Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Raising IHT threshold to £1,000,000 - because you're worth it...

231 replies

Figmentofmyimagination · 08/07/2015 08:33

There are so many reasons why this change is morally repugnant, socially regressive and economically illiterate, it is hard to know where to begin with this ....

OP posts:
SaucyJack · 08/07/2015 08:59

I'm not complaining......

Nice to have some good news for those of us who get shafted every other which way by the housing market here in the South East.

ihavenonameonhere · 08/07/2015 09:03
Biscuit
Alibabsandthe40Musketeers · 08/07/2015 09:05

Why is it economically illiterate to not re-tax the same income over again?

Floundering · 08/07/2015 09:07

Sorry you feel like that but a modest family home in some areas can be worth that, & the owners be normal hardworking folks who aren't loaded toffs!! ( not me )

Floundering · 08/07/2015 09:08

(Not me as in don't have a property!)

PosterEh · 08/07/2015 09:09

In most cases its the untaxed gain from the booming property market that IHT on property captures, not earned income that has already been taxed once.

I'd prefer that to be taxed and for high earners to keep their pension relief.

FarFromAnyRoad · 08/07/2015 09:09

If there are SO many reasons OP I'm sure you'll be happy to take some time out of your hugely busy schedule to list some here. Shall we say what? 10? Start with 10 and then we can reevaluate whether you're to be taken seriously or not.
GO!

blueshoes · 08/07/2015 09:09

I take it OP does not expect to pay IHT anyway.

JackShit · 08/07/2015 09:13

Wrong forum for this one OP Wink

ozzia · 08/07/2015 09:15

I am an only child, when my parents die I will not be able to afford to keep the house due to its value (they've lived there 30odd years, paid £19,000 for it). I have no cousins, no other family. All my memories are wrapped up in that house as its the one they've always had. I have no objections to paying some inheritance tax but I want to be able to sell that house in my own time not when I have to because I can't afford to keep it. It breaks my heart that it will be all I have left of my family and I won't be able to have it to hold on to the memories.

NoisyOyster · 08/07/2015 09:16

Good. Pleased with this. House prices have risen. "Normal" working families have found themselves with a higher house worth due to this. Why shouldn't they be able to pass this hard work and saving and paying mortgages and scrimping down to their loved ones as they see fit?

Right decision

wonkylegs · 08/07/2015 09:17

We will benefit from this but still agree it is an awful bit of policy which is truly incompatible with the overt 'austerity' policy stance that is being used elsewhere to beat people down.
I think it's being used to bribe & distract people from other measures which will have effects that they don't yet understand (changes to funding structures, pension changes etc)

Cheeseandhamtoast · 08/07/2015 09:19

YANBU. Most people with properties worth over a million have not "paid" for the property, but are mainly people in their 60's who have gained from massive price increases.

TTWK · 08/07/2015 09:24

Why is it economically illiterate to not re-tax the same income over again?

I live in London, and my kids will benefit from this decision, but even I realise that the above statement is a complete lie. Most of my estate, which is over £1m, has been accrued thru house price inflation that has never been taxed. EVER.

Radiatorvalves · 08/07/2015 09:33

I will benefit from these changes....both DF and MIL may leave us a legacy idc, and while both estates would previously have attracted IHT, they will likely be exempt in future.

The inheritance will be a lovely bonus if we get it, BUT it is not our right! I suspect that some may well need to go on care home fees in any case.

And in our case, we bought a house in London some 5 years ago. It has almost doubled in value to over £1m. I see no reason why my DSs should have this tax free. They haven't earned it...nor have we! We have been lucky.

OP YANBU.

TheChandler · 08/07/2015 10:35

YANBU. It simply reinforces the privilege of luck of birth into the right family who leave you a large inheritance, while shafting those who might well have a good job and work hard, but were born into the wrong family.

