To think this is the fair and kind way to fund social care crisis

[BarnabyBungle]

So two people each have £325k in assets.... one dies of a heart attack suddenly and leaves inheritance for family (and/or anyone else they so choose), the other gets severe dementia and spends years in an expensive home, and spends all but the £14k threshold left when they die.

Hardly fair is it?..... But then it’s unreasonable to increase general taxes to fund care as it would mean those without substantial assets would be paying for enabling those that did....

Surely lowering inheritance tax threshold and/or increasing the rate would be fair. If the limit were, say, £125k, and the rate was, say, 40% on inheritance above to the current £325k threshold, both imdividuals would pay £80k inheritance tax, enabling both to pass on £245k, rather than one passing on £325k and the other £14k.

Not only would this be far fairer it would help alleviate the anxiety of those with dementia knowing their condition means they will mean their assets will be dramatically reduced as their disease progresses.

How about allowing assisted suicide for those of us who don’t want our assets being wasted on care? My autistic ds needs help with somewhere to live and I don’t want my money used to fund my continued existence in the event of me being unable to look after myself.

Couldn’t agree with septima more.

How about allowing assisted suicide for those of us who don’t want our assets being wasted on care?

I agree that assisted suicide should be allowed, but the very fact this is being mooted as an option to ensure assets can be passed to children shows how broken the system is. If care was paid for via inheritance tax you wouldn’t need consider this.

@Septima

Couldnt agree more. There are old people that are litrially just shells laying in bed all day costing thousands waiting to die. Living wills should be written that allow you to choose death.

I do they think should make carers allowance better and encourage people to look after elderly relatives where possible. Maybe government loans for building a granny annex on your home. Tax breaks ect.

That way more people could look after relatives to save their inheritance. Once someones situation gets too sever to care for them at home the government takes over the cost of care.

What Septima said. I'm not willing to pay higher taxes so people can inherit money they never earned - that makes no sense, so earners get to keep less of their money so the privileged few can get money they never earned? Nope.

I think the fairest way is the way they do it in other countries where people pay long term care insurance as part of their taxes - this money goes direct to pay for health and social care costs add isn't just put in the general tax pot

It's a bit like insurance for your house or car - you may not be burgled or in an accident, but if you are you are covered and it means if you are unlucky and need care yu don't lose everything

Once someones situation gets too sever to care for them at home the government takes over the cost of care

The problem is that too many are living so long with complex health conditions that the number who are so severe they need care is soaring high. There's not enough money for 'the government' to pay for it all so some can sit on assets.

Fine, as long as people are not forced into 'assisted suicide'. In the example given the one who had only £14K left had needed expensive care, why is it unfair that they paid for it?

I agree with living wills.

I work in care and there are people who want to die. They are upset with lack of dignity and don’t want to be alive anymore.

Some have even attempted suicide.

Inheritance isn't a right. If the money is there to fund care, individuals should fund their own, that's it. And I include (redundant) assets such as houses in that.

You are assumthat only the I'd die

Have you considered the impact on young families if one or both parents die, and then a tax bill if the scale you propose is imposed?

LeftRightCentre

But I’m specifically not suggesting increasing general taxes, just inheritance taxes.

Why is it unfair? You need care and you have the money to pay for it. Children don't need inheritance if they get them they are lucky not deserving. Spend your money or save your money but don't expect to be cared for whilst you keep large sums of money that's unworkable and unfair.

Agree, let's give assisted suicide as an option.
We put animals out of suffering yet let humans lie in an empty shell in immense pain but it is to cruel to let them die?

I also don't understand why people think it's unfair for people to have their social care costs covered. I don't have kids so don't cost the education system, I haven't used the health service much (so far) I don't use many public services such as libraries, yet I pay high taxes.

I have no problem with this, as schools, the health service and public services are important

Social care is also important, so why should all the burden be placed on disabled people, or older people who are unlucky enough to need care

And tbh, I think inheritance tax should start from a lower number anyway, say 20k, and the rate be 25%

I disagree with lowering inheritance tax, it fuels the wealth gap. My PIL stand to leave a large estate (in excess of £1m) to their sons and they’d both rather the money ensured their parents had all the care needed (although I believe they’ve made provisions for that separately).

I do agree assisted suicide should be allowed and that there should be a way to make specific provisions for disabled children.

I would happily pay more tax or an insurance premium for care in old age.

A minor point but isn't the assets limit for care costs £24k? But I do think that may be inheritance tax should be extended. Its currently quite generous and easy to avoid.

But I agree that people should be able to choose to die if severe health conditions mean their quality of life is unbearably low.

Not necessarily due to money, several relatives have suffered cancer, strokes, car accidents, dementia etc and sometimes had years with awful life quality. I'd rather avoid that.

This is a massive dissincentive to save and be prudent with your money. Why shouldn't your children inherit what you've carefully saved ? Why should your inheritance go to fund someone else's old age when maybe they've enjoyed a more lavish lifestyle but not saved for their old age .

I agree with you to an extent OP, and absolutely think it is awful that people are suffering without the option of assisted suicide. I just hope this post isn’t written by someone bitter because they only got 14k while a friend got 325k.

Inheritance tax should be much higher, also it inflates house prices and baby boomers have over benefitted.

Assets should be sold to pay for care in old age.

Living wills and assisted suicide are kindness, not cruelty.

Need to add to taxes inc taxing pensions to contribute more to nhs and social care. It’s crazy that we can’t pay for this while people are larging it up at shopping centres every weekend and eating out all the time.

Unfortunately the dominant voters (baby boomers) won’t entertain any of the above.

@BarbaraofSevillle the upper threshold is £23250 (capital over this amount means you have to pay the full cost of care - unless it's disregarded capital like bonds which have life assurance attached). Anything between £14250 and £23250 means you pay a tariff income, which is on top of the client contribution from income. So someone with £14250.01 would pay an extra £1 per week, someone with just under £23250 would pay an extra £36pw.

I agree that assisted suicide should be allowed, but the very fact this is being mooted as an option to ensure assets can be passed to children shows how broken the system is. If care was paid for via inheritance tax you wouldn’t need consider this

Have you watched someone you love slowly die of dementia? It is horrific. And sufferers are kept alive by medical intervention for years and years and years in some cases. I do not want that kind of life for my mum (who is currently mid-stage and I pray everyday she dies before it gets any worse) and I sure as hell don’t want it for me and, perhaps more importantly, my mum wouldn’t want to be the person she is today and the emotional burden we feel in trying to do our best by her.

So yes, even if I didn’t have to pay for my mum’s care out of what would have been a substantial inheritance, I would absolutely consider assisted suicide.

I would expect people to sell their assets to pay for care. Or if they cannot be immediately sold, for there to be some sort of charge made against them so costs are repaid when eventually sold.

Not changing IHT (where the threshold is ridiculously low, given hose prices, so in effect a tax on the SE) because of the effect on younger bereaved families.