Poll: Poll: Prime Minister Theresa May calls General Election on June 8th

[FoxEye]

given our ageing population why shouldn't they pay for social care... there are enough young people out there who can't afford homes - why should their taxes pay for the care of some elderly person who has substantial assets themselves to cover care costs

I think actually this will screw over young people who can't afford homes even more.

It means that the only way parents can help their kids is to re-mortgage their house whilst still alive, in order to get their kids on the property market. Then I guess when the house is sold to cover the mortgage, there is no money left to pay the social care bill?

Trying to give their kids the family house on death doesn't work, assuming the parent needed social care. Then the house gets sold an most/all of the money gets handed over to the govt.

BUT crucially the house is quite likely to be sold to an BTL investor rather than a young person on a low wage. Meaning that instead of inheriting the family house, that young person is now stuck in a life of renting.

The crux of it is that not being able to inherit your family home is going to hurt young people on low wages the most. Rich people can afford to pay for their social care, or have fully private care anyhow. Their kids will still inherit everything, minus IHT.

It's actually the poorer families that get screwed, because now their kids lose everything.

Be careful what you wish for.

 

[McBain]

You can't take it with you... really don't see why we don't tax wealth more.

I also don't see the issue here - frankly I suspect some of the criticism is simply because it is being proposed by the Tories. Someone has to pay for this care and if the people receiving it are wealthy then why should they expect others to foot the bill.

You might not be able to take it with you, but why should you be taxed on something twice?

Working your entire life, paying taxes, earning that wealth, then you get get taxed on it when you buy the farm. Seems fair.

Wouldn't be surprised if they taxed you on it it, even if you donated your estate to charity. I'll have to look into that.

 

[dowie]

Oh look, let's see what some of our regulars had to say over Labours previously proposed Death Tax (to pay for social care)

https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/threads/david-blunkett-wants-a-death-tax.18653649/

from that thread:

Inheritance tax is fine IMO, probably should be extended like this and a crackdown on trusts etc...

Much better to tax assets this way than proposals like the mansion tax.

I'm not being inconsistent here - I was in favour of taxing wealth when proposed by labour just as I am when being proposed by the Tories

on the other hand I suspect that some of the people criticising this, who are otherwise sympathetic to the left, are simply doing so because it is the Tories proposing it

 

[Greebo]

lol! Lets see what they say about this...

You would hope they would be frothing at the mouth and bashing their keyboards just as vocally as they did two years ago?

Or will it be because its a Tory proposal it will be approved off and the issue before was that it was a Labour proposal?

I really dont get the blinkered view a lot of people seem to have that they cant judge something purely on its merits and not from a label viewpoint. I mainly tend to approve of Tory policies but there are lots a detest and think are wrong (becoming more and more under May) and equally there are some Labour suggestions which I think are great and others which are claptrap.

You see the same in Trump thread. Everything has to be polarized and black and white nowadays.

 

[Uther]

Well, she's live now...

 

[dowie]

I think actually this will screw over young people who can't afford homes even more.

It means that the only way parents can help their kids is to re-mortgage their house whilst still alive, in order to get their kids on the property market. Then I guess when the house is sold to cover the mortgage, there is no money left to pay the social care bill?

Trying to give their kids the family house on death doesn't work, assuming the parent needed social care. Then the house gets sold an most/all of the money gets handed over to the govt.

BUT crucially the house is quite likely to be sold to an BTL investor rather than a young person on a low wage. Meaning that instead of inheriting the family house, that young person is now stuck in a life of renting.

The crux of it is that not being able to inherit your family home is going to hurt young people on low wages the most. Rich people can afford to pay for their social care, or have fully private care anyhow. Their kids will still inherit everything, minus IHT.

It's actually the poorer families that get screwed, because now their kids lose everything.

Be careful what you wish for.

yet in this thread linked below, when Blunkett proposes a death tax, you're all in favour of it... why the change in tune when it is the Tories who propose targeting wealth (to be paid upon death)

Oh look, let's see what some of our regulars had to say over Labours previously proposed Death Tax (to pay for social care)

https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/threads/david-blunkett-wants-a-death-tax.18653649/

 

[FoxEye]

Tbh a death tax would be fine if the housing market wasn't utterly screwed.

THe problem is that what could be a good idea in other circumstances is a terrible one in the current reality.

 

[VincentHanna]

In hindsight this quote is also quite funny considering Teresa May bought in The Snoopers Charter

It's David Blunkett, he's a **** of the highest order. He's responsible for kicking off Labours love of the surveillance culture by putting CCTV practically on every street corner

 

[dalehitchy1]

I have a feeling that once the baby boomers pass away the tories will become unelectable for a while.

