Do I really have to get married?

the_reductionist

Is it correct that cohabiting with my partner is not enough to avoid inheritance tax should one of us die?

If this is the case - there must be lots of unmarried couples out there whose properties are now worth more than the £312,000 threshold and would be liable to be taxed at 40% by this money-grabbing bunch of incompetents.

RayWolfe

If you cared to research you would know that it has always been thus.

bryanb

There is no such thing as a common law wife (legally) Or husband!

whatatwit

If the house is in joint names, then the partner who dies only owns half of the house for the purpose of their estate.

As RayWolfe comments, it's not a new rule and the threshold has increased considerably over the last 10-15 years.

jimmo

You seem to be in exactly the same position as the 2 sisters who lost in the European Court.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/wiltshire/7372555.stm

the_reductionist

'If the house is in joint names, then the partner who dies only owns half of the house for the purpose of their estate'

Does this mean that only half of the value is taken into account when calculating the inheritance?

I agree Jimmo - and wasn't that an outrageous decision? Are they any less a family unit than a married couple? I suppose their only course of action to avoid this tax would be to sell up, downshift and invest their halves of the remaining money in separate accounts but this would involve a lot of distress at losing their family home. This, of course must be quite a rare situation compared to the many cohabiting couples - today I am looking to see how quickly I can get spliced without the trimmings. Is it possible to do it online............?

The threshold may have increased and it's something I probably paid little attention to because it seemed ridiculously remote but property prices have pushed me into this bracket even though my partner and I are low earning part-timers.

CLAPTON

The IHT will be levied on the dead person's estate... so yes it will be on half the value of the house.

Its been reported millions on times in the papers... and was highlighted as particularly absurd when the civil partnerships came in..(they are treated as married couples for IHT purposes).

But as always, as there was no groundswell of support for a change in the law, no political party has taken much interest. ... I guess that even today there are not a massive number of house worth more than 624,000 outside the southeast

nicko33

jimmo wrote: »

You seem to be in exactly the same position as the 2 sisters who lost in the European Court.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/wiltshire/7372555.stm

except they don't have the option of getting married...

moggylover

nicko33 wrote: »

except they don't have the option of getting married...

Nope, but could they try going for a rather messy civil partnership - or would that land them in jail for incest?

nicko33

moggylover wrote: »

Nope, but could they try going for a rather messy civil partnership - or would that land them in jail for incest?

They are not eligible for a civil partnership (or, I guess, they would have done that already)
http://www.uk-civil-partnership-act-2004.co.uk/s-T

I believe in some states of the USA, they allow closer relations to marry if there is no chance of the union bearing fruit, e.g. infertility
(not any relation though, just 1 degree closer than usual)

dunstonh

Why dont they just do a 50/50 share with a discretionary will trust and use up the first nil rate band on first death?