail to see is that tax has already been paid on much of the inheritance. As I pointed out above. As you failed to see.

Proponents of IHT also fail to appreciate that any tax relief on mortgage interest is a tax allowance. How would you feel if you saved £3,000 in an ISA for your children every year for 30 years and then the tax man confiscates 40% of all the compound interest? What if the tax man also confiscated 40% of all the money you earned below your personal allowance? What about confiscating 17% of everything between the 40% and 23% tax bands? The tax man has a fair go at the fruits of your labour, for the greater good. What I object to is him having second helpings from already taxed income. IHT was originally designed as a way to wage class warfare to put the final nail in the coffin of the aristocracy but has instead become grave robbery.

Robbing the dead is all IHT is.

This poor child would get the first £260,000 or so tax free and the estate would pay 40% on the remainder. Wouldn't you be happy to inherit, say, a £300,000 house and only pay about £16,000 in tax? Bet you'd be happy to go to the building society and tell them you've got 94.67% as a deposit and could they lend you 5.33% of the value! This assumes, of course, that the deceased had no other assets whatsoever. Surely he/she would have ten or twenty grand lying about?

Am I not right in thinking that it's only about 5% of estates that pay IHT? What's the big problem? Greed, perhaps?

What Squeek said.

And BTW about 1 in 3 families are now liable to IHT. Excluding yours truly. My objections are moral, not personal. My oldies live overseas with a house worth about £23k.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Armed forces to keep me safe from external enemies.

Police forces to protect me from internal enemies.

Medical services to keep me and my family alive and well.

School services to educate all my kids.

Universities to further educate some of them.

Roads, fire services, etc. etc. etc. etc.

Armed forces to fight pointless and undemocratic wars

Police forces to punish marginal crime and to let serious crime flourish

Medical services to artificially extend my miserable existence

School services to teach my kids how to pass exams but not to do anything useful

Universities to further educate some of them in art degrees

Roads, fire services, etc. etc. etc. etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Armed forces to fight pointless and undemocratic wars

Police forces to punish marginal crime and to let serious crime flourish

Medical services to artificially extend my miserable existence

School services to teach my kids how to pass exams but not to do anything useful

Universities to further educate some of them in art degrees

Roads, fire services, etc. etc. etc. etc.

Then do something about it, like voting someone you trust into power or, even, standing for parliament/council yourself. If what you say is the truth you'll have no trouble converting others to your views.

Have you always been so happy or have you worked hard at it? :D

p

Tax has been paid on the money to buy the house.

Yes, that'll account for about 10% of it's value. The other 90% appeared from thin air.

What you and other IHT proponents fail to see is that tax has already been paid on much of the inheritance. As I pointed out above. As you failed to see.

What's so special about that? All your earnings are taxed but you still pay an additional 17.5% VAT on almost all the goods and services you buy. Do you want all that cancelled as well?

The only thing different about IHT is that people sit there waiting for their inheritance and are broken hearted when they find that a fractional amount has been taken in tax when they'd been rubbing their hands with glee thinking about the nice sum involved. Must be gutting.

I would love to have the 'worry' of IHT; so would 95% of the British population. You worry about the priviledged 5%, if you like. Don't ask me to join you.

p

Lets say the house was bought for £70k 20 years ago, and is valued at 650k after all the work having been done on it.

If this child inherits the house they wouldn't get get any money.

The child wants to keep the house and isn't bothered about getting the £260k tax free, as they just want to keep their family home, they don't happen to have "10 to 20 grand knocking about" (I don't really understand the implication that a lot of people who are 18-21 have this lying about). They can't get a mortgage for the house (40% of 650k - 390k is 156k), so have to sell it. But I'm sure they'd be really happy having no mortgage, if they'd just lost both their parents and their house. Or maybe not.

If this imaginary child is so desperate to own the home of his/her parents, then I'm sure a suitable financial arrangement could be found.

p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Come on you bears!

Cheer up!

Surely, when our long-awaited house price crash happens the state's Inheritance Tax take is going to go down?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why can't the government and local councils just learn to budget with what they've got.

Sucking all the money out of the economy and throwing it at an area of the economy that isn't wealth creating is daft.

VAT- why should I act as an unpaid taxation collector for Gordon Brown? Keeping on top of VAT and sending off the cheques irrespective of whether I've been paid is a pain in the ar$e I could do without.

The public service is turning into the biggest gravy train ever- backed up with a very big stick. If I can't retire till I'm a geriatric why should some pen pusher at the council be able to skip off at 55?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 301 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.