To think it’s unfair that some people get inheritance while others start with nothing?

@wipeywipe

ONS covers it here. The 20% highest income households received over 10 x more inheritance than the lowest paid 20 %

www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/personalandhouseholdfinances/incomeandwealth/articles/intergenerationaltransfersthedistributionofinheritancesgiftsandloans/2018-10-30#:~:text=For%20example%2C%20on%20average%2C%20inheritances%20received%20by,5%%20of%20their%20net%20wealth%20on%20average.&text=Those%20in%20the%20lowest%20wealth%20quintile%20received%20a%20median%20value%20of%20£1%2C200.

How could the majority of the value of UK estates liable to IHT not belong to higher rate taxpayers?

Because so much is down to property/equity gains & the gains are varied depending upon location. Many parts of London that are now expensive and gentrified were nothing like that in the past.

Hilarious. So you only bother to work part time because you don't want to pay tax (!) and you don't need the money. But you think you should get your bit from the money people have saved working full time for decades.

Well, you're honest about your hypocrisy, I'll give you that.

I know it's emotional on an individual level, but as a group the wealth about to be transfered came from house prices increasing 1145% since 1980 and equity prices increased by 7 x since 1984.

And as it stands only. 6% of inheritance is taxed.

@AzurePanda so you can't link anything?

@wipeywipe the statistics on this are self explanatory, just take a look at the percentage of higher rate tax payers and the percentage of estates which incur an IHT liability combined with the mean UK earnings numbers. How could the majority of the value of UK estates liable to IHT not belong to higher rate taxpayers?

Well sure, vast amounts vs nothing will always seem unfair.

But most people are nowhere near that.

DD is a working class kid , she'll get a one bed flat when we die (in a town on one of those worst places in the UK lists) and that's if we don't need any care . Anyone who begrudges her that and think is fighting for "fairness" is deluded.

😂😂😂

Same here. My parents were such savers - wish they had spent their bloody money and had more fun but they were obsessed with owning their own house and passing it down to us so we would always be ok. Lost them both way too young. If there was no inheritance what would be the point in trying to get save / buy a house. Might as well just live day by day.

Having money to just enjoy and fritter away is extremely privileged. I'm amazed you don't realise that. You really don't seem to have a clue about life for a significant proportion of the population.

Where did that poster say she frittered money away?!

That’s a whole other subject / post !!!!!!

Im NOT volunteering BTW , despite my dad potentially needing one in the near future :(

What if a dependent child was orphaned? Would you think it's unfair if they were left any money, even a modest amount?

You're absolutely right of course, OP. And anybody who understand what the word "fair" means, and was being honest, would concede this.

And yet, the sample I dipped in to was post after post, attempting to claim it is "fair" that some people get a massive hand out due to who they happen to be born to, whereas others get nothing......

This is a very right wing website. So the answers you are getting don't surprise me.

I can't bring myself to read all the responses, as they will make me furious.

Who the hell are you OP to stop my children getting the benefit of my life savings?

You are right OP.

£5.5trillion of wealth (70% of all Uk wealth) is owned by people born before 1964 (30% of the population.

Over the next 30 years this will be inherited by their kids / grandkids.

Overwhelmingly it will go to people who are already fairly well off.

This is the biggest wealth transfer in history and will increase inequality

I know people like to think it's all hard earned but most of it comes from getting lucky on property as prices have gone crazy, and great pensions which grew fast in economic boom times.

Why shouldn't they? There is no principle that says income should only be taxed once. My income is taxed. The purchases I make with that taxed income are taxed. The savings I make from that taxed income are taxed.

I may receive an inheritance of several hundred thousand pounds when my mum does. I have done nothing to deserve it. She will be dead. It is personally reasonable that that windfall should be heavily taxed.

Anyway, it seems that the main proponents on the thread of abolishing inheritance are all wealthy. I think the term is "champagne socialism."

Having money to just enjoy and fritter away is extremely privileged. I'm amazed you don't realise that. You really don't seem to have a clue about life for a significant proportion of the population.

By that same logic, Isn’t handing money to people who don’t work and have never paid into the system grossly unfair?! But we live in a country where we try to ensure no one is left behind and everyone has the basic minimum.

When we work hard all our lives we do so in the hope that we can help our children have a better life than we had. That is what motivates people to work. Everyone isn’t born with the same intelligence, looks, health, money etc. so life can never be fair. But we can work hard and save to leave the next generation better off.

Say tmrw you create a new app, it makes you a lot of money, would you be happy if we said you have to give it all to the government to decide what to do with it rather than your own children benefit from it?! You might have worked long hours and not had time to spend with your children as you worked on your app. Your children might have made sacrifices by helping to take care of siblings etc while you worked day and night on your app. Your only hope was that atleast you could leave them better off than you were. Now when you finally can cash in and get money for your invention would you be happy to have to hand it all over to the government in tax?! No one would work if that was the case, what would be the point?!

jealous much .

The whole point of this thread is whether inheritance should be taxed at 100%. If it is, you will have nothing to leave to your children because that would be unfair. That's what this thread is about.

I thought the thread had moved on a bit. I did say earlier but no reason you should have seen it that I don't support the obviously troll suggestion that inheritance is made illegal or something. I would support moving from income being hugely taxed to a more wealth based regime and would support an increase in inheritance tax as part of that.

I have an IFA so no worries there but thank you.

I think we should abolish money all together. We can go back to trading things we make/produce.

Definitely reckon I could trade 60 carrots and 20 tatties for an iPhone 15

>will also likely have plenty to leave to DS

The whole point of this thread is whether inheritance should be taxed at 100%. If it is, you will have nothing to leave to your children because that would be unfair. That's what this thread is about.

Even if less that 100%, that's assuming all your wealth is not consumed in care home fees if you are lucky to grow old, or if (god forbid) you don't spend thousands setting up the correct legal frameworks to protect your assets and/or you die before your time.

With a highish income like yours, I'd suggest talking to a financial advisor for a realistic view on how to manage your finances longer term. You get to this point at which you think "i earn a fortune" but actually when you look at it, things aren't as rosy as it might look.

well, you are subsidised by those idiots of us who pay 67% tax on our income.

I won't disagree that your an idiot 🤷🏻‍♀️

The only alternative would be communism? Which doesn’t seem to have worked out very well in the places it’s been trialled.