IHT in my opinion should be increased, along with the 7 year period for gifts being subject to it, to tackle the problem of parents giving their offspring massive house deposits, thus inflating house prices, and putting those who don't get such help at a disadvantage.

lemmein · 08/07/2015 10:44

Ozzia, whilst I sympathise there are many, many families forced to leave the home they have built memories in due to the morally repugnant bedroom tax. These people are forced to leave their family homes, their communities -eurgh yeah it's too early for this, the subject winds me up so nevermind! As you were...

AllTheUserNamesAreTaken · 08/07/2015 10:48

House prices have risen. "Normal" working families have found themselves with a higher house worth due to this. Why shouldn't they be able to pass this hard work and saving and paying mortgages and scrimping down to their loved ones as they see fit?

These statements are at complete odds with each other. The increase in property values, pushing many properties into the £1m plus bracket has nothing whatsoever to do with hard work, saving and paying mortgages and scrimping. Many people have worked hard and scrimped to pay their mortgage but have not had the luck of the SE property value increase.

penisland · 08/07/2015 10:50

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

SomethingFunny · 08/07/2015 10:51

I actually agree with the IHT being raised. At the moment it is payable on a teeny tiny shoebox semi in the South east. Normal houses that people have actually bought for that much (because that is how much a house costs) and who have scrimped and saved to pay for and who have paid tax on the amount already. The threshold as it stands doesn't just include lucky people whose houses have risen massively in value for many years, but people who bought their stupidly expensive shoe box houses in the 2000s.

HOWEVER - a budget where thousands of the most vunerable, poorly paid but hard working ordinary people will be pushed into deeper poverty is NOT the time to be prating around helping those who have done alright for themselves. Either the country desperately needs all the money it can get or it doesn't. You can't have it both ways.

ReallyTired · 08/07/2015 10:53

I have not problem with the threshold for IHT being raised. The threshold has not been raised for years and more and more estates are being sucked into inheritance tax. It was meant to be a tax for the super rich rather than normal working class families in the south east.

Having an allowance for a house is unfair. It creates a perverse incentive for elderly people not to downside. It is unfair that someone who has to sell their house to go into a care home pays more tax than someone who has been lucky enough to die in their own house.

I feel that there should be a reform of inheritance tax system. There are plenty of loopholes for those who have enough money to pay lawyers. At the moment people can dodge inhertiance tax by good planning.

We need to get people spending money rather than hoarding huge amounts of money. I feel that raising the threshold for gifts would inject much needed money into the ecomony. I feel that the threshold for gifts in the last seven years of someone's life should be raised in line with inflation.

cunningplans · 08/07/2015 10:55

Delighted here as my parents house for which they both worked their butts off won;t now be taxed and we will be able to pass our own home on with less tax too ( for which we have also worked our butts off!)

What is morally repugnant is having kid after kid you have no intention of keeping but expecting the tax payer to.

SaucyJack · 08/07/2015 11:04

"Many people have worked hard and scrimped to pay their mortgage but have not had the luck of the SE property value increase."

But unless you can pass all the money from the sale of your house down to your kids then there's no actual luck in the SE property value increase anyway.

My PILs are amongst the baby boomer generation who've seen the value of their perfectly nice but nothing special house raise to silly money. It doesn't benefit them- they own it outright, so it's just numbers on paper.

It goes without saying that I'm talking from a position of total self-interest, but it's ours and our children's generations that have been shafted by the housing market so at least some of us can gain from an increase in IHT.

ReallyTired · 08/07/2015 11:07

Tax is the subscription for living in a civilised country. None of us want to pay tax, but unless we pay tax we will have no services.

I feel that homeowners should have financial parity with those who live in nursing homes or rental accomodiation when it comes to income tax. We should not be encouraging someone to stay on their own in a large family house to avoid inheritance tax.

Timetodrive · 08/07/2015 11:08

Living in a 1930s semi in the south my house has increased with little input from us, but it is just a typical 1930 like many that my northern family also live in. They however can leave their house to their children whereas under the current system our would probably need to be sold. But I do think my DC have probably better prospects to earn more through better infrastructure. I am not sure where I stand, maybe a lower rate for everyone with the laws streghned apart when dependant children are concerned.