What are the Tories thinking with insane £1,000,000 inheritance tax threshold proposal for family homes?

[Figmentofmyimagination]

It's almost as if they have completely lost their way.

Binky - it's a very cynical bit of entrenchment. The Tories don't like high earners who come from nothing (unless they vote Tory). This proposed change will make it even more difficult for people to achieve true social mobility - yes a bright working class person (or if you prefer a lucky working class person) might scrabble up the greasy pole to a certain level - but the Tories are damned if they will let them get any higher. This proposed move will directly hit people who work for their money in order to reward people who don't - who are more the Tories' sort of people. Classic entrenchment of wealth. A properly redistributive policy would be to hammer inheritances and reward earners. But that will never happen.

I'm really very happy to pay higher taxes (and will vote for this) to help needy and vulnerable people. I believe in redistribution from people like me to people who need help. I do not believe in redistribution from people like me to people with much more!

"GentlyBenevolent Mon 13-Apr-15 10:54:39
Flabby no, it isn't, and no, it hasn't (or, most of it hasn't)".

Am I imagining the Tax that I pay on my earnings then? I have an allowance of 8K, then everything else is taxed at 20% or 40%.

If I shouldn't be paying this Tax then do please PM me with how I can get out of this arrangement.

merry it won't be 'a bit meh' for people who have received or will receive no inheritence.

You haven't paid any tax at all on the capital appreciation of your property. You only pay tax on your earnings and your (luxury - FSV of luxury obviously) purchases. Capital appreciation is tax free until the point at which it is realised - sale or death.

We stand to benefit from this and we think it's absolute madness, especially as I am likely to have my DLA taxed after the election if the Tories win.

There is an ex-British soldier in his 20s, who has done tours of Afghanistan, who is about to be made homeless. This is because when he left the army he moved back to his childhood home. The house is a council house, his mum was originally the tenant but she died and it was passed on to his dad. His dad has recently passed away and the council have said that the tenancy can only be passed on once so he must move out. That's fair, isn't it?

The inheritance I will get from my dad one day (unless it all goes on care home fees) will be needed to help my children buy their own homes in their home town.
If we lived in the north, they wouldn't need any help to buy a home.

This proposed move will directly hit people who work for their money in order to reward people who don't

Bang on.

Gideon said it himself: this is about Tory values.

This has probably been said half a dozen times on this thread already, but the dead person is not being taxed twice. They paid tax on their income when they were alive, but they are dead now. An entirely separate person is now being given a huge amount of money/assets, and when someone receives a huge amount of money, they pay tax on it.

And, as has also been said a few times I'm sure, you pay 'double tax' every time you buy anything that has VAT attached, how about campaigning about that?

When I think of all the things they could spend the money they get from cutting pension relief on, and then remember what they are intending to spend it on...I get really quite angry.

If we lived in the north, they wouldn't need any help to buy a home.

Realistically, they would need help to buy a home, but wouldn't have the freedom of being able to move somewhere else for work.

If they had a job at all.

I think they do need help living in the north.
My ds1 didn't but he has saved every penny and sold shares from his past job to enable him to buy his first home.
i think its the same everywhere for youngsters trying to get first steps on the property ladder.
I don't agree with people paying inheritance tax at all and think they are right for this.
it is such a pity they are robbing the poor, cutting benefits but still doing nothing about the big companies avoiding tax and spending money on missiles and other warfare.

Inheritance tax is iniquitous. It removes incentive from people to own their own homes and accumulate savings to pass on to their families. My father's entire work ethic has been based on the principle of passing on a secure foundation to the next generation, as is my own. My sole goal in my career is to provide a fantastic portfolio for my daughters.

Obv. it is entirely possible to work around it, but that shouldn't be necessary. This is money that has already been taxed and I (or my children) shouldn't be expected to pay tax a second time on money that is already in the immediate family. By that logic, a SAHM should be taxed on her "share" of her husband's earnings, because she didn't go out and earn it directly herself, or indeed, why not go right ahead and tax children who are benefitting from their parents' earnings?

It removes incentive from people to own their own homes

That isn't the impression I get. I was under the impression that there was quite a demand from people wanting to own their own homes in the South East, hence the million pound houses.

I have seen inheritance remove the incentive from adult children to work hard and get on. A friend did a low paid and easy job, knowing she would inherit a lot of money from her very elderly parents.

But do you agree that tax needs to come from somewhere though?

If so, then why is IT any more a disincentive to work than income tax?

Don't get me wrong - I really don't agree with taxing just to punish rich people but I don't understand why IT is unfair as compared to others. Or would you like to see all taxes reduced?

I have seen inheritance remove the incentive from adult children to work hard and get on. A friend did a low paid and easy job, knowing she would inherit a lot of money from her very elderly parents.

What sort of incentive does a well-off person in their 50s or 60s have to work if they know their estate will be taxed into bits for their children?

This proposed move will directly hit people who work for their money in order to reward people who don't

Yes, but unless inheritance tax is at 100% (ie. you give all your money and assets to the state on your death) then 'people who don't work for their money' are always going to be rewarded.

I agree that on these threads there always seems to be this idea that 'people who are richer than me should do this, this and this with their money'.

Well, one of the ideas on this thread seems to be that 'people who earn more than me should pay more tax so I (who don't earn that much) can have a tax free inheritance'. People seem very keen on that idea.

Several people here who are arguing against it have said they will benefit from it. It's not simply a case of jealousy or thinking it should apply to people just a bit richer than them.

Goodybe - If they don't need the money, maybe someone in their 60's who needs money as an incentive to work, should retire and let someone else have their job?

Hence the "clogs to clogs in three generations" cliché.

First generation works hard; second generation trades on that; third generation has no idea what hard work is or how to run a business - but continues to spend in the style to which they've become accustomed.

I strongly think that high earners should be taxed more, in order to reduce cuts on the needy and vulnerable. Not in order to give more tax breaks to the already fabulously well off.

But this is the way the Tories have worked all along - they start hammering at the bottom, and gradually work their way up through the ranks - all in the interests of those at the very top.

lucycant, successful people in their 60s have pretty substantial brain power to contribute.

I strongly think that high earners should be taxed more, in order to reduce cuts on the needy and vulnerable.

What percent, then?