Permabanned
- Joined
- 9 Aug 2009
- Posts
- 12,234
- Location
- UK
Agree with putting a cap on inheritance. Somewhere around 200k should do the trick.
And boomers wonder why millennials are bitter towards them..
- Thread starter Scam
- Start date
Permabanned
- Joined
- 9 Aug 2009
- Posts
- 12,234
- Location
- UK
Yep
£2m is more like it.
Please explain your reasoning for this and the £200k limit.
Why? I'm saving so my kids will have a decent future - why should I have that money I earned be taxed more than if I'd spunked it all on cars, hookers and cocaine?
(Edit: reading this back maybe my priorities are wrong)
Hookers pay tax, you pay tax on a car purchase and in turn the rest of the cash spent on the car pays for profit, salaries of people who made it and so on - plenty of tax getting paid for there...
But that is conflating different things, transfer of wealth vs buying goods and services.
That's just naive and impractical.
How would that work in reality? Say you introduce a cap then what is to prevent people simply disposing of their assets?
How do you account for life assurance policies? Do only the rich have security now? Some salary man with a mortgage and a family now can't make provisions in case the worst were to occur and he gets diagnosed with cancer or run over by a bus or something....
I think the idea of cap/high tax on inheritance isn't to target salary men with mortgages, but people with millions in net worth. It encourages them to spend the money into the economy (which creates jobs and increases money utilisation), instead of dumping them into asset classes, inflating them for everyone else.
To be fair this view is just as naive as the boomer generation telling young people to pull up their boot straps. 200k isn't a lot of money nowadays.
Intent doesn't matter - these are obvious consequences of a 200k cap.
It's over 11 years pay at minimum wage
Of course but you need to cater inheritance tax to cover people from all walks of life, not just those at minimum wage level.
And I'm against that. But for a cap that's in millions or tens of millions instead.
Tax or cap that (above a certain threshold) as well. Some countries have a lifetime tax-free gift allowance for example (again can be millions), after that you're paying effectively the equivalent value in estate tax.
It's 8x the average wage.
I agree that in the grand scheme of things £200k isn't a lot. But when it would take the average person 8 years to get "not that much", without spending a penny, there is something very, very wrong.
What's really wrong is that wages in this country are way too low. Have been for decades.
Yep, they haven’t kept pace with asset inflation compared to previous decades.
I don’t support stricter inheritance tax, it would be double/triple taxation which is ridiculous.
OK so people just make large transfers and pay a tax, your cap is then bypassed.
That tax can be at 100% above a certain level, equivalent to a cap. Are you really debating transaction technicalities? We're not drafting legislation here.