Inheritance Tax?

[TeeJay]

But when they do you'll be dead, what the hell has it got to do with you?

And what the hell has it got to do with the government?

 

[In Bloom]

100% of urbanites agree, moaning about having extra income is daft.

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=174447

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

Bollocks.
As a proportion of income the bottom 30% of people on the earnings scale pay more.

hmm i read the original statement and your response i can only say two things really ... if you are in the top 5% of that 30% and have little out goings you might jsut consdier yourself moderately well off (in terms of comparitive wealth this might not acutally be true but circumstance may make it feel true)

but no one who is well off will ever consider anything such as moderately well off anything other than poverty....

essentailly there are two states of financal being having too much or too little. You can never have enough only more than enough or not enough.

Not enough menas you cannot afford to do what you want to do, more than enough allows you to give what you feel away shoudl you choose too with out worring about it. Having just enough is a lie to maintian those in poverty by making it an ever moving forward nearly attainable goal, essentialy suckering them into further greed as they then evaultuate thign based on whether they can afford it. thus benchmarking things and giving it vaule beoynd it's ture worth. and thus it allows people to feel there is movement with in the class sturcture and as you can now afford what previously you had to be rich to buy... things must be infinately better...

this like all things based in class movement is essentially a middle (climbing) class obsession ...

 

[The Groke]

Scrap it.

At the very least scrap it in its present form.

The Government will have already claimed their tax on whatever it is that is being handed down - fuck 'em if they think they are getting twice.

The problem with the argument that:

"Inheritance without hefty taxation increases and perpetuates the gap between the privileged and the have-nots" (or whatever)

Is that Inheritance tax is not a tool with which to address this issue - in its current form at least.

It seems to me that the opinion of those who are very pro-Inheritance tax is one born out of jealousy.

A desire to see those that they deem as "undeserving of their assets" have them substantially reduced during the inheritance process, so that they can then feel smug and happy and point and laugh that "poor little "rich" boy got his money-pot raped"

Where are the figures that show that the tax which is claimed by the government does anything to to reduce poverty, to narrow the gap between the rich and poor, to do anything other than line the coffers of a government whose decisions on how to spend that money most people here disagree with anyway?

I firmly believe that if someone has worked hard and done well for themselves and their family, dutifully paid their taxes all their lives, invested wisely and saved regularly, they should be free to pass that on to whomever they wish without the tax-men getting their paws on any more of it.

The theoretical person above could have easily got an estate worth a million or so - House value increased over the years, good investments and saving ethics etc etc - without ever being deemed as "uber rich", "undeserving" of their assets or even having transcended above "Middle Class" (whatever the fuck that means these days!)

I really don't believe that anyone should be able to whisk away nearly half of the value of that million it belongs to those that worked for it and no-one else.

 

[tbaldwin]

Alternatively, you could make the tax on spending the money equal to the tax on giving it away.

In both cases someone is moving their money around - in one case it goes to a business in the other to someone they know.

Why should giving your money to a business entail less tax than giving it to a family member, friend or good cause?

If somebody passes it on to somebody who then spends it in a country with very little tax then couldnt they avoid it though?

 

[tbaldwin]

A lot of people on this thread are really showing their true colours.

 

[FreddyB]

Why should they get it back?

(ie exactly the question you asked me)

They shouldn't, in fact VAT is one of the most unfair taxes there is. Still has nothing to with inheritance tax though.

 

[FreddyB]

yup we should all work for the good of the government there should be no personal ecomomies that way we could all be branded from birth with a big corperate logo and prostiue ourselves as modren day techno serfs to our corperate masters ...

great idea...

What is that about, fuck all to do with inheritance tax.

unless i'm mistaken you do live in my world ...

regardless, why should you have to move out of your family home because a famliy member has died? why should you be forced out by death... sounds to me like serfdom where once the worker has died the landlord evicts and removes to increase their profits....

