Budget 2024

[Blue Maverick]

The “rule” only started in 2015…
And since then the rich have ploughed billions of surplus cash in to avoid IHT.
Tough titty.

Do you think the rich won’t find another way of avoiding this? Whilst your average person will get fucked over because they don’t have financial advisors to tell them to get a cayman island account. £325k is not a massive amount anymore when you consider the average price of housing, those figures need to be reassessed over the years it’s been 15 years since it was frozen, I’d suggest the average house price was considerably less then.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

The “rule” only started in 2015…
And since then the rich have ploughed billions of surplus cash in to avoid IHT.
Tough titty.

The rich, who do you classify as rich exactly. Someone who didn't have a public service pension. Someone who saved diligently into a private pension ? That's such loose term and as the thresholds on IHT haven't changed many more people are being swept up in IHT especially with house price increases.

I think it will have a detrimental impact on pensions and many people will stop paying into pensions and now use trusts

Surely if you are going to put pensions into IHT it would be fairer to have that tax at the same ammount as the original tax benefit gained on deposit, this isn't the case after yesterday.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

Do you think the rich won’t find another way of avoiding this? Whilst your average person will get fucked over because they don’t have financial advisors to tell them to get a cayman island account. £325k is not a massive amount anymore when you consider the average price of housing, those figures need to be reassessed over the years it’s been 15 years since it was frozen, I’d suggest the average house price was considerably less then.

Precisely, the rich, whoever they are will just avoid this altogether. It will be middle income earners and savers that will feel the full force of this.

 

[hampshireblue]

OK, if we accept your argument , would it not be fairer to have the IHT at the same rate as that which was given the relief on when placed in the pension?

It probably would be, but quite how that calculation would be done is tough to do. The tax relief would have been made at different rates over many years.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

It probably would be, but quite how that calculation would be done is tough to do. The tax relief would have been made at different rates over many years.

So keep it at the lower rate. And don't excessively penalise those that made provision.

 

[hampshireblue]

Tell us your a Daily Mail / Express reader without actually saying the words Daily Mail or Express.

He's pulling your leg.

 

[metalblue]

Tories loathed the public sector because it cost money rather than generate it, the selfish greedy bastards.

That’s plainly untrue. The public sector gives us health, education and security. These all generate money in some guise or other.

What the right typically dislike is inefficiencies in the public sector. Ie they want to measure outcomes on money invested whereas the left measure outcomes on, erm, I’m not sure actually. What should we measure outcomes on? Happiness?

 

[blueinsa]

Have Interest rates gone through the roof this morning? Is the Country in financial turmoil? Have the financial markets gone into free fall ?


Nope ...... thought not.

Reeves and co keep telling us all we are in financial turmoil so what are we?

 

[mosssideblue]

Yes

And we all know who put it there

 

[Blue Maverick]

It probably would be, but quite how that calculation would be done is tough to do. The tax relief would have been made at different rates over many years.

Alternatively pay tax on the pension as you save, so when you get it you can’t be taxed again, so the government get the tax over your working life and you get to live tax free in your latter years, it would simplify everything, but then again they want to make it so complicated you haven’t a clue and they take the fucking lot off your family.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

Anyone know if she changed the 7 year rule?

 

[Blue Maverick]

Anyone know if she changed the 7 year rule?

You mean gifts etc, no, I looked up online and bloody hell it’s complicated, but then it keeps thousands of financial advisors and accountants in jobs trying to circumvent those rules.

 

[The Future’s Blue!]

I don’t think it’s particularly informative to state that the private and public sectors are interlinked, given that one of the largest tax grabs in history was announced yesterday and the official fiscal forecaster is stating that private sector investment will be crowded out as a result.

Along with higher inflation, higher interest rates, lower growth and an extra £35bn in funding costs, based on extremely conservative assumptions.

It’s also frankly laughable, ludicrous in fact, to suggest that the public sector has been starved of funding when government spending was already running at an abnormally high share of GDP. Throwing many more billions at the NHS hasn’t worked previously, so I fail to see why this time will be any different.

