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.

Agreed, my grandmother has been in a home for the last 9 years, she has been bed ridden with advanced dementia for the last two years - she always said she never wanted to get to that stage. Occasionally she says quite clearly 'I wish I was dead'
She has also paid the full cost until very recently when she finally got below £23250. The home then reduced their rates by about £200 pw as a council funded resident. I work for the council so understand the processes fully, but it still grates that the same care can be so much more expensive for a private resident.

Where does the missing funding come from op?

£750k- £490k = £260k. Which is £51k less than would go towards funding than if one pays £311k.

We really don't need a system where those who won't ever inherit will be expected to pay higher taxes to protect the inheritance of others.

Personally I'd like a system where care costs can be offset against property after death if the person has care at home. Naturally with clauses so that a spouse or dependent adult child could retain the property for the rest of their lifetime.

I don't see social care insurance working. Going off family history, someone like me would get incredibly cheap insurance, we live long and healthy, as would anyone with a family history of fatal physical problems which require little social care. Whereas those considered high risk would be paying higher premiums

I think it’s perfectly fair that people’s own money gets used by them until they die. Inheritance is not a right. what about all the people who never even had £325k to pass on to begin with, but maybe died before needing to use social care. Should the government not give ‘inheritance’ to their offspring to make it fairer?

No, people have their own money. They use it to live the best life they can. When they can’t afford to support themselves at any stage in life the government picks up the tab. But otherwise we are responsible for ourselves and inheritance only happens when there is a surplus on the death of a person.

I agree the "dementia tax" was better than what we have now but it wasn't a solution. Neither is assisted suicide which is fucking horrifying in the expectations it would place on disabled people.

I agree with the posters re assisted suicide and with me working in healthcare I see everyday how awful it is being kept alive when you don’t even know what time of day it is.

I would like to have a living will and a DNACPR in place for when the time comes stating I don’t want medical intervention. No way am I sitting there not even knowing my own children, I’ve been there with my granny who I spent a lot of time with and she didn’t know who I was anymore at the end

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?

I’m not sure how much it would effect young families as they don’t tend to be in a position to pay IT.... But with any tax, there’ll be some losers... and you could adjust be bands and rates the increase the starting threshold and increase the rate at higher levels.

Why should someone/someone"s relatives who has saved hard to leave an inheritance be punished versus someone who might have earned the same but pissed it up against a wall.

If that were the case, I'd make sure every penny was spent first before it could be taken off me.

i think a higher inheritance tax is sensible. Its unfair for the cost to be out of general taxation - why should struggling youngsters who cant get on the property ladder pay for someone who is loaded?

I also think the current system is pot luck - if you get dementia you are unlikely to pass much onto your kids, if you die suddenly then you can - this results in large pots of money being concentrated in some families - fine if you have worked hard for it but thats not the case here its just a lottery.

Why is care for the elderly treated differently to say me breaking my hip? or any other serious accident or illness? no expects me to pay for the AE , the X-ray the MRI, the operation, despite the fact i could as could many others in hospital.

Also, 56% of people currently do not contribute in any way to their elderly care.

How about bringing care back under the umbrella of the state, where profit is not the primary motive?

The IHT is a red herring and just assisting those who want to dismantle the NHS, by making us pay for yet another area of healthcare, as already done with dentistry and eye sight.
Once this is achieved, next will be Ambulance, A&E, GP services, the cry being why should my taxes pay for these when they are being used by the wealthy too.

Its about time people woke up to the fact this country is a very wealthy 1st world country and can afford to look after its elderly without tax rises, just changes in spending priorities.

"**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."

Completely agree. Carers allowance is so low, it's an insult to people who do 24/7 care and they save the country a huge amount of money.

How about this: person A takes excellent care of themselves are works really hard. Is in good health until the very end of their life and pays out if pocket for private care when they need it. They leave £1million pounds when they die which they want to go to their family who mean the world to them. Instead most of it gets taken away to pay for people like person B.
Person B does fuck all to take care of themselves and makes no finacially provision for their future. Following years of smoking, unhealthy eating and drug and alcohol abuse they become a burden on the care system at a young age and dwindle on not paying a penny for all of the treatment and care they recueve because they know that people like person A will be forced to pay so they don't bother saving to pay for their own care.
That is what us not fair. There is no entitlement to leave behind an inheretance subsidised by the taxpayer paying for your care. If you want to leave money for your children then you need to get of your arse and work for it.