It has nothing in common with serfdom unless you can point to the historicl records of erfs walking zway with £240k tax free and 60% of the difference.

do you know where current tazation goes? is it for the benifit of our schools, our health services our essential infrastructure is that what you hoenstly think?

I know where taxation goes yes.

get out of the old overblown lefty rhetoric and smell the fucking coffee, this isn't about personal wealth any more, tbh that history of landed genrty or the rich as you so coyly call them is that they are in the decline replaced by an altogether worse version of modern day corperate aristocrat.

It's all about personal wealth and I don;t coyly call anybody anything thankyou.

public and private partnership deals, government contracts for industry, transportation, health and education are all handlelled by big multi nationals who's main aim is to get more cash to reduce the things they have to do to get it.

An argument about how tax is spent that I agree with, how this relates to the way taxes are collected is lost on me mate.

whislt your rhetorice and much of it on the floundering left deals with fight the visalbe demons the unseen phantoms of unaccountable corperate culture are well and truely enconsing themselves under the table...

Dunno what you're on about.

so whoopee that one person manages to accure some cash or conversly inherits some good fucking luck to them, and you're angery that they might do so becuase you cannot.

A sad assumption that is frankly wrong, I hope it doesn't happen for a long time because it will mean the death of my parents but I will inherit a modest property when that sad day comes quite possibly worth above the threshold now.

yet spectaculalrly missing the point that your tax is being given away to any jonny come lately fly by night corperation who claims that it can resolve the *insert govermental created issue* at the time... for a fee...

you are looking in wholley the wrong place....

No mate you are, another argument about how tax is spent, this thread is about raising it, cart - horse or horse - cart.

never mind eh when each person is as impoverished as the leftwing level playing field would result then it might force people to revolt and take back their society, in one long and bloody coup rather than the current system of complacency...

great plan...

Shit plan but one you just made up not me.

 

[FreddyB]

And what the hell has it got to do with the government?

In my view the re-distribution of wealth is what a government should be about, fairness. I know it isn't about that now, I know the governemnt spend tax revenue on keeping their "friends" happy. I know that the rich can already avoid inheritance tax with a bit of know how but getting rid of the tax altogether just makes it less fair. If someone needs doing about inheritance tax it's the closing of loopholes that exist, making everbody pay, not just those who can't avoid it.

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

What is that about, fuck all to do with inheritance tax.

no you are right but it's a response to this...

The person who left the assets has done the work not the person getting it. you're right about levelling the playing field, closing loopholes used by the rich would be a better way to go though than opening them up to everyone else.

you are suggesting here that the way to level the playing field is to remove fromt hsoe who accrue it monies in order that they can live in a manner more acustomed to those who don't...

re: loopholes for the rich, those are loop holes for all there isn't specific law for the rich is there... so in closing these loop holes you do so for everyone and thus make a punitive taxation system more so for more people....hence you force more people into techno serfdom...

you are in effect arguing for more legislation to be more punitive...

It has nothing in common with serfdom unless you can point to the historicl records of erfs walking zway with £240k tax free and 60% of the difference.

it has nothign to do with historical record it's a comparision where a more punitive system introduce will in effect reduce the abilty of any one to own or retain any assets unless they are a corperate or state based entiy at which point we all become renters of our own assets nothing more this would be modern day serfdom...

if you cannot draw comparison from history to modern day situations and cannot see the comparision that's your issue...

I know where taxation goes yes.

yet you are arguing for more of it to be ahnded off to private companies to create more corperate aristocrats...

It's all about personal wealth and I don;t coyly call anybody anything thankyou.

yes you do...

The person who left the assets has done the work not the person getting it. you're right about levelling the playing field, closing loopholes used by the rich would be a better way to go though than opening them up to everyone else.

here... see...

An argument about how tax is spent that I agree with, how this relates to the way taxes are collected is lost on me mate.

so you can see no accoutnabltiy with revenue being collected and what that revenue is then used for... ok...

