UK Affordability still very good

Windofchange

economic wrote: »

of course he wouldn't have, he would have been a new immigrant!

If your dad was a thoroughbred British born UK citizen would he have been able to buy a house in London on a median wage?

GreatApe

GreatApe wrote: »

Before I start, this is 2013 data I would say you need to up the bands by 20%-30% to get an estimate of 2017 data so let us continue

Let us say a £25,000 estate is sufficient to help someone who inherits such an estate could use it as a deposit to buy a house

Well there were 230,000 such estates left in a single year. If you take 1 generation to be 30 years then 230,000 estates x 30 years = 6.9 million estates left each generation. If each estate has 2.5 beneficiaries that will mean it is given out to over 17 million individuals per generation. So 17 million people will receive each generation a non trivial amount. That is about half the adult population age 18-65 who will receive an inheritance.

So first point proven, that it is spread far and wide. Also it impacts even more than half this age group as a large number of the people who receive inheritances will be married so it will not only benefit them but also their spouse and children



Now lets look at more significant estates, worth £100,000 or more. They were 199,861 such estates for the year 2013. How is that not very significant sums to a significant number of people? And 128,000 of those estates are valued at over £200,000

Clearly inheritance data shows significant sums given to significant numbers of people.

GreatApe

Windofchange wrote: »

If your dad was a thoroughbred British born UK citizen would he have been able to buy a house in London on a median wage?

you are missing a key point which I explained to your pal earlier on

prices were cheaper 40 years when he were a lad partly because gifts and inheritances did not play as bid a role back then. Since that time there has been 40 years of savings and investments so the price is more capital and less income multiple (for London and other expensive areas)

So if a migrant could afford to buy 40 years ago, the question might be can the migrants son buy today using his earnings plus the 40 years of family savings and the answer is probably yes as Mr Economic is an owner

GreatApe

ukcarper wrote: »

So 75% of estates are under £300k and that doesn't include people who do not leave anything.

Also most people are in 60s when they inherit.

!!!!!! seriously? I had you as smarter than the bags of wind cheerleaders

Why would you dismiss the estates worth £200-300k
Why would you dismiss the estates worth £100k-£200k
Or hell even the ones worth £80,000 - £100,000 ?

Also as noted you really need to up the figures 30% to take into account its out of date by a few years and houses stocks and bonds are all up vs 2013

And gifts are made to reduce inheritence taxes and also simply to get ones affairs in order

200,000 estates are left each year that have at least £100,000 (or if we rebased to 2017 levels we can probably say 200,000 estates are left each year that have at least £130,000). very very significant

ukcarper

GreatApe wrote: »

Before I start, this is 2013 data I would say you need to up the bands by 20%-30% to get an estimate of 2017 data so let us continue

Let us say a £25,000 estate is sufficient to help someone who inherits such an estate could use it as a deposit to buy a house

Well there were 230,000 such estates left in a single year. If you take 1 generation to be 30 years then 230,000 estates x 30 years = 6.9 million estates left each generation. If each estate has 2.5 beneficiaries that will mean it is given out to over 17 million individuals per generation. So 17 million people will receive each generation a non trivial amount. That is about half the adult population age 18-65 who will receive an inheritance.

So first point proven, that it is spread far and wide. Also it impacts even more than half this age group as a large number of the people who receive inheritances will be married so it will not only benefit them but also their spouse and children



Now lets look at more significant estates, worth £100,000 or more. They were 199,861 such estates for the year 2013. How is that not very significant sums to a significant number of people? And 128,000 of those estates are valued at over £200,000

Clearly inheritance data shows significant sums given to significant numbers of people.

You keep ignoring the fact that most people are in thier 50s and 60s when they inherit.

Windofchange

GreatApe wrote: »

I prefer raw data to articles

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/541408/Table_12-3.xls

Ok, so from the explanation on HMRC:

"As explained in the commentary detail many estates do not have to be reported to HMRC on tax returns. The total number of UK deaths in 2011 to 2012 was approximately 553,000 and estates on which tax was due represented around 3% of this total."

So you have got data where "many estates" are missing because they do not get reported for tax purposes, and this is what you are basing an argument on? You have 550,000 or so deaths in that year and your data covers about 250,000 estates.

Nice one.

GreatApe

ukcarper wrote: »

You keep ignoring the fact that most people are in thier 50s and 60s when they inherit.

People in their 50s upsize and the inheritances probably play a part

They can also give it to the kids if they want. Or they can keep it for 30 years and let it compound and hand the kids over 4 x as much as what they received

ukcarper

Windofchange wrote: »

Ok, so from the explanation on HMRC:

"As explained in the commentary detail many estates do not have to be reported to HMRC on tax returns. The total number of UK deaths in 2011 to 2012 was approximately 553,000 and estates on which tax was due represented around 3% of this total."

So you have got data where "many estates" are missing because they do not get reported for tax purposes, and this is what you are basing an argument on? You have 550,000 or so deaths in that year and your data covers about 250,000 estates.

Nice one.

Not only that but a large number of those estates will be from one partner to the others in fact that probably accounts for most of the estates over IHT threshold that don't pay tax.

ukcarper

GreatApe wrote: »

People in their 50s upsize and the inheritances probably play a part

They can also give it to the kids if they want. Or they can keep it for 30 years and let it compound and hand the kids over 4 x as much as what they received

Some do but what has that got to do with affordablity for FTBs

GreatApe

Windofchange wrote: »

Ok, so from the explanation on HMRC:

"As explained in the commentary detail many estates do not have to be reported to HMRC on tax returns. The total number of UK deaths in 2011 to 2012 was approximately 553,000 and estates on which tax was due represented around 3% of this total."

So you have got data where "many estates" are missing because they do not get reported for tax purposes, and this is what you are basing an argument on? You have 550,000 or so deaths in that year and your data covers about 250,000 estates.

Nice one.

yes baggage of wind not everyone dies with an estate worth reporting, however does that diminish the fact that 200,000 people each and every year leave at least £100,000 estates?

Also afaik a lot of the estates that are not reported will be transfers from/to husband/wife which are exempt