Neither is assisted suicide which is fucking horrifying in the expectations it would place on disabled people.

In Switzerland are they using assist dying to eradicate the disabled. As the parent of a disabled child I'm offened that you think I would pressure my child into killing himself.

jasjas - because breaking your hip needs medical intervention and its better for the hospital to feed you and look after you than having relatives wandering around doing it.

Not being able to wash or feed yourself at some stage in your life is not a medical issue. my kids couldnt feed or wash themselves when younger but i wouldnt expect the state to sort that out

I don't have children by choice. I pay my taxes and have therefore helped educate lots of children, some of whom will no doubt turn out to be nurses, doctors, surgeons. I've been fortunate to have good health for the most part and needed very little help from the NHS yet (I do have a condition they could help which would cost them £6 per year but they won't do it, so I pay for an alternative myself that isn't as good for considerably more, and it will inevitably mean the NHS having to spend a lot more on my when I age - which pisses me off when I see some things they WILL fund). I'll take equity release in my home, spend the money and then they can look after me seeing as I've paid all my taxes - may as well get something out of them. By the time I am old and starting to fall apart I hope assisted suicide will be legalised and once I reach that point I can pull the plug.

Should the government not give ‘inheritance’ to their offspring to make it fairer?

Unless we have a communist revolution, 100% inheritance tax as you appear to be suggesting is never going to happen....

@Radardetector

How the fuck can you be offended by something I didn't say?

Why should someone/someone"s relatives who has saved hard to leave an inheritance be punished versus someone who might have earned the same but pissed it up against a wall.

But it’s those who saved for the inheritance that are being punished.... by having their savings taken if they are unlucky enough to get dementia. What i propose would stop the unfairness.

I'm well up for assisted suicide. I have no wish to live long. I'd rather go as my physical and mental abilities subside and not be any sort of burden to my offspring than hang around not being able to look after myself in front of shit TV all day long.

I work, I pay my taxes and I'd far rather have a good life with my money to spend as I please - at the point the money is purely spent on keeping me alive I'd rather trot out the euthanasia door and pass the money on to my child.

Inheritance tax already doesn't work well, because it is already easily avoided.

Like income tax, it's one of those taxes where the more you squeeze, the more slips through your fingers.

Wanting to build wealth you pass onto the next generations is entirely natural. If the tax is punative then people will work harder to find ways around it. It's not your moral obligation to pay as much tax as possible, it is the government's job to make sure it collects enough.

When you have had the former chancellor George Osborne sit on the couch of a morning TV show and joke about inheritance tax avoidance it's clear something is rotten in our culture when it comes to tax avoidance. The current rules suit the wealthy elite - few people handing down £millions pay anything like 40%. What we need is reform, not increased rates.

But it’s those who saved for the inheritance that are being punished.... by having their savings taken if they are unlucky enough to get dementia. What i propose would stop the unfairness

Yes inheritance is treated differently and that is wrong, so there is room to treat it as unearned income and taxed at marginal rate.

However, to me, that is a separate issue, at present we already take all of peoples savings/assets and it hasn't helped plug the funding gap because the Government keeps cutting monies paid to councils, leaving us, rich or poor to pay extra council tax.
Once we acquiesce to this, they'll just move to other aspects of health care that is very costly, GP services will be next on the list of things we cannot afford.

This will always be a contentious subject. It's very emotive, as it involves both money and care for elderly relatives. In the days where one adult would generally stay home and not work, a lot of elderly care was done by family. That is not the way the world works now with needing 2 incomes, and scattered families.
I do support assisted suicide under certain caveats.

I would rather die than be so unable to look after myself that I end up in a care home, clapping away to some daft singalong and that being the highlight of my day. I feel sick just thinking about it. My DF has said the same. Madness that £100,000's could be squandered on a care home than make healthy offspring's lives better.

I absolutely agree with the assisted suicide commenters, but in the case of dementia, wouldn’t it be very difficult to know whether someone had actually consented, or when the person should be helped to die?

Sorry if that’s an ignorant question.

I don’t want to give the government my money, that I have worked for. I want it to go to my kids.

Inheritance tax should be scrapped entirely, and all other taxes should be lower. Tax is theft.