Dunno what you're on about.

you are rallying against the 'rich' and using outdated ideas of what this consitues. in doing so you fail to address the fact that those 'rich' who are takign the piss continue to do so with impuntiy because they are corperate... and not inthe firign line of your ire... misdirected attacks based on outdated ideals...

A sad assumption that is frankly wrong, I hope it doesn't happen for a long time because it will mean the death of my parents but I will inherit a modest property when that sad day comes quite possibly worth above the threshold now.

and will you want to part with this physical reminder or your family in order to pay taxation on somehting they have had to pay taxation on their entire lives? more to the point why should you? have your parents not done enough to benifit the state already?

No mate you are, another argument about how tax is spent, this thread is about raising it, cart - horse or horse - cart.

gimmie £1000, i'm not telling you what i'm going to do with it until you give it to me and if i feel like it i might piss it up against the wall anyway and then demand more money from you. Is this a reasonable method of action? would you volantarily give me £1000?? is there not room for scope to say that if this money is being given then there has to be accoutnablity for what that money is then spent on?

Shit plan but one you just made up not me.

it's what your words advocate ...

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

In my view the re-distribution of wealth is what a government should be about, fairness. I know it isn't about that now, I know the governemnt spend tax revenue on keeping their "friends" happy. I know that the rich can already avoid inheritance tax with a bit of know how but getting rid of the tax altogether just makes it less fair. If someone needs doing about inheritance tax it's the closing of loopholes that exist, making everbody pay, not just those who can't avoid it.

all this does it further limit the indivual and has nothing to do with redistrubting the wealth...

once of course you have worked out an equal manner in which you could fairly judge the levels of work input to output theourhg out and entire persons life....

sounds like idealist claptrap which belongs in the pages of some pinko organiseation from the late 70's ....

do you own a donkey jacket

 

[tbaldwin]

Teejay,Trashpony and Garfield seem to be to the right of Margaret Thatcher on this issue....Suprise suprise eh......

 

[trashpony]

Teejay,Trashpony and Garfield seem to be to the right of Margaret Thatcher on this issue....Suprise suprise eh......

a repatriation advocate speaks

 

[tbaldwin]

a repatriation advocate speaks

To somebody who thinks its OK to take all the skilled workers from poorer countries that they most need.....And somebody who thinks that richer people should not pay so much tax........
Bit of Right wing Tory aerrnt you? Do you miss Thatcher or was she not Right wing enough for you?

 

[FreddyB]

no you are right but it's a response to this...

you are suggesting here that the way to level the playing field is to remove fromt hsoe who accrue it monies in order that they can live in a manner more acustomed to those who don't...

After they're dead yes, when they don't live in any manner at all, on account of having given up living.

re: loopholes for the rich, those are loop holes for all there isn't specific law for the rich is there... so in closing these loop holes you do so for everyone and thus make a punitive taxation system more so for more people....hence you force more people into techno serfdom...

The rich are more liekly to use them being they require accountants etc. which the rich as a rule know more about. And besides all this we're still talking about people walking away with £240k tax free and 60% of the rest, punitive? You must be a very sensitive fellow, or just a very greedy one.

it has nothign to do with historical record it's a comparision where a more punitive system introduce will in effect reduce the abilty of any one to own or retain any assets unless they are a corperate or state based entiy at which point we all become renters of our own assets nothing more this would be modern day serfdom...

they can't retain assets they nver had, the person who did have them lost the ability to retain them at about the time they lost the ability to breathe. It still has nothing to do with serfdom.

if you cannot draw comparison from history to modern day situations and cannot see the comparision that's your issue...

I can when the comparison holds up, in this case it doesn't.

yet you are arguing for more of it to be ahnded off to private companies to create more corperate aristocrats...

No I'm not.

so you can see no accoutnabltiy with revenue being collected and what that revenue is then used for... ok...

