The wealthy with umpteen homes organise their affairs to avoid Inheritance Tax by converting properties they do not live into Trusts, thus taking those properties out of the Inheritance Tax calculation.
They can also settle money on people under the normal seven-year rule. Thus, the very wealthy never pay Inheritance Tax through clever legal advice: the very poor do not pay it because they have no wealth to tax.
Inheritance Tax is paid by Middle England by people who own one house or flat with modest savings.
Inheritance Tax is never paid by the fabulously wealthy who can avoid it. This is why the gentry keep their country piles.
IHT is the politics of envy.
The gift system needs be reformed, so that vast wealth that is distributed during someone’s lifetime can be taxed effectively, rather than escaping inheritance tax entirely.
ReplyDeleteWhy should anything which has been taxed once be taxed again...I suppose you are someone who has never built up assets. Bone idle and envious of others? Get a proper productive life, loser
ReplyDeleteTo be called ‘bone idle’ and an ‘loser’ by a stranger!
ReplyDeleteAligning tax rates between employees and the self-employed would reduce inequity while encouraging entrepreneurial risk.
It was Margaret Thatcher who introduced inheritance tax in 1984.
ReplyDeleteInheritance Tax Act 1984 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/51/contents
IHT is in the blood of the Tories!
It was first introduced in the late 1880's as Estate Duty. Not sure how Mrs T comes into the picture
DeleteIHT came in over 100 years ago
DeleteThe 1984 Act created a different legislative framework, that is all that it did.
DeletePlease do not pretend to be dim. A weblink was provided by 15:59 easy to check.
DeleteIn the United Kingdom, inheritance tax was introduced with effect from 18 March 1986, replacing capital transfer tax. This followed Margaret Thatcher’s Inheritance Tax Act 1984.
Estate Duty proceeded this by many decades
DeleteI am a lawyer and 20.49 is a moron.
DeleteIf 09:08 is a lawyer they know the weblink 15:59 provided is to the Inheritance Tax Act 1984 introduced by Margaret Thatcher. Why not click on the link or look up ‘Inheritance Tax Act 1984’ on Wikipedia? That way nobody has to believe the morons.
DeleteI work with the Inheritance Tax Act 1984 every day. I have completed thousands of Inheritance Tax Returns for my clients. You are relying on the date that this legislation was introduced to say that it has only existed since 1984. That is patent nonsense. There is no point in my explaining to someone as ignorant as you that the Schedules to 1984 Act create a different framework for much of the administration of the Tax. Inheritance Tax existed long before Mrs Thatcher came along, the 1984 Act created a more favourable regime for the Taxpayer compared to that existed beforehand. You can go on deluding yourself but it is not worth anyone's while wasting more time on your barrack room lawyering.
DeleteAn analogy for 20.37.
DeleteThe Labour Government in the 1960's enacted the Supplementary Benefit Act 1966. The Tories enacted the Supplementary Benefit and Housing Benefit Act 1982. Does this mean that the Tories created Supplementary Benefit in 1982- of course not. They amended the framework in which that benefit operated just like the IHT Act 1984 did.
Dear Dame,
ReplyDeleteYour headline should read,
...........The Middle Class and Middle England
............Gets "shafted."
This attitude ‘England get stuffed’ was fully on display today. Man Utd and City fans brawling in a street in Harrow before the FA Cup final and leaving a shirtless man knocked out cold.
ReplyDeleteThere will be no money to scrap IHT as Sunak’s first priority is to spend £2.5 billion per year on mandatory national service.
ReplyDeleteThis is not a spoof on Dad’s Army. But who put Pike (Rischi) in charge of the country? ‘Stupid boy!
Some form of National Service is an excellent idea. It will clear out some of the rubbish as they flee back to their homeland and give some order to our falling apart country. Training camps run by retired servicemen would crack this
Delete07:40 please explain:
DeleteWho will enforce the National Service?
Who will administer the National Service?
Where will you house the recruits?
How will you equip the recruits?
Who will train the recruits?
How will you pay for any of the above?
The comments on ConHome to the NatServ plan are unrelentingly negative: https://conservativehome.com/2024/05/26/this-campaign-must-be-the-nadir-of-government-by-bunker/
DeleteHome Secretary James Cleverly has clarified nobody is 'going to jail' for skipping national service. So, this basically amounts to zero policy announcement.
DeleteNew question: Are the Tories trying to throw the election on purpose?
