We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are - or become - political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
We're aware that some users are experiencing technical issues which the team are working to resolve. See the Community Noticeboard for more info. Thank you for your patience.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
I don't think it would make any difference.
When one of you passes away the house will automatically pass to the surviving spouse without any Inheritance Tax payable.
Because of the value of the property inheritance tax would be payable on your estate when both of you pass away under current rules.
The rules have changed a lot recently to try and close down various avoidance schemes.
You could take out an insurance policy to cover the tax bill if both of you die suddenly.
You could also investigate various trusts and other options for trying to eliminate all the liability but I think many of these options are now closed off.
Good luck
R.
I think it could in due course make a difference of £100,000 to your daughter if you make use of two separate nil rate bands of £263,000.
I don't buy the idea of insuring against IHT. The insurance companies make a profit on the insurance. It is just another way of saving. The money is yours and is used to pay the IHT not to avoid it ... or am I missing something here?
...............................I have put my clock back....... Kcolc ym