I see them as seperate arguments, win this one and there's £3billion a year less to argue about, tell me how that makes things better.

you are rallying against the 'rich' and using outdated ideas of what this consitues. in doing so you fail to address the fact that those 'rich' who are takign the piss continue to do so with impuntiy because they are corperate... and not inthe firign line of your ire... misdirected attacks based on outdated ideals...

So we must abolish inheritance tax to tackle the corporations? Makes no sense mate, they're a seperate argument one that using your logic could be used to support the abolishen of income tax.

and will you want to part with this physical reminder or your family in order to pay taxation on somehting they have had to pay taxation on their entire lives? more to the point why should you? have your parents not done enough to benifit the state already?

Well I certainly won't keep it as a museum to mum and dad, I have somewhere to live already, I 'll sell it pay my dues and be the best part of a quarter of a million pounds better off. I'm heartened to know my new found poverrty will at least get sympathy from you though.

gimmie £1000, i'm not telling you what i'm going to do with it until you give it to me and if i feel like it i might piss it up against the wall anyway and then demand more money from you. Is this a reasonable method of action? would you volantarily give me £1000?? is there not room for scope to say that if this money is being given then there has to be accoutnablity for what that money is then spent on?

Of course there is room for accountability, not if I don;t give the money though becuase then there is none. Baby out with the bath water I feel.
[/QUOTE]

 

[FreddyB]

all this does it further limit the indivual and has nothing to do with redistrubting the wealth...

once of course you have worked out an equal manner in which you could fairly judge the levels of work input to output theourhg out and entire persons life....

sounds like idealist claptrap which belongs in the pages of some pinko organiseation from the late 70's ....

do you own a donkey jacket

Further limit the individual? This is inheritance tax we're talking about the individual is dead, how much more limited can you get

Can't see much point in working out the input output either, they're dead, they don't need their stuff anymore because they're dead.

In regard to inheritance tax at least it's current reality, and no I don't own a donkey jacket, I don;t have some kind of bizarre dynastic view of property either.

 

[dylanredefined]

Raising it or excluding the family home might be an idea but 3 billion quid
is a big hole to find (thats half a small war isnt it) so scrapping seems out of the question.

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

Raising it or excluding the family home might be an idea but 3 billion quid
is a big hole to find (thats half a small war isnt it) so scrapping seems out of the question.

sure i mean when they are haign to fork out summit like 91 billion on ppp each year... it's shocking the 'rich' won't pay more...

 

[tbaldwin]

Inheritance tax currently raises £3 billion and it should be a lot more...a 40% starting rate at over £285.000 is fair enough but on over £500,000 there should be a rate of at least 50% and it should be raised the more that is inherited........
Its grossly unfair that some people inherit hundreds of thousands or millions and some inherit bugger all...
A lot of greedy bastards want to do away with it. They think its perfectly OK that people should inherit huge sums wiithout working for it and then not pay tax on it...

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

Inheritance tax currently raises £3 billion and it should be a lot more...a 40% starting rate at over £285.000 is fair enough but on over £500,000 there should be a rate of at least 50% and it should be raised the more that is inherited........
Its grossly unfair that some people inherit hundreds of thousands or millions and some inherit bugger all...
A lot of greedy bastards want to do away with it. They think its perfectly OK that people should inherit huge sums wiithout working for it and then not pay tax on it...

this statement sums up what's wrong with inheritence tax ...

some people expect to be given something regardless of the work which was involved in gaining that thing.

fucking liberals, can't do logic or economics...

 

[greenman]

Reminid me, who are the 'liberals'??
tbaldwin?
or the crypto (or not so crypto)-tories agreeing with Byers?

 

[tbaldwin]

People like Garfield think that its OK for Richer people to pass on their wealth cos basically they think the Class system is OK as do Trashpony and Teejay.....
Spoilt Middle class children who think they deserve so much more than others by birthright...

