Why?
'Rich Privilege'
- Thread starter SiD the Turtle
- Start date
Why?
The current system of "inheritance tax" is a death tax.
I'm perfectly happy for a true inheritance tax to be implemented (where the receiver pays tax on the amount they receive, rather than the tax being on the assets of the death person before being handed out as it is now). As I said in the other thread I would support getting rid of the current "inheritance tax*" system and moving inheritance into the CGT realm. However before that happened we should get rid of the 28% threshold, or at the very least stagger it like all other taxes**.
*It's a death tax, just to reiterate
** As far as I understand anyone on less than £41k pays CGT at 18% whereas anyone on a salary above £41k pays 28%, no matter what the gain is. It's blatantly unfair. Why should someone on £38k that gains £1m pay 18% when someone on £42 who gains £10k have to pay 28%?? Maybe I've misunderstood the system, in which case ignore. I would potentially be happy with something along the lines of 18% up to x and then 28% over that, no matter what your salary.
Simplifying the tax system would be one way of doing that, rather than just increasing PAYE tax that most people seem to advocate.
As an aside I am morally opposed to an overall tax regime of over 50%, which is not far off what anyone in the higher tax bracket pays...
OP's parents worked hard and climbed the ladder, OP feels they should have full control over what happens to that money that they have already paid tax on all their lives.
What do you feel should happen to the parent's property?
Ok so everyone does that for the next 200 years, eventually you've got one class of people who own all the property because of inheritance and don't have to work at all, and you've got another class of people who are born into poverty and work to pay the rent of the "owner" class. How do you think that turns out? Hint: Rich people and Guillotines
Except, of course, it doesn't. Still, jealousy is probably a better mental state to be in than responsible for their own fate for some.
Dear god, are you really, really that simple?
Well "statistically" almost all the people I know and grew up with must have been the "exception that proved the rule"...
I guess it depends if you compare everyone to the super rich or if we compare the poor to the well off (i.e. the vast majority of people that are successful but have assets worth less than £1m).
There are two different issues that have to be sorted out here. How we "deal" with the super rich billionaires (most of whom are self made in some way) and how we "deal" with the very well off (those on, lets say, £100k+ but still work full time as employees - those that still pay almost all the tax they are supposed to).
Well, wealth inequality is not a problem in itself when you look at studies that don't cherry pick their data to fit an existing narrative the author wishes to present. (Spirit level, looking at you)
Social mobility is more complicated, but I am far from convinced that the solution to poor social mobility is to abuse the property rights of the successful any more than abusing the rights of the less successful would be appropriate.
The problems we have today are not a result of inheritance, but a combination of poor planning and unintended consequences from 70 years of various types of state intervention in people's lives.
biggest issue is when massive companies like amazon abuse the system and pay bugger all in taxes.
if Amazon didn't exist we would still have tons of high street stores or individual websites paying the correct tax which is all added up with the same total revenue as amazon would be a lot more tax than amazon gets away with paying.
it's a joke how these massive companies are so powerful governments will basically bend over and give them special tax rates
I wish the government would promote smaller/medium business more and penalise the monstrously big companies that basically have a monopoly.
during the recession the banks were supposed to be giving these types of people loans but seemingly were very hesitant and would rather trade it on the stockmarket lol
Last edited:
I thought we was specifically focusing on the UK here?
The poor aren't getting poorer in the UK. Even the lowest income people in the UK are better of than they were 10/30/50/100 years ago..
You don't have to shop at Amazon if you don't want to. I will continue to do so while they continue to pass the savings from only handing over the minimum required under the law to the government on to the customer.
You shouldn't penalise people or companies for success, nor should you protect companies from their choices. Equal treatment under the law should be the defining principle in all interactions with the state.
I am aware what IHT is. I was referring to Labours idea which has been coined 'death tax'. A flat 10% on inherited estates on top of IHT I believe.
That's the point of working hard and being more successful surely? More disposable income to spend how you wish perhaps on nice things? You would rather everyone have the same percentage of disposable income?
And I'm not sure you are even right. Rich will have more disposable income, but they will be buying nice things and paying tax on those. You mention investing, surely they will then pay tax on any returns they make..
Never said France was in trouble did I? But they went after the rich, brought in obscene tax rules. Tax revenue then fell because all the rich people either left or avoided it one way or another.
Last edited: