Millennials are likely to enjoy the biggest "inheritance boom"

[Hotwired]

So just tax avoidance then, fair enough, I assume you'll never complain about anyone not paying their taxes or the state of public services then.

What's this snarky rubbish. If you're going to talk trash to someone who gives you a honest reply in good faith then get lost.

If you (1) have money and (2) distribute it before your death there is no question of tax to be paid because it isn't yours anymore.

 

[Roar87]

What's this snarky rubbish. If you're going to talk trash to someone who gives you a honest reply in good faith then get lost.

If you (1) have money and (2) distribute it before your death there is no question of tax to be paid because it isn't yours anymore.

Well yeah but if you're actively distributing your wealth before your death to avoid inheritance tax then it's tax avoidance, which is perfectly legal but obviously not in the spirit of the system. Loads of people do it, you'd be daft not to really, but then if you go and do that then you should also accept that you are part of the reason public services aren't as good as they could be. That was only my point.

 

[Irish_Tom]

Piketty advocates a progressive “global wealth tax” that would see a rate applied to all assets including property, financial derivatives and investments, regardless of the individual’s country of origin or the country in which those assets are held.

Theoretically it would be possible given the digital world we now live in. The biggest barriers are getting all the countries in the world to agree and implement it; notwithstanding the resistance it would meet by many of the super rich who, lets face it, have a significant say in business and politics around the globe.

As @Roar87 says, most of us will base our opinion on inheritance tax through the framing of what we stand to inherit (if anything).

As such, most of the discussion in this thread has been around the inheritance of the “middle class” – a property with value of £1m or less – that doesn’t really bother Piketty.

Those of us who do inherit a house, even a £1m house, aren’t suddenly going to start accumulating all of the world’s capital. It’s the super rich – the top 1 and top 0.1% – where a global wealth tax could begin to reduce the massive inequality we have today.

 

[Randomface74]

Well yeah but if you're actively distributing your wealth before your death to avoid inheritance tax then it's tax avoidance, which is perfectly legal but obviously not in the spirit of the system. Loads of people do it, you'd be daft not to really, but then if you go and do that then you should also accept that you are part of the reason public services aren't as good as they could be. That was only my point.

It's not moral to take money from someone because they have more than you. If he's part of the reason public services aren't as good, then so are you.

 

[m@rty]

I will inherit pretty much nothing as both parents are quite poor with no purchased home or savings to pass on.

I don't expect them to be able to pass on anything to me and believe in making it on your own in the world so I am quite content with this scenario.

I still don't believe in inheritance tax however.

 

[dowie]

Those of us who do inherit a house, even a £1m house, aren’t suddenly going to start accumulating all of the world’s capital. It’s the super rich – the top 1 and top 0.1% – where a global wealth tax could begin to reduce the massive inequality we have today.

wel it is trusts that really skew things for the mega rich... if you're the senior male descendent of Lord Snooty and you stand to inherit the Scottish estate, the London Town house, the Estate and farms in the Home Counties and a bunch of freeholds to some property in London then it is probably all wrapped up in a trust/ or trusts...

"oh but you'll still be taxed on the income from that trust" some might say... well sure but you're still getting some big huge houses worth multiple millions to live in the same way as if they were actually in your name and the freeholds, estate farmland etc.. that provides your income is still all protected/doesn't have to be sold to pay off the big tax bill (OK farmland is a bit different anyway but the freeholds and other property have value etc..)

that is the thing that stinks... a big chunk of property can be essentially passed down to multiple generations of some male line of some family and there won't be any come back

sure these days there are some tax implications when setting up the trusts and there is the tax to pay on the income from them but it is still a massive dodge... without it then Lord Snooty's son might well have to liquidate half the freehold property, flog one of the mansions and perhaps sell some of the farmland to someone who actually intends to do some farming rather than live off the rent

 

[Irish_Tom]

Snip!

Absolutely; trusts, tax havens, Ltd companies and clever accounting all make things much harder to tax the super rich. Not to mention the ability to move around the world if one country did start to impose heavier tax rates. The bigger the fortune the faster it grows and the more money can be spent holding on to it and increasing it.

As I said earlier in the thread, increasing these taxes tends to just punish the middle class while the top percent can afford to avoid it.

That’s why Piketty calls for a global wealth tax but he admits in the book that it’s a bit of a utopian vision.

 

[Roar87]

It's not moral to take money from someone because they have more than you. If he's part of the reason public services aren't as good, then so are you.

You'll basically need to clarify both of those sentences for me to respond to them. Who's taking someone's money because they have more than me? Why am I the reason public services aren't as good as they could be if I'm not actively avoiding paying tax?

 

[dowie]

That’s why Piketty calls for a global wealth tax but he admits in the book that it’s a bit of a utopian vision.

I don't think we need global taxes per say, especially given how we tax things differently... for example we don't have capital gains on our primary homes, the US can do though... we have council tax, they have property taxes etc..

I do think we need more transparency/information sharing... if someone who is a UK resident is to be say taxed on their worldwide income then the transparency is sufficient - it doesn't necessarily require a global tax... I guess overseas trusts and companies owned by nominees are potentially a problem though even if we crack down on UK ones

 

[Randomface74]

You'll basically need to clarify both of those sentences for me to respond to them. Who's taking someone's money because they have more than me? Why am I the reason public services aren't as good as they could be if I'm not actively avoiding paying tax?

I don't want you to respond.

 

[Roar87]

I don't want you to respond.

