Re: Spoilers - Soaps - from Radio Times online, w/e 14th September

BrritSki wrote:
Marjorie wrote:
BrritSki wrote:
Jo Lonergan wrote:
On Sun, 07 Oct 2007 16:31:45 +0100, Marjorie
<dontusethisaddress@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Stephen wrote:
On Sat, 06 Oct 2007 21:27:26 +0200, Gumrat <Gumrat@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Stephen wrote:
In general I think IHT is a thoroughly good thing because it doesn't
actually take any money away from anybody: the person whose estate
it is levied on is dead, and those who might inherit do so by whim anyway, rather than by any sort of right (and remember that it doesn't apply to people who are married or in a civil partnership).

Sorry, Stephen, why do you describe my willing of my own belongings, on
which I have paid tax, probably several times over, to my child as a
"whim"? I think you're talking through your hat. I will happily pay
taxes for whatever reason and to whatever level once. .
But after that, I require to be allowed to gift my own money wherever I
want, without paying taxes again.
It's clear we disagree on this. My view is that when we are dead we
are dead, and we should not have the right to influence what happens
to the living. I do believe that inheritance should take into account
what is good for society, but I don't think that that is always best
served by passing wealth to those who have not earned it.
I'm with Stephen on this. Some of one's estate is taxed as earnings, but some (often the greater part) is simply acquired as a result of rising house prices. And what if it was mostly taxed? You'd still get taxed again if you decided to spend it on holidays or cars or any non-essentials rather than leave it behind. Besides, you can't pay taxes when you're dead - the people who pay IHT are the beneficiaries of large estates, who have not been taxed already on this asset because they've only just acquired it and have done nothing to earn it.

<languid wave>

My house in London is worth well over 10 times what we paid for it in
1981. What have I done to earn this money?
And actually, given that a great many people nowadays live into their
80s or longer, a lot of people who are moaning about IHT are of my
generation (late middle age, I refuse to be old). We've already made a
fortune just by buying a house when we did, but we want to pocket the
profit our parents made, tax free, as well.
And why not ? My Dad gave up a probable England Rugby cap when he was offered what was to him back then an enormous sum to turn professional. He did it for his family and regretted it all his life, but as a result was able to buy a house when we moved back to Coventry.

He made a sacrifice as many other people have chosen to do in different ways to own their own home rather than rent. Nothing wrong with renting, but it's certainly less risky. The value of houses can go up as well as down. If it goes up, why can't the people who took a risk profit ?

They can and they do - they have a secure home for their old age, and can always sell it to release capital if they need it. The gain is not taxable if it's their home. They can leave it all to a spouse without any IHT being due.

What Stephen and I are saying is that there's no reason why others should profit hugely from it after their death. There's still (as things are now) a generous allowance that is IHT-free, and that alone is enough to provide a useful amount for children.

Politics of envy again. It's their money. It is not a temporary loan from the state for the period of their lifetime.

You've lost me now. Who's envying whom?
A few years ago I was lucky enough to receive a generous legacy when my father died. He didn't quite get into the IHT category, but he left enough to make a big difference to us, his children. Had there been more, I wouldn't have thought it unreasonable that we should pay some tax on this unearned windfall. It was, as you say, his money (not ours) and we felt humbled and fortunate to receive a useful sum as a result of his hard work and thoughtful saving.

--
Marjorie
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Spoilers - Soaps - from Radio Times online, w/e 14th September
    ... it is levied on is dead, and those who might inherit do so by whim anyway, rather than by any sort of right. ... I require to be allowed to gift my own money wherever I ... Some of one's estate is taxed as earnings, but some is simply acquired as a result of rising house prices. ...
    (uk.media.radio.archers)
  • Re: Spoilers - Soaps - from Radio Times online, w/e 14th September
    ... it is levied on is dead, and those who might inherit do so by whim anyway, rather than by any sort of right. ... Some of one's estate is taxed as earnings, but some is simply acquired as a result of rising house prices. ... Inheritance tax was abolished in the US after a campaign aimed at ...
    (uk.media.radio.archers)
  • Re: Spoilers - Soaps - from Radio Times online, w/e 14th September
    ... it is levied on is dead, and those who might inherit do so by whim anyway, rather than by any sort of right. ... I require to be allowed to gift my own money wherever I ... Some of one's estate is taxed as earnings, but some is simply acquired as a result of rising house prices. ...
    (uk.media.radio.archers)
  • Re: Spoilers - Soaps - from Radio Times online, w/e 14th September
    ... it is levied on is dead, and those who might inherit do so by whim anyway, rather than by any sort of right. ... I require to be allowed to gift my own money wherever I ... Some of one's estate is taxed as earnings, but some is simply acquired as a result of rising house prices. ...
    (uk.media.radio.archers)
  • Re: Spoilers - Soaps - from Radio Times online, w/e 14th September
    ... actually take any money away from anybody: the person whose estate ... I require to be allowed to gift my own money wherever I ... My view is that when we are dead we ... Inheritance tax was abolished in the US after a campaign aimed at ...
    (uk.media.radio.archers)