~| Is Inheritance Tax Immoral? |~

Why would installments be any more affordable? If your parents earned very little, and you don't earn very much, £50,000 to own the home your family already owned seems like a lot of money even spread over 10 years,,

A tax on a tax is disgusting yes.

Question in point: 40% income tax alongside 40% inheritance tax gives a net benefit of 20% - what is literally the point of working!?

A tax on a tax is disgusting yes.

Question in point: 40% income tax alongside 40% inheritance tax gives a net benefit of 20% - what is literally the point of working!?

Could you give me a worked example of where someone on higher rate tax only contributes 20% to their child?

ie what is their salary, therefore income tax, what is their house worth and inheritance tax on that.

I doubt you could make a feasible case for them passing on less than 50%.

Well, actually it would be 36% since the second lot of 40% would only be on 60% of the whole.
If you really wanted to make it look bad you would look at the 45% rate, or go even further and go for the, IIRC, 97% that the max rate used to be. But of course you failt o take into account the tax free allowances (where applicable) on both and the lower rate on income tax. Also, if you do it right, you can get massive amounts through the system tax free, after all, you can give your children 3k per annum tax free (and I think that's per child), then depending on how the inheritance tax works (I don't know the ins and outs) when you die part goes to the child and part goes to your spouce to reduce the tax etc.

I can't say I'm a fan of inheritance tax, but it's kinda looking at it the wrong way. It's a transfer of money. Are you saying that if your child was employed by you you should be able to pay them tax free?

Yes but i'm talking about aspiration here. Fact of the matter is who wouldn't want to keep making more than the 40% tax band?

My parents have never made more than 20k per year and are well beyond the IHT threshold but they have taken risks and invested prudently. But either way there are ways around IHT and it is only permissible largely in the west and many capitalists these days are global.

I'm personally quite left leaning myself and i wouldnt mind if it went towards more social good but when you see corporations avoiding billions in debt and the poor not looked after appropriately alongside banks being bailed out. I don't see why a 40% inheritance tax rate can exist?

40% on wealth over eight and a bit years of your parents combined gross income (assuming they both earn the maximum of your figure.

Basic rate taxpayers pay 42% if they are graduates (ie on £20k).

As I have said before on such threads, my parents (if they both died today) would incur inheritance tax on the estate. And I'm likely to on mine I hope, but I'd rather my assets on death were taxed in order for my income to be taxed less. Also paying 40% of the remainder of a gift after I've taken six and a half times my gross salary wouldn't bee too much of a hardship, hardly like I'd need the money anyhow.

Also I think some people on this thread forget that many people will need to sell the house (sorry, 'family home') before death to pay for care fees. Less than 5% of estates pay it.

Oh i would love to re-work the system personally i would just get rid of VAT, have a flat rate taxation system, excessively tax large corporations and million pound incomes and will all live in some form of utopia. But accepting the situation we have i disregard inheritance tax as an acceptable form of redistribution.

I'm not surprised since you feel you will suffer from it.

Turkeys don't vote for xmas...

That's a very easy thing to say. For that matter i could say i'm against income tax...............................

I understand the UK is very left wing and is being taken for a ride but the whole pie is getting smaller. I'm just lucky im leveraged across multiple locations................

If your a low income family, your certainly not subject to inheritance tax

The parents have paid tax on his earnings. They should be free to spend it as they wish.

And of course, whilst they are alive they are. They can give money to their kids and the taxman cannot get his grubby mits anywhere near it. It's only if they die that the government feels it can swoop in and seize its pound of flesh. It is not a tax on privilege, it is not a tax on giving to your children, it is a tax on dying and it is disgusting.

To those of you who speak of the inequality of someone inheriting without having done anything, do not think of it as them having done anything but their parents. Their parents have worked their entire lives to help their children, to tax them in this way is to spit on their labour.

The parents have paid tax on his earnings. They should be free to spend it as they wish.

And of course, whilst they are alive they are. They can give money to their kids and the taxman cannot get his grubby mits anywhere near it. It's only if they die that the government feels it can swoop in and seize its pound of flesh. It is not a tax on privilege, it is not a tax on giving to your children, it is a tax on dying and it is disgusting.

That's a very easy thing to say. For that matter i could say i'm against income tax...............................

I understand the UK is very left wing and is being taken for a ride but the whole pie is getting smaller. I'm just lucky im leveraged across multiple locations................

I believe you are.......such as the family home. I get full maintenance grant, but because of the house my parents got on the cheap, the house value is hitting nearly 3 times the original cost. I'll probably get hit by it.