I wouldn't either if I was making irrelevant points

 

[Randomface74]

Well you wouldn't respond to yourself, that wouldn't make any sense.

 

[Roar87]

Completely unrelated but Oxford is described as the least affordable place in the UK, with house prices 10.7 times the national average, not that it might affect anyone's views ITT on inheritance.

 

[Randomface74]

Think it's more like 13x. Nobody I know (all well paid working people) can afford Oxford, myself included.
Might be worth pointing out that people's parents don't necessarily live where they live.
E.g. someone with family in Oxford but living in Hull would get a serious pay day.
But someone with family in Hull but living in Oxford wouldn't.
So do you tax the person in Hull more or something? nah that's daft of course...

 

[wesimmo]

Life is tough, ever was it thus. Focus on today and your future life, not what people had before or what people are doing to your future (not aimed at you). I suspect many (not all) student bills could be significantly smaller, but they aren't because education is now something you do for an experience, in my time it was very much for the specialisation it provided you, the differentiation. Instead of moving from Birmingham to Edinburgh to do your Biology degree, do it in Brum, live with mum and dad, save 20K, focus on the end point, not the 3-4 years of having a great time. Plenty of time for that.

Yep, work through university too, part time in term time and full time during holidays, and live off food from Farmfoods and Aldi like I did. I did some soul-destroying jobs to limit my debt when I graduated but ended up in a position where I could pay off my student loan fairly quickly.

Kinda annoys me these days when I go for breakfast at a nice place just down the road from where I lived as a student and can't get a table due to students who are spending £10-15 minimum a head on breakfast, expensive coffees and super food smoothies, that was my budget for a week of crappy food. Hell I remember boiling up a massive pot of cheap tea bags to try and get a cheaper caffeine hit than pro plus during exam time.

 

[Roar87]

Think it's more like 13x. Nobody I know (all well paid working people) can afford Oxford, myself included.
Might be worth pointing out that people's parents don't necessarily live where they live.
E.g. someone with family in Oxford but living in Hull would get a serious pay day.
But someone with family in Hull but living in Oxford wouldn't.
So do you tax the person in Hull more or something? nah that's daft of course...

Nah if you live in Hull and you come into some money you deserve it for living in Hull

 

[LabR@t]

Yep, work through university too, part time in term time and full time during holidays, and live off food from Farmfoods and Aldi like I did. I did some soul-destroying jobs to limit my debt when I graduated but ended up in a position where I could pay off my student loan fairly quickly.

Kinda annoys me these days when I go for breakfast at a nice place just down the road from where I lived as a student and can't get a table due to students who are spending £10-15 minimum a head on breakfast, expensive coffees and super food smoothies, that was my budget for a week of crappy food. Hell I remember boiling up a massive pot of cheap tea bags to try and get a cheaper caffeine hit than pro plus during exam time.

That's the me now generation for you, they want it now and they don't want to miss out

 

[Irish_Tom]

I don't think we need global taxes per say, especially given how we tax things differently... for example we don't have capital gains on our primary homes, the US can do though... we have council tax, they have property taxes etc..

I do think we need more transparency/information sharing... if someone who is a UK resident is to be say taxed on their worldwide income then the transparency is sufficient - it doesn't necessarily require a global tax... I guess overseas trusts and companies owned by nominees are potentially a problem though even if we crack down on UK ones.

More transparency would definitely help.

I think the problem is as you say; if a single country cracks down then the money will just move elsewhere.

If all countries signed up to whatever system was put in place it would avoid all that.

The problem is, in certain places entire economies are based on financial services and low tax rates – there would have to be incentives to get them on board.

 

[Hotwired]

Well yeah but if you're actively distributing your wealth before your death to avoid inheritance tax then it's tax avoidance, which is perfectly legal but obviously not in the spirit of the system. Loads of people do it, you'd be daft not to really, but then if you go and do that then you should also accept that you are part of the reason public services aren't as good as they could be. That was only my point.

It's ridiculous to bash people for being able to read and comprehend the requirements for inheritance tax.

The bottom line is that if you want the maximum personal control over your money and assets then you have to spend or gift away everything over £325k or £650k if you're a widow/er.

If someone has no specific desire to use their money while they are alive then they can die with the lot and it either will or wont get taxed depending on how much they leave.

IHT is a tax on money and assets that you obviously have no use for and held a large amount of on your death, demonstrating that you had no desire to do anything else with it, otherwise why hoard til you died.

I wouldn't have bothered giving you the initial response if your entire plan was to have someone to harass on a morality angle.

 

[Roar87]

It's ridiculous to bash people for being able to read and comprehend the requirements for inheritance tax.

The bottom line is that if you want the maximum personal control over your money and assets then you have to spend or gift away everything over £325k or £650k if you're a widow/er.

If someone has no specific desire to use their money while they are alive then they can die with the lot and it either will or wont get taxed depending on how much they leave.

IHT is a tax on money and assets that you obviously have no use for and held a large amount of on your death, demonstrating that you had no desire to do anything else with it, otherwise why hoard til you died.

I wouldn't have bothered giving you the initial response if your entire plan was to have someone to harass on a morality angle.

I wasn't bashing anyone really, if stating giving away your assets before your death to avoid IHT is tax avoidance then yes I'm guilty. I'm sorry if I made you feel bad about it. If it's any concellation I honestly couldn't give a ****, it's a drop in the ocean. I'm pretty sure David Cameron is guilty of it so it's not like everyone isn't doing it.