Of course it is unfair, inheritance tax is tax on money that has already been taxed. Be a farm, a business, a stately home or a family home. The money used to build these has already been taxed at least once in many cases more than once. Very few family homes cannot be purchased without at least two incomes both of which have already paid income tax to pay the mortgage to by the property.
hold on, if farms have been exempt from IHT to 40 years then many farmers would have received a whole farm with zero tax - so it won't have been bought by money that has already been taxed which is your point.
It's not a tax on money already earned (and invested), it's a tax on the gain. It's simply a capital gains tax that is crystalised when the owner(s) die. If we as a society demand certain services from the state (schools, hospitals) then it's incumbent on the state to raise revenue (taxes) fairly from all. Why should one class of owner be treated differently? Asset rich/cash poor businesses suggest there is a business model issue not that the state shouldn't listen but why not make money and provide for taxes like we all do.
Cool lets stop funding the police so we can take those for ourselves then, final bit of the social contract gone! Probably not good news for the average telegraph reader but it's what they want!
why? Why should wealth be locked in? I would like to live in a meritocracy, where hard work and graft pays. Inherited wealth destroys the incentive to work, for as we are seeing, the bank of mum and dad have mad property almost unaffordable for those without such support, no matter what they earn. Example, the house I first bought in 2001 was £100K, which my partner and I could afford on a joint income of £35K. The same house is now £400K, which would require a couple without deposit to have an income of £115K on the same 3.5 multiplier. Therefore the only people that can afford a house are those with inherited wealth/wealthy parents. Hard work just won't cut it these days.
Someone works their entire life being taxed every step of the way. When they pass and leave something for the family should that be taxed again? No. It's already been taxed...well unless you're a politician in which case you don't have to worry about paying your share
I don't pay tax on my sipp or my isa savings or the inflated price of my house due to government policy The bulk of my savings are curtesy of low income tax due to oil money and asset stripping during the Thatcher years and the inflated value of my home down to policy designed to forever increase asset prices. I even got a grant at university
Any family business worth in the millions will be affected. Consider hotels, shops, funeral directors, car dealerships, construction companies, estate agents, manufacturing businesses, logistics companies, healthcare clinics, wholesale distributors, engineering firms… Many of those will have to shut down because they cannot get hold of enough cash to pay off the IHT bill, or because they become unviable after selling off 20% of their assets.
Yes. We offshored our digital business for this reason. And ourselves, of course. We are no.longer UK tax residents and we're now working on domicility. Hope UK sorts.itself out at.some point.
If family businesses are forced to sell, who is going to buy? Certainly not another private family. So they will have to sell for far less and to a large business that is probably foreign owned and will then charge more for their goods and services and monopolise the business. All wealth tax is wrong. Governments can tax profits and purchases if they must but please stop the grave robbing.
This inheritance tax is a welcome handicap against private businesses who have an unfair advantage over the giant corporations. 😅 Sarcasm? Is that sarcasm? I think it might be.
Supermarkets are killing farming have been for years, this is a distraction from the real issue. That tax should be paid, and supermarkets should put farmers ahead of profits. The NHS needs money, the tories left an empty pot.
The NHS spend is out of control, the state is far too big for the size of the UK economy. Labour will further shrink the economy and this socialist project will fail and the country shall be saddled with even more national debt, which it will struggle to finance. Oh, happy times...
It depends on the infrastructure investment and supply side reform. 3% inflation isn't bad in itself if your getting positive wage growth We've had 14 years where disposable income has declined by on average 10% with government policy deliberately suppressing pay in the public sector and using immigration keep it low.
@@SlowhandGreg For sure, there will be a bounce in short term growth from the £70 billion of extra government borrowing/spending. However, long term growth can only be generated from business. Since 2008, the UK economy has functioned on cheap money (low interest rates) and QE. If the UK ran a balanced budget, I strongly suspect we would be in recession i.e. there is no real growth. I agree, wages have been suppressed during the last 14 years but is that due to the government or the fact that productivity has been very poor and companies need to make a profit, if they are to give wage increases.
@LA-fr7fx so a rule of thumb money spent on public sector wages generates a minimum of 0.8 in terms of a an economic multiplier, so spending 10 billion through incresed economic activity it generates enough tax and spend that the real cost is 2 billion. Here's the rub though cutting spending can have a > 1 effect, analysis of Osborne's Austerity put the figure at 1.6 An example is defunding the justice system, outsourcing parole function and creating private prisons. You have inefficient use of resource, incresed crime which affects gdp and reduces productivity.
@LA-fr7fx I could reduce customer spend on energy dramatically by using the government to invest in mass storage at both the grid and customer level we have the tech just not the will. That would increase both companies and people's spending power and reduce costs. So for say a 30 billion investment I'm reducing customer costs by 20 billion a year and paying for the investment by increased gdp and productivity over time
@@SlowhandGreg Surely, as a nation, we cannot indefinitely borrow money, award public sector pay rises and call that growth? The public sector is a very inefficient body for spending money. The problem is made worse, when that money has been borrowed and the debt has to be serviced.
Any tax is unfair if any of the population does not pay it. Why should rich very rich people be exempt from inheritance tax like King Charles. Why should someone be able to pass a law in parliament to exempt them from paying tax on their massive pension fund like Kier Stalin. It’s double standards and people who have worked hard get taxed the most….tax should be fair and transparent. People hiding in offshore accounts should be disqualified from having businesses in the UK or the laws should be changed to take into account these tax loopholes.
Same discussion is going on in germany. The problem is that the same can happen to companies worthi billions. then people are thinking very different regarding the inheritance and the taxes.
Totally iniquitous as the really rich can afford to pay accountants who will find ways to move their assets off-shore and out of the reach of HMRC. It's those of us that work hard, save regularly and generally try to be self sufficient who get penalised. House prices make it quite likely that a person who has worked their whole life, earned modestly, spent carefully and invested their savings will quite possibly have assets over £500,000. IHT will be levied on their estate.
Inheritance destroys hard work and locks in wealth into the top few percent. No amount of hard work can help those without a wealthy parent now bridge the gap, so it destroys ambition and optimism. I would like to live in a meritocracy, where hard work and graft pays, with low taxes on the working person. Inherited wealth destroys the incentive to work, for as we are seeing, the bank of mum and dad has made property almost unaffordable for those without such support, no matter what they earn. Example, the house I first bought in 2001 was £110K, which my partner and I could afford on a joint income of £35K using a 3.5 times multiplier. The same house is now £400K, which would require a couple without deposit to have an income of £115K on the same 3.5 multiplier. Therefore the only people that can afford a house are those with inherited wealth/wealthy parents. Hard work just won't cut it these days, and that is a terrible thing.
How can women go to a international meeting when they now what she is . If she does this country is looking like a fool like that of of USA not long ago but not no more.
Is hoarding resources fair when there are millions of people who need more resources to live? What kind of businesses are dependant by the PERSONAL hoarded money of the founders? If the business cannot survive off the profit it generates then it should fail aka FREE MARKET economy. If the business needs the personal funds of the owners to survive then it is better for the family if the business fails.
They are taxing the business….the private wealth is taxed as normal. Go tax Microsoft or TESCO….nearly all companies won’t pay IHT why should just British family owned ones?
Bpr applies to trading businesses. Cash or equivalent hoards in excess of the business needs means that the trading status can become compromised resulting in bpr failing.
You sound like a communist - have you spent most of your life, living off the welfare state and were raised in a tax payer funded council house? Hard working people's taxes paid for your life - never forget that!
Of course it is unfair, inheritance tax is tax on money that has already been taxed. Be a farm, a business, a stately home or a family home. The money used to build these has already been taxed at least once in many cases more than once. Very few family homes cannot be purchased without at least two incomes both of which have already paid income tax to pay the mortgage to by the property.
hold on, if farms have been exempt from IHT to 40 years then many farmers would have received a whole farm with zero tax - so it won't have been bought by money that has already been taxed which is your point.
It's not a tax on money already earned (and invested), it's a tax on the gain. It's simply a capital gains tax that is crystalised when the owner(s) die. If we as a society demand certain services from the state (schools, hospitals) then it's incumbent on the state to raise revenue (taxes) fairly from all. Why should one class of owner be treated differently? Asset rich/cash poor businesses suggest there is a business model issue not that the state shouldn't listen but why not make money and provide for taxes like we all do.
Cool lets stop funding the police so we can take those for ourselves then, final bit of the social contract gone! Probably not good news for the average telegraph reader but it's what they want!
All inheritance tax should be abolished, not just for farmers!
why? Why should wealth be locked in? I would like to live in a meritocracy, where hard work and graft pays. Inherited wealth destroys the incentive to work, for as we are seeing, the bank of mum and dad have mad property almost unaffordable for those without such support, no matter what they earn. Example, the house I first bought in 2001 was £100K, which my partner and I could afford on a joint income of £35K. The same house is now £400K, which would require a couple without deposit to have an income of £115K on the same 3.5 multiplier. Therefore the only people that can afford a house are those with inherited wealth/wealthy parents. Hard work just won't cut it these days.
It is not unfair, it is IMMORAL.
The thing is the money has been taxed already !
Pension hasnt
Neither has my isa money
Or
The added value on my house created by decades of government policy designed to keep asset prices rising
the inherited farm hasn't been taxed
Someone works their entire life being taxed every step of the way. When they pass and leave something for the family should that be taxed again? No. It's already been taxed...well unless you're a politician in which case you don't have to worry about paying your share
well, the point of inheritance tax is that it´s "hard work" that counts, not who your mum and dad are.
I don't pay tax on my sipp or my isa savings or the inflated price of my house due to government policy
The bulk of my savings are curtesy of low income tax due to oil money and asset stripping during the Thatcher years and the inflated value of my home down to policy designed to forever increase asset prices.
I even got a grant at university
Any family business worth in the millions will be affected. Consider hotels, shops, funeral directors, car dealerships, construction companies, estate agents, manufacturing businesses, logistics companies, healthcare clinics, wholesale distributors, engineering firms…
Many of those will have to shut down because they cannot get hold of enough cash to pay off the IHT bill, or because they become unviable after selling off 20% of their assets.
Yes. We offshored our digital business for this reason. And ourselves, of course. We are no.longer UK tax residents and we're now working on domicility. Hope UK sorts.itself out at.some point.
good, get lost
Tax dodging Tory snake.
Yes, no one should be paying it.
If family businesses are forced to sell, who is going to buy? Certainly not another private family. So they will have to sell for far less and to a large business that is probably foreign owned and will then charge more for their goods and services and monopolise the business. All wealth tax is wrong. Governments can tax profits and purchases if they must but please stop the grave robbing.
This inheritance tax is a welcome handicap against private businesses who have an unfair advantage over the giant corporations.
😅 Sarcasm? Is that sarcasm? I think it might be.
Yes very good point….
What a brilliant and articulate guest. Top performance.
YES !!
Supermarkets are killing farming have been for years, this is a distraction from the real issue. That tax should be paid, and supermarkets should put farmers ahead of profits. The NHS needs money, the tories left an empty pot.
The NHS spend is out of control, the state is far too big for the size of the UK economy. Labour will further shrink the economy and this socialist project will fail and the country shall be saddled with even more national debt, which it will struggle to finance. Oh, happy times...
Try to tax everything - corruption
A very interesting podcast. It seems we’re heading for lower growth with higher costs which will fuel inflation and interest rates.
It depends on the infrastructure investment and supply side reform.
3% inflation isn't bad in itself if your getting positive wage growth
We've had 14 years where disposable income has declined by on average 10% with government policy deliberately suppressing pay in the public sector and using immigration keep it low.
@@SlowhandGreg For sure, there will be a bounce in short term growth from the £70 billion of extra government borrowing/spending. However, long term growth can only be generated from business. Since 2008, the UK economy has functioned on cheap money (low interest rates) and QE. If the UK ran a balanced budget, I strongly suspect we would be in recession i.e. there is no real growth. I agree, wages have been suppressed during the last 14 years but is that due to the government or the fact that productivity has been very poor and companies need to make a profit, if they are to give wage increases.
@LA-fr7fx so a rule of thumb money spent on public sector wages generates a minimum of 0.8 in terms of a an economic multiplier, so spending 10 billion through incresed economic activity it generates enough tax and spend that the real cost is 2 billion.