 

[trashpony]

People like Garfield think that its OK for Richer people to pass on their wealth cos basically they think the Class system is OK as do Trashpony and Teejay.....
Spoilt Middle class children who think they deserve so much more than others by birthright...

And what about the people who've bought their council houses? Are they spoilt middle class children?

 

[tbaldwin]

And what about the people who've bought their council houses? Are they spoilt middle class children?

Sometimes...Sometimes not..... But anybody who claims that Inheritance tax is wrong is buying into a very dodgy right wing idea that upholds the Class system...

 

[trashpony]

Sometimes...Sometimes not..... But anybody who claims that Inheritance tax is wrong is buying into a very dodgy right wing idea that upholds the Class system...

I never said it was wrong - I just think the cut off should be raised. It just strikes me as sad that people who've got property which suddenly is worth above the ceiling because of rising property prices get whacked for tax at the same rate as people who have a mansion in London and a couple of holiday homes.

Many of them have never paid 40% tax in their lives.

 

[Dowie]

People like Garfield think that its OK for Richer people to pass on their wealth cos basically they think the Class system is OK as do Trashpony and Teejay.....

Although I do have an issue with "old money" - vast estates etc.. getting passed on - those often haven't been earned - but have been passed on for hundreds of years - due to some nob being related to some king/baron/other nob type etc..

however I do think that a small business or a family home(within reason - not talkng mansion size here) ought to be able to be passed on to sons/daughters without the govt interfereing as most of these have been earned & have had the tax paid on already

as for a class system - I don't like the idea of people being born into vast wealth however I don't have a problem of a class system within a meritocracy* - tbh... all people are different - some will work harder - some are brighter etc.. I don't have a problem with some people earning more than others - IMO a doctor deserves to earn more than a shelf stacker at tescos.

*yeah i know we are not in one yet - far from it - things like education in inner city areas need to be addressed

 

[tbaldwin]

I never said it was wrong - I just think the cut off should be raised. It just strikes me as sad that people who've got property which suddenly is worth above the ceiling because of rising property prices get whacked for tax at the same rate as people who have a mansion in London and a couple of holiday homes.

Many of them have never paid 40% tax in their lives.

I dont know you Trashpony or how much you stand to inherit or leave???

But i know that many people inherit nothing or less than 10 grand and when people who are going to inherit over a hundred grand moan about how unfair it is that they should pay tax on it....I wanna shit in their gobs....Nicely of course.

 

[trashpony]

I dont know you Trashpony or how much you stand to inherit or leave???

But i know that many people inherit nothing or less than 10 grand and when people who are going to inherit over a hundred grand moan about how unfair it is that they should pay tax on it....I wanna shit in their gobs....Nicely of course.

No you don't know me - but that didn't stop you accussing me of being to the right of Mrs T nor being a spoilt middle class kid.

I'm actually going to inherit fuck all - my parents don't have a lot of money - my generation is the first to go to university and all that. I guess you could say they were working class. But hey, let's not let the facts stand in the way of sweeping statements.

 

[FreddyB]

I never said it was wrong - I just think the cut off should be raised. It just strikes me as sad that people who've got property which suddenly is worth above the ceiling because of rising property prices get whacked for tax at the same rate as people who have a mansion in London and a couple of holiday homes.

Many of them have never paid 40% tax in their lives.

People keep saying this, but they aren't getting whacked for any tax, they're dead!

As for the argument it should be progressive I agree but that I can see no argument at all other than greed to raise the threshold or drop the rate from 40% once that threshold is reached.

 

[trashpony]

People keep saying this, but they aren't getting whacked for any tax, they're dead!

As for the argument it should be progressive I agree but that I can see no argument at all other than greed to raise the threshold or drop the rate from 40% once that threshold is reached.

It's not greed. I'm about to become a single mum. If I die in twenty years time, I'd like to think that my kid isn't going to get turfed out on their ear to have to pay their inheritance tax bill.

The system was designed to tax the rich. Right now, it taxes virtually every single person who owns property in London.