The Labour Government

Chippy_boy said:
Well for a start, I want the ones with huge chips on their shoulders, to stop acting like society owes them something, to stop trying to justify taking other people's money off them. To take some personal responsibility and stop whinging on about how much better off they'd be if they could only shaft someone else.
Click to expand...

Most of society deserves to have a chip on their shoulder given the increasing disparity and concentration of wealth to be fair. The social contract is being stretched to its limits.
 
bluenova said:
I know from working for a charity in a rich area of the country, that there are plenty of people who are asset rich/cash poor.

However, for IHT purposes, these people will be dead. Whoever inherits, has just got an asset worth £500k+. Unless the person inheriting is also living in the same house (and the average age of inheritance these days suggests that's going to a very small figure), you're not talking about a poor person paying. You're talking about someone who is £500k+ richer than they were the day before.

Even then, they're only paying the tax on anything ABOVE the £500k.
Click to expand...
Yeah of course, get all that. I mentioned Mansion Tax is the same post, which was perhaps confusing.

But back to IHT, for me it's a matter of principle. You either think it is morally right for the state to take money off people when they die, depriving their airs of money that their parents presumably wanted them to have, or you don't. I am in the latter camp. You live your life and pay your taxes, and that should be the end of it IMO. I don't think it's right that when you die the state should say great we can now have even more of that money you've accumulated. Even worse, to change the rules on people AFTER they have made all of their life choices. The holidays they didn't take, the car they didn't buy, the house move they didn't do, so they can give money to their kids and give them a leg up in life. Only to find that Rachel Thieves says thanks very much, glad you've accumulated that cash, we'll have some more of that (laughing as she does it).

So I am not in favour of their being any IHT at all, let alone a reduction in the tax exempt limits.
 
BrianW said:
I wasn't saying that IHT only applies to 25-bedroom houses.

I was saying that for most of us, the tax is about as relevant as one on 25-bedroom houses. Because it is a fact that the percentage of estates that pay it is in single figures. That is, the vast majority will not pay it.

Do you prefer higher income tax instead? Or are you are believer in the naive nonsense that everything can be paid for by 'cutting waste'?
Click to expand...
Nope neither, I would start off by taxing big business at a % level above what SMEs are paying. The very biggest businesses don't pay tax at all in this country and can certainly afford it. Then I would look at non doms. Starmer and Reeves have a delicate balancing act to achieve tax wise next month. They need to encourage growth first and foremost otherwise the overall tax revenue won't grow, so taxing SMEs isn't the best choice. None of this is helped by the cost of borrowing being the highest its been for well over a decade, and sectors of the economy still in recession. From what little I've seen I like Reeves, she is clearly a clever cookie and Labour certainly deserve their chance, so we shall have to see.

I do think we could probably spend the country's revenue better, after all we are paying more tax per person than at any point in the last 60years. So it does seem odd that people now need to pay even more, when services are so poor and run down? I mentioned capital infrastructure projects earlier in the thread, it's simply criminal how these are so poorly managed, this is an area where we could certainly save money if the right people reveiwed what was happening.
 
Vic said:
Give it to charity, avoid the tax.

What has the person inheriting done to deserve it?
Click to expand...
Since most people that inherit are the children of those that have left an estate of some kind then by default they are far more deserving than any charity (and FTR I wouldn't give a rusty washer to any charity) and the goverment (no matter who is in power).
 
Chippy_boy said:
Yeah of course, get all that. I mentioned Mansion Tax is the same post, which was perhaps confusing.

But back to IHT, for me it's a matter of principle. You either think it is morally right for the state to take money off people when they die, depriving their airs of money that their parents presumably wanted them to have, or you don't. I am in the latter camp. You live your life and pay your taxes, and that should be the end of it IMO. I don't think it's right that when you die the state should say great we can now have even more of that money you've accumulated. Even worse, to change the rules on people AFTER they have made all of their life choices. The holidays they didn't take, the car they didn't buy, the house move they didn't do, so they can give money to their kids and give them a leg up in life. Only to find that Rachel Thieves says thanks very much, glad you've accumulated that cash, we'll have some more of that (laughing as she does it).

So I am not in favour of their being any IHT at all, let alone a reduction in the tax exempt limits.
Click to expand...
Absolutely spot on.
 
maxwellblue said:
Since most people that inherit are the children of those that have left an estate of some kind then by default they are far more deserving than any charity (and FTR I wouldn't give a rusty washer to any charity) and the goverment (no matter who is in power).
Click to expand...

Water Aid? Red Cross? Save the Children?

Nope, Jonty and Jemima they need to get a new range rover and a polo pony each.
 
Mr Kobayashi said:
Water Aid? Red Cross? Save the Children?

Nope, Jonty and Jemima they need to get a new range rover and a polo pony each.
Click to expand...
Yep not a penny or as I said a rusty washer to any of them.

Had first hand dealings with them all and they are nothing but a money making scam. In 2001 I bought an old mill which was used for shoe manufacturing. The place was left full of shoes scattered all over the place, probably about 5000 pairs. All I wanted was the place clearing of them so I rang every charity in the book. Said you can have them all, just bring some vans and take them away. The reps from the Red Cross, Oxfam, Help the Aged and more all turned up in their new BMW's and Merc's, had a look round and basically said it was too much effort for them but they would happily accept a cash donation. Ended up skipping them all and after that I vowed I'll never give a penny to charity again.

And yes I would rather my kids blow whatever I leave them on whatever they want rather than it go to some no mark who is too bone idle to get a job or someone that has come over on a boat and put nothing into the country.
 
maxwellblue said:
Yep not a penny or as I said a rusty washer to any of them.

Had first hand dealings with them all and they are nothing but a money making scam. In 2001 I bought an old mill which was used for shoe manufacturing. The place was left full of shoes scattered all over the place, probably about 5000 pairs. All I wanted was the place clearing of them so I rang every charity in the book. Said you can have them all, just bring some vans and take them away. The reps from the Red Cross, Oxfam, Help the Aged and more all turned up in their new BMW's and Merc's, had a look round and basically said it was too much effort for them but they would happily accept a cash donation. Ended up skipping them all and after that I vowed I'll never give a penny to charity again.

And yes I would rather my kids blow whatever I leave them on whatever they want rather than it go to some no mark who is too bone idle to get a job or someone that has come over on a boat and put nothing into the country.
Click to expand...

By the time you've told that story a few more times, the shoes will have been all clean and boxed up neatly, and the reps will be arriving by helicopter ;)
 
maxwellblue said:
Yep not a penny or as I said a rusty washer to any of them.

Had first hand dealings with them all and they are nothing but a money making scam. In 2001 I bought an old mill which was used for shoe manufacturing. The place was left full of shoes scattered all over the place, probably about 5000 pairs. All I wanted was the place clearing of them so I rang every charity in the book. Said you can have them all, just bring some vans and take them away. The reps from the Red Cross, Oxfam, Help the Aged and more all turned up in their new BMW's and Merc's, had a look round and basically said it was too much effort for them but they would happily accept a cash donation. Ended up skipping them all and after that I vowed I'll never give a penny to charity again.
Click to expand...

And what happened? Did you pay someone take away all your old shoes or did you get any money for them? Sounds like you were aggrieved that a charity didn't want to allocate money, time and resources on stock that was of minimal value and save you paying clearance costs.

maxwellblue said:
And yes I would rather my kids blow whatever I leave them on whatever they want rather than it go to some no mark who is too bone idle to get a job or someone that has come over on a boat and put nothing into the country.
Click to expand...

You sound like a nice bloke, is there a pub corner you spend your evenings in?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top