Here's the rub though cutting spending can have a > 1 effect, analysis of Osborne's Austerity put the figure at 1.6
An example is defunding the justice system, outsourcing parole function and creating private prisons. You have inefficient use of resource, incresed crime which affects gdp and reduces productivity.
@LA-fr7fx I could reduce customer spend on energy dramatically by using the government to invest in mass storage at both the grid and customer level we have the tech just not the will.
That would increase both companies and people's spending power and reduce costs.
So for say a 30 billion investment I'm reducing customer costs by 20 billion a year and paying for the investment by increased gdp and productivity over time
@@SlowhandGreg Surely, as a nation, we cannot indefinitely borrow money, award public sector pay rises and call that growth? The public sector is a very inefficient body for spending money. The problem is made worse, when that money has been borrowed and the debt has to be serviced.
Don't forget she lied on her CE for maths.
They’re not labour they’re communists
Any tax is unfair if any of the population does not pay it. Why should rich very rich people be exempt from inheritance tax like King Charles. Why should someone be able to pass a law in parliament to exempt them from paying tax on their massive pension fund like Kier Stalin. It’s double standards and people who have worked hard get taxed the most….tax should be fair and transparent. People hiding in offshore accounts should be disqualified from having businesses in the UK or the laws should be changed to take into account these tax loopholes.
Not just Family Businesses being destroyed but actual FAMILIES being split up . LABOUR TOTAL lack of UNDERSTANDING of how rural UK works .
Sure got us
Taxes is a lifetime loyal friend,
no one without a best buddy.
Of course it’s unfair like most taxes
Same discussion is going on in germany. The problem is that the same can happen to companies worthi billions. then people are thinking very different regarding the inheritance and the taxes.
Yes
Yea, it is a triple tax.
what about corporate tax rates and offshoring profits?
Drop the rate and lose the loopholes so everyone has to pay it, not just the middle class - but it is fair. At the end of the day its unearned income.
this guy employs 150 people also got the other problem of ni
No
Totally iniquitous as the really rich can afford to pay accountants who will find ways to move their assets off-shore and out of the reach of HMRC. It's those of us that work hard, save regularly and generally try to be self sufficient who get penalised. House prices make it quite likely that a person who has worked their whole life, earned modestly, spent carefully and invested their savings will quite possibly have assets over £500,000. IHT will be levied on their estate.
Rich folk creates fund. Inharitance tax for plebs.
SOS England
Stupid question. Taxing the dead is rape
Easily fixed... change it to an income tax on those receiving the money.
Inheritance destroys hard work and locks in wealth into the top few percent. No amount of hard work can help those without a wealthy parent now bridge the gap, so it destroys ambition and optimism. I would like to live in a meritocracy, where hard work and graft pays, with low taxes on the working person. Inherited wealth destroys the incentive to work, for as we are seeing, the bank of mum and dad has made property almost unaffordable for those without such support, no matter what they earn. Example, the house I first bought in 2001 was £110K, which my partner and I could afford on a joint income of £35K using a 3.5 times multiplier. The same house is now £400K, which would require a couple without deposit to have an income of £115K on the same 3.5 multiplier. Therefore the only people that can afford a house are those with inherited wealth/wealthy parents. Hard work just won't cut it these days, and that is a terrible thing.
How can women go to a international meeting when they now what she is . If she does this country is looking like a fool like that of of USA not long ago but not no more.
Is hoarding resources fair when there are millions of people who need more resources to live? What kind of businesses are dependant by the PERSONAL hoarded money of the founders? If the business cannot survive off the profit it generates then it should fail aka FREE MARKET economy. If the business needs the personal funds of the owners to survive then it is better for the family if the business fails.
They are taxing the business….the private wealth is taxed as normal. Go tax Microsoft or TESCO….nearly all companies won’t pay IHT why should just British family owned ones?
Bpr applies to trading businesses. Cash or equivalent hoards in excess of the business needs means that the trading status can become compromised resulting in bpr failing.
You sound like a communist - have you spent most of your life, living off the welfare state and were raised in a tax payer funded council house? Hard working people's taxes paid for your life - never forget that!
WHY THEY DONT PAY INHERITANCE TAX ON THE RICH DEad