To wonder why there isn’t public outrage about this?

[Blusterylimp]

If a couple isn’t married but own their property between them, the surviving one will need to pay inheritance tax on their partners half of the house (and other assets) if they die.
Effectively they will lose their home to pay the IHT unless they also have huge savings.
How can that be allowed in this day and age when so many couples cohabit without getting married?

Public outrage?
Adults have the power of a decision to sort themselves out, if not smart enough or making mistakes....well, it falls back again onto us adults.

The Inheritance tax threshold is £325k and you will pay 40% on anything over that. It's been at that rate since 2009 which considering how much house prices have risen in the last 16 years means people of comparatively slender means end up paying. It's one of the few times you will be reassured by a debt size as this is offset against it.

You'd be lucky to get a one bed flat here for £200k and I'm not even in London!

This

Well then it's a choice, right?
What are you exactly complaining about?

simple- get married.

If you don't want to , suck up the downside.

But also as PPs have pointed out, your property and assets have to be above the IHT threshold before you pay tax.

This is why lots of older co habiting couples do get married in their 60s-70s even if they eschewed marriage for decades.

But it's not actually true

@Blusterylimp i can’t believe all the backward thinking in the replies to your OP!

I didn’t know this either and I am also quite quite financially savvy.

shocking that so many people have posted to say ‘just get married.’ No, as a woman I don’t want to have to get married to protect my finances. I agree OP it’s outdated and shouldn’t be happening.

But that isn't what this thread is about and not what I was responding to? The OP is talking about being outraged around couples who chose not to marry, not single people. If you are outraged about that, start another thread.

Men in the same situation would be accused of financially abusing their partner.

You have to make the decision on whether to give your partner financial security or not. You can't cherry picks the pros of being married and the pros of not being married. You chose one or the other.

No, hopefully marriage is not just a legal contract. But it is a legal contract and not having it has consequences. If you don't want to marry each other then you have to sort out the consequences, you can't demand the rights a contract confers if you are not willing to sign the contract, after all.

I am in this situation. I don't want to get married to my partner, mainly because I cannot be faffed with all party nonsense. Even a civil partnership needs a ceremony. Why cannot it be a simple form, done online for those who don't want all the nonsense? If it's a contract, then it should just be able to be signed and sent back, surely?

@pippy1958 Because you need it witnessed. Doing it online behind a screen doesn't count. It's open to abuse that way.

You don't need a party. You need two people and two witnesses. That's all.

A marriage ceremony is a public declaration. That's the bit you don't seem to understand.

@AliceSpringsEverywhere 🤦🏼‍♀️do you just suck up everything? You don’t have an opinion on being forced into marriage to protect finances?

Do you mean joint tenants? ie automatically is inherited by other person?

as always

My point is that why shouldn’t cohabiting couples get the same legal protection as marriage

But why? Many don't want to get married for specific reasons eg a couple who both came to the relationship with assets they hope to pass down to their respective children, and don't want any future partner to have a claim on in the event the relationship ends.
Or a single mother who breaks up with a partner - should he have a claim on her house because he has the same rights as if he was her husband?

Why force people who have deliberately chosen to not sign a legal contract to be treated as if they have?

Thank you!
I don’t think our solicitor made the implications clear when we made our wills and bought our property. That might have been because the value of half the property was below IHT thresholds at that time but it is way more now.

What an odd comment. Where are you getting the 'forced into marriage' idea? No one is forced into marriage unless you mean other religions and arranged marriages.

It's a choice.

This thread is crazy.

You can’t have your cake and eat it too 😂

There are risks and benefits to being married or not being married that you have to weigh up. It’s not a pick and choose type situation.

There isn't public outrage because most people aren't wealthy enough to pay IHT, let alone be in a situation where it would cause them to 'lose their house'.

Most people don't have the energy to get outraged about stuff like this that falls into the 'nice problem to have' category, ie they're rich enough to be affected, unlike most people who's partner has died. It's also easy to avoid by getting married or entering into a civil partnership, just paying the tax, or taking out life insurance that would cover it.

IHT threshold is £325k (or possibly £500k for main residence) so the house would have to be worth more than twice that for even a penny of IHT to be payable. So most people will just pay the tax, if it's more than they have available, they can always sell or remortgage the expensive property they've just inherited.

He has plenty of financial security through his own savings. I just have more.

The voice of sanity.

For all the faux "outrage" on this thread and all the posters who "get it" 🤔someone needs to explain the total and utter lack of any attempt to change the situation.

In fact I would say there is more push for my local park to have an extra bin than there is to change the financial rules around home ownership and IHT between couples.

I look forward to a link to the petition.

I didn't want to get married to my ex because I didn't want us to have any rights. I didn't want to him to gain a claim on my home or savings.

If you want rights get married, if you dont want rights then you should have an option too. If rights started to automatically accrue it would fuck over a large group of us.

@Blusterylimp sadly lots of women still assume the man has more. I’m in the same scenario as you.