Finally, if you don’t want to read different opinions on the Budget, then it’s perhaps best not to engage in a thread where people offer up different opinions on the Budget.

The doom and gloom of being Conservative.

 

[west didsblue]

It never crossed my mind that pension pots were actually outside a person’s estate for IHT purposes. As I have a DB pension, if I croak before the missus she gets half my pension until she pops off. Fairly sure there’s no pot for anyone to inherit after that, although I think there was a provision for a lump sum if we both died fairly soon after starting to draw it. It makes no sense for a pot to be outside an estate and it’s the correct decision to tax it. It’s clearly currently just a loophole for rich people to dodge tax. If you don’t want to pay IHT give it away when you’re alive and hope you live another seven years.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

Lol, do you know many Farmers? I live locally to probably 10 farms within 10 miles and when I say they all chip in, they all chip in, most of the older generations still live and work on the farm as they dont have any actual cash when they come to retirement age, just assets that can't be sold without screwing their Children over so never actually retire.

Chip in or keep operating as the management of the farm?

 

[roubaixtuesday]

Complaints about the pensions IHT aren't justified.

Pensions were originally conceived to support the people who paid in whilst working during their retirement, never as something to leave to younger generations. You used the sum to buy an annuity.

Now you're allowed to draw down the capital, they suddenly became a tax avoidance vehicle for IHT savings.

The arrangements now still allow for you to save tax efficiently for your won retirement, they just stop the pension tax relief being used to avoid IHT.

I write as someone with what to me is a considerable private pension pot.

 

[SiMCFC]

It never crossed my mind that pension pots were actually outside a person’s estate for IHT purposes. As I have a DB pension, if I croak before the missus she gets half my pension until she pops off. Fairly sure there’s no pot for anyone to inherit after that, although I think there was a provision for a lump sum if we both died fairly soon after starting to draw it. It makes no sense for a pot to be outside an estate and it’s the correct decision to tax it. It’s clearly currently just a loophole for rich people to dodge tax. If you don’t want to pay IHT give it away when you’re alive and hope you live another seven years.

You can't easily compare a DB and a DC pension scheme like that though, totally different vessels with different benefits.

 

[roubaixtuesday]

Alternatively pay tax on the pension as you save, so when you get it you can’t be taxed again, so the government get the tax over your working life and you get to live tax free in your latter years, it would simplify everything, but then again they want to make it so complicated you haven’t a clue and they take the fucking lot off your family.

You can do this if you want, you've £20k a year taxed income to put into an ISA, which is far more than most people put into pensions.

 

[BerkshireBlue]

It never crossed my mind that pension pots were actually outside a person’s estate for IHT purposes. As I have a DB pension, if I croak before the missus she gets half my pension until she pops off. Fairly sure there’s no pot for anyone to inherit after that, although I think there was a provision for a lump sum if we both died fairly soon after starting to draw it. It makes no sense for a pot to be outside an estate and it’s the correct decision to tax it. It’s clearly currently just a loophole for rich people to dodge tax. If you don’t want to pay IHT give it away when you’re alive and hope you live another seven years.

Yeah 100% it is a tax loop hole. At the end of the day the vast majority of descendants will be paying 40% tax on anything more than £1million. so they'll be receiving in excess of this no matter what. That is a ton of money to hand to someone one one go. How much wealth do people need?

 

[metalblue]

Complaints about the pensions IHT aren't justified.

Pensions were originally conceived to support the people who paid in whilst working during their retirement, never as something to leave to younger generations. You used the sum to buy an annuity.

Now you're allowed to draw down the capital, they suddenly became a tax avoidance vehicle for IHT savings.

The arrangements now still allow for you to save tax efficiently for your won retirement, they just stop the pension tax relief being used to avoid IHT.

I write as someone with what to me is a considerable private pension pot.

You can still avoid paying IHT on your pension pot. The government hopes the majority are too ill informed / lazy to understand how to protect inter-generational wealth.