Rat
Not bored. Never bored.,
So his child never has to work to get a house. Very convenient for him, I suppose.
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
UKIP win Clacton by-election by a landslide
- Thread starter MikeG
- Start date
At least you aren't calling them very rich now.
You clearly have no idea how poverty stricken some areas of the South east are, and how working people desperately struggle to afford to live here.........and all because an undersupply of houses and an influx of foreign capital into the area have artificially inflated house prices.
Guybrush Threepwood
Trainee Pirate
OK, in another bizarre coincidence, I have magic powers. I have just disappeared all your assets. You are standing in the streets in your pants, and that's all you own. Does that alter your choice of which house you want?
Yes. I would choose the house nearest my work, my family and my friends. Without hesitation. Thanks for the offer
Guybrush Threepwood
Trainee Pirate
No he doesn't, neither of them would pay inheritance tax as the threshold is 325,000. Even if it was worth more, he (or she) would still leave more money to his kids, I know who I'd rather have as my parent.
Guybrush Threepwood
Trainee Pirate
Yes. I would choose the house nearest my work, my family and my friends. Without hesitation. Thanks for the offer
You wouldn't pick the more expensive one, sell it and buy the other one and give your family and friends loads of money then?
OK, your choice I guess.
But you're falling for the same old issue.....
Plasterer in Caephilly dies and leaves 100% of the value of his house to his 2 kids. They get 50% of a house each.
Plasterer in Walthamstow dies, estate pays 10% inheritance tax, the 2 kids end up with 45% of the value of a house each. How is that fair?
It is utterly irrelevant how much houses are worth 200 miles away.......people live where their family and their work is, almost exclusively. Why should the kids of a plasterer in the SE be penalised for living in the south east, when all other circumstances are identical with the kids of a plasterer living in Wales or Northumberland?
Belgian thought
Master Poster
Do they give you any reasons? Would the UK be then subject to import duty and so forth?
The plasterer in Walthamstow does have another choice; to sell his house, move to Caerphilly, buy a very similar house, bank a significant sum and start his own business. He is materially better off, if he is willing to move.
Not the most popular suggestion of the 80s.
Used to be true, but is it still true? Families tend to be more scattered these days, going where the work is etc. If we have no idea where the beneficiaries live, then taxing the 325k* Walthamstow 2-up 2-down at the same rate as its Caerphilly equivalent 2-up 2-down is tantamount to assuming that the Walthamstow beneficiaries are in that area and suffering NE London prices.
* Are such houses still that cheap? Walthamstow is on a major tube route to central London. I thought the Chinese had bought all those houses already and prices were now pushing £.5M
The only thing that can fairly be taxed is the monetary value of the taxed object. Price, revenue. That sort of thing. Poll taxes don't work because they violate that principle. Fairness is imposing a tax as a function of a clearly measurable monetary value. Adam Smith knew that. So should you.
Belgian thought
Master Poster
My question is that if a person has bought their house during their life from the salary of their work which was taxed as income tax, why should they pay an extra tax when they die?
This takes the adage of there being only two certain things in life, those being death and taxes, to an extreme.
I favour no inheritance tax - tax is/was paid during life.
As an aside, do companies pay taxes on assets?
Last edited:
Guybrush Threepwood
Trainee Pirate
And if I buy clothes/gasoline/alcohol with money I paid income tax on why should I pay VAT or excise duty?
No one has yet responded to my initial point, none of us will ever pay inheritance tax on our assets, some of us may pay it on someone else's should we choose to keep them. Why does this most voluntary of taxes create so much anger?
Guybrush Threepwood
Trainee Pirate
Just to hammer this home, no one ever has paid, or ever will pay, in any nation on the face of God's earth, any tax after they are dead. It is not possible to do so.
Last edited:
They don't pay. They're dead. The heirs pay.
Then nothing I buy with my taxed income should be taxed, as pointed out. Nothing I inherit from the taxed estate of a deceased parent should be taxed. Wait ... Nothing I buy with income I inherited from the taxed income of a deceased parent should be taxed? Nothing I earn in wages paid from the taxed profits of an employer should be taxed?
Can I ask a question more on topic, what will the effects of the UKIP win be on the promises made about settling the West Lothian Question and preventing those MPs who are from areas with devolved parliaments or assemblies voting on issues which are already decided there.
And you should stop with the patronising tone. There many good alternatives to the death duty question, as you should know.........not having it at all being one. That's fair to everyone, and is what I advocate. A reasonable alternative is to have it set with such a ceiling that it only catches the genuinely rich, say, £1,000,000 estates and above. Or if fairness is really what you seek (it clearly isn't with most here who only want it as a way of punishing people for being notionally better off than them), you could apply it universally (ie no lower limit), but at a much lower rate.......say 1% of the entire estate's value, rather than 40% of everything over £325,000 as at present.
Last edited: