Labour should increase inheritance tax to 50 per cent

[Tummyachey]

If they did this it would raise billions of pounds - while avoiding raising taxes on working people. Exemptions should be put in place to protect small businesses; I accept this would be complicated, but they need to try and make it work.
So much money could be raised and it would also encourage earlier wealth transfers which would stimulate the economy. In addition, it would help redistribute wealth thus reducing inequality.
There would be political backlash, of course, but they need to get the economy growing and should act now so that the results are visible in time for the next general election.

But there would be iht on the second home. The nil rate is for residence only.

Not that many years ago, it was only the very wealthy who paid IHT. Now, moderately successful working class people will have to pay, but the OP wants to cut this transfer of wealth in the lower classes. Just what the establishment wants, don't let the oiks get above their station.

Well said

this grabbing if what other people have worked for to waste

The wealthy pay extremely low rates of IHT. It’s the moderately well of who get hammered. If you cannot afford to give away your assets because you need to live in your house you are likely to pay 40% on everything above the nil rate band. The extremely wealthy just give the majority of their assets away and keep a few million back to see out their years with.

I think inheritance tax on anything above £345k should be above 5 million IMO.

In this case they should be going after people with insane amounts of money , not someone passing a little bungalow worth £345k to their kids...the really rich will always find a loophole, and the hard working middle class will get f&*#ed as per usual.

Not everyone has a spouse and DCs with the same spouse to use this allowance.

A very modest flat in London can be valued at more than 500k. So a single parent cannot pass their kids their family home without kids having to sell it.

As mentioned above - super wealthy can avoid IHT altogether. Those muppets who worked hard and tried to better themselves and pass it on to their kids will be taxed yet again.
You know what's going to happen now, with Labour's smart move to IHT pensions - people stop putting more money in it and reduce hours and retire earlier to spend it on. The loss for economy is huge.

Not IHT, but the same behavioural change:
Capital gains tax receipts fall after big cuts in allowances

Revenue falls 18 per cent in 2023-24 to £12.1bn as the UK’s efforts to increase revenues from the levy backfire

This entire debate is focused on the wrong issue - we don't need to increase spending, we need to reallocate it and use what we have efficiently. We need to reduce taxes to stimulate growth.