The "deliberately trying to lose" hypothesis gets harder to dismiss every day, doesn't it!
DeleteRishi to bring back National Service so today's youth can learn to use a knife correctly.
DeleteRishi Sunak thinks he can force kids in Northern Ireland to perform national service in the British Army. Oh dear!
DeleteHow bad must things be in Downing Street, to imagine this is a good idea? No wonder Starmer is staying quiet, just watching Sunak dig a gigantic hole for his entire party.
DeleteMany of us have only half-jokingly suggested that Sunak's mission, since he became prime minister, was to gift the keys of No 10 to Starmer and in the process, destroy the Conservative Party. That's no longer even half a joke. All the evidence of this so-called election campaign points to Sunak's deliberate sabotage of the Tory Party.
DeleteThe end goal doesn’t sound bad. But where does the money lost going to come from? Remember the Conservatives have already promised to scrap NI. Is the Dame simply suggestion the UK add the IHT loss (to the Treasury) to the £46b NI scrappage fiscal blackhole?
ReplyDeleteThe Tories are addicted to the magic money tree. They stopped explaining where the money comes from for their spending a long time ago.
DeleteWhat we must conclude from all of this is that inheritance tax simply needs to be reformed so that the wealthy pay a fair rate of tax . And British controlled tax havens closed down . And Johnson's friend Lord Bamford must be jailed & his assets seized if he does not immediately pay up the £500,000,000 he owes in tax
ReplyDeleteYes, let's kick Bamford out of the country and close down his JCB or better still nationalise it and let Angie Rayner run it. She knows how to play the system. We can re-deploy the thousands of Bamford workers to the public sector. That make sense 06:33?
DeleteAre you really suggesting that Bamford is NOT required to pay his taxes ?
DeleteWhy don't you try making a business a world class leader? Thought so...just an envious little shite
DeleteThere is nothing little about me ! & actually l have been relatively successful in international business & unlike Bamford l have always paid my share of the taxes for which l have been assessed
DeleteYes, I am sure you are telling us the truth! Bamfords are in dispute with the money-grubbing HMRC.Off-shore tax arrangements are not illegal. Let's see what happens. Big government means squeezing the pips of entrepreneurs which is why so many successful entrepreneurs have buggered off and many more will follow.
DeleteIts one thing to challenge or query a tax bill . Its quite another to flee the country with the tax man in hot persuit
DeleteEXCL: Greg Hands triggers backlash after spamming Whatsapp group of parents of boys at elite St Paul's School - alma mater of George Osborne, etc. - about Labour's private school plans.
ReplyDeleteTrade minister told "stop assuming everyone's a Tory" and that some feel it is "hard to justify" VAT exemption
https://x.com/Gabriel_Pogrund/status/1794787580212391981
Hands is facing a "monumental shafting."
DeleteIn the face of disaster, all that Hands is able to do is to try equally extreme measures to try and save himself; and other Tories. Sending spam by Whatsapp to the parents of pupils at St Paul's, the exclusive Public School. Sheer desperation.
The ghastly Hands resorts to the only thing in the Tory arsenal. He assumes that all of the parents of boys at St Paul's Public School are self interest merchants, like him, and, therefore, interested in what is in their pockets. The Tories approve of indirect taxation which impacts disproportionately on the poor but when it hits those who are better off, oh no.
DeleteStupidity. Hands should have realised that anyone who objects to paying VAT on School Fees will Conservative. He is good at crawling to the middle and upper classes.
DeleteThe people affected by Labour policy will be the Middle Classes: The upper classes will afford the increase. Take your visceral envy and stuff it up your arse
DeleteHatred is a terrible thing. Hands, with any luck, will be shafted.
Delete09.19 is pugnacious. Yes, Labour are bringing in VAT on school fees. The country is at breaking point with infrastructure, state schools and the NHS disintegrating in to dust. If the Tories had not wasted so much money on Rwanda, HS2, and in reducing National Insurance, and on a host of other economic failures, Labour might not have had to impose VAT on school fees for the upper and middle classes to improve the crumbling infrastructure.
DeleteThe Labour Party's wish to make the Private Schools pay VAT goes back a long way . David Blunkett when education secretary 20 years ago wanted to do it but was stopped by Blair . Starmer is well aware how wide spread is the support for this long overdue measure across the Party and amongst the wider electorate ( 93% of whom were educated within the state system of education
ReplyDelete