Daily Express Inheritance Tax Crusade

dragonfly02

HELP US END THIS UNFAIR TAX...NOW

http://www.express.co.uk/inheritancetax.html

The Daily Express believes inheritance tax is an immoral form of taxation that penalises hard work and thrift. By raising a 40% levy on earned assets, it is also effectively double taxation. It frequently piles financial misery and distress on families already suffering the pain of bereavement; that is nothing less than grave robbery.

Over the last decade, millions of households have been drawn into the death duty trap by steadily rising property prices. Often, people are forced to sell their family homes to pay the duty.

The burden of death duty largely falls not on the super rich, who can often afford to use tax avoidance schemes, but on millions of hard-pressed families struggling on modest incomes.

For all the anguish it causes, inheritance tax raises a tiny proportion of the Government's revenue, less than one per cent. We believe that inheritance tax is inherently unfair and are therefore demanding the Government abolishes it outright in the Chancellor's forthcoming Budget.

Patr100

Like many I don't like it but there isn't a hope in hell of having it abolished in the next budget just cause the Express "demands" it.

Andy_L

No, I don't think i'll sign that. Since my parents have written a tax efficient will & I can inherit upto £570k IHT free I don't have an issue with it.
Especially since most of that is due to house price inflation and has thus never been taxed before - indeed they recieved MIRAS for quite a while to.

RayWolfe

So we have to follow "crusades" by the Daily Express now? Next you'll suggest that we have to believe what's printed in the Daily Mail!
Meanwhile only 6% of deaths result in any IHT being paid so Mr Desmond, a very rich man, is looking out for himself not for you,

Ian_W

When the Express isn't obsessing about P. Di [and sometimes even when it is] it's main story is usually how house prices are rising by a £1000 a day and how wonderful that is for middle England, blah, blah.
If the choice is being taxed after death or being taxed MORE in life - then I know which I chose and you may have guessed I won't be signing the petition.
Like Andy's parents my will is tax efficient but in a different way. It leaves all the nil band to nearest and dearest [if the poor dears can't manage on £70oddk each -tough], the rest to charities of my choice.

exil

Whilst there is an issue with the level which IHT kicks in, or where people inherit the home they're living in, I have no problem with people being taxed on what is in effect a giant windfall. OK - it may happen in circumstances where you lose a loved one - but we ALL have to suffer that, not all of us get a huge wodge of cash or property dropping out of the sky. I'm not saying you shouldn't be allowed to receive legacies - just that it shouldn't be tax-free when other income or capital gains is taxed.

Before I'm accused of jealousy, my estate is liable to be above the IHT threshhold by the time I pop off. I thank providence or fate that I'm well enough off to be in that position.

oldwiring

exil wrote:

Whilst there is an issue with the level which IHT kicks in, or where people inherit the home they're living in, I have no problem with people being taxed on what is in effect a giant windfall. OK - it may happen in circumstances where you lose a loved one - but we ALL have to suffer that, not all of us get a huge wodge of cash or property dropping out of the sky. I'm not saying you shouldn't be allowed to receive legacies - just that it shouldn't be tax-free when other income or capital gains is taxed.

Before I'm accused of jealousy, my estate is liable to be above the IHT threshhold by the time I pop off. I thank providence or fate that I'm well enough off to be in that position.

Agreed, but I'd also suggest that IHT perhaps kicks in too early and too harshly, and those who can mosr eadily avoid it are the most affluent in our society.

exil

I agree - but that is IMO a reason for reforming the system, not abolishing the tax so that billionaires don't even have to make an effort to pass on wealth, and the economic and political power that goes with it, to offspring. No IHT means that some families will over a couple of generations accumulate gigantic estates as they did before death duties were introduced, and the rest of us will have to rent if we're lucky. This is the REAL reason for the "crusade" - no IHT would suit wealthy newspaper owners very well indeed.

At least the current rules mean that rich people are encouraged to donate to good causes, hand over big houses to the National Trust, etc.

It's often said that IHT was originally meant to apply to the "super rich" - but in the 1930s 15% of estates paid death duties, compared to about 6% now.

dragonfly02

When I posted the link I was also of the opinion that abolishment was harsh but assumed that a compromise would be reached as the petition now has 91,341 signatures and must be addressed.

Speaking on behalf of my relatives who have just had to pay the 40% as I saw first hand how harrowing it is for Joe Bloggs.
My nan puchased her house in the year dot for 7k and no-one realised after her death it would be valued at a lot more, I do think a to have death tax is a good idea however I think there should more thought for the average Joe.

Admitedly the beneficiaries will be sitting on quite a lump after taxes it's just a catastrophic reaction when the bill for 40% laands on your mat BEFORE any monies can be given out

Andy_L

dragonfly02 wrote:

a catastrophic reaction when the bill for 40% laands on your mat BEFORE any monies can be given out

You can pay the bill for property (& a few other things) over 10 years
http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/cto/customerguide/page12-6.htm

This is another of there IHT myths put about.

tarinilie

what a crazy idea to abolish IHT - how about abolishing the nasty Daily Express with its nasty scaremongering journalism ?