From statisitics you can see that 35s and under just do not vote tory. Once this age bracket are the majority I cant see the tories being as popular as they are now. The young have been screwed over by the tories enough and at one point they will snap at the government.

There only chance is propaganda ... And with the tories having close ties to all the media its possible ... But I can really see it come crashing down at some point in the next 10-15 years

 

[Freakbro]

yet in this thread linked below, when Blunkett proposes a death tax, you're all in favour of it... why the change in tune when it is the Tories who propose targeting wealth (to be paid upon death)

Well, a 15% levy on your estate is somewhat different to we will take it all and leave you £100k

Which when you include houses nowadays pretty much anybody owning theirs will have an estate far in excess of £100k

 

[VincentHanna]

From statisitics you can see that 35s and under just do not vote tory. Once this age bracket are the majority I cant see the tories being as popular as they are now. The young have been screwed over by the tories enough and at one point they will snap at the government.

That's because we're just nicer people

 

[dowie]

Well, a 15% levy on your estate is somewhat different to we will take it all and leave you £100k

Which when you include houses nowadays pretty much anybody owning theirs will have an estate far in excess of £100k

they're not generally going to take it all though, they're going to cover the costs of your care... typical care bill (for residential) is 50-90k IIRC dependent on location... obviously for the more expensive locations the property in question is likely also more expensive

someone living in a 500k home in south east England perhaps gets say 90k taken away when they die - what is so unfair about that? Not to different to a 15% levy in that case either tbh..

Though in this case we're also now talking about people paying for care at home... which has a lower cost than full time residential care

 

[McBain]

1. New rules on the aid target - but 0.7% of GDP commitment remains

Well, that's the likely the end of any chance of a vote for Tory. Doubt i'll bother.

 

[Greebo]

Well, a 15% levy on your estate is somewhat different to we will take it all and leave you £100k

Which when you include houses nowadays pretty much anybody owning theirs will have an estate far in excess of £100k

Yeah, with the average house price being £215k this is like an average 53% death duty should you need the maximum social care.

 

[Bigpops]

....why should you be taxed on something twice?

If only they'd limit it to twice!
You're taxed on the money you earn. You're taxed again when you spend it (VAT). If you import something, you pay duty, then they charge you VAT on that duty and the goods you imported, and the shipping.

 

[McBain]

If only they'd limit it to twice!
You're taxed on the money you earn. You're taxed again when you spend it (VAT). If you import something, you pay duty, then they charge you VAT on that duty and the goods you imported, and the shipping.

Yeah quite, I was thinking more along the lines of taxed twice = living and death.

 

[dowie]

If only they'd limit it to twice!
You're taxed on the money you earn. You're taxed again when you spend it (VAT). If you import something, you pay duty, then they charge you VAT on that duty and the goods you imported, and the shipping.

Indeed - the 'taxed twice' argument didn't really make any sense

 

[Greebo]

they're not generally going to take it all though, they're going to cover the costs of your care... typical care bill is 50-90k IIRC dependent on location... obviously for the more expensive locations the property in question is likely also more expensive

someone living in a 500k home in south east England perhaps gets say 90k taken away when they die - what is so unfair about that?

Not sure where you get your figures from.

https://ukcareguide.co.uk/home-care-costs/

Leaving it on berkshrie, 10 years in a care home will be £413k and 10 years home help will be £85k. Of course that is per person and so if you are a couple then it will be £170k of home help.

Even Tyne & Wear is £257k in a care home and £57k for home help for 10 years.

 

[xyphic]

they're not generally going to take it all though, they're going to cover the costs of your care... typical care bill is 50-90k IIRC dependent on location... obviously for the more expensive locations the property in question is likely also more expensive

someone living in a 500k home in south east England perhaps gets say 90k taken away when they die - what is so unfair about that? Not to different to a 15% levy in that case either tbh..

As with everything Tory, it has a higher impact on those with less wealth. Around these parts, an average 4 bed semi will come in at somewhere like £200-250k so this effectively takes up to 50% of the value of your home, which is obviously higher than a 15% death tax.

 

[dalehitchy1]

Yeah, with the average house price being £215k this is like an average 53% death duty should you need the maximum social care.

I'm still not 100% percent sure I understand. Lets say my house is worth 120k when I die. My social care bill could be... A random guess... Around 50k.

Is 20k of that only deductable (I.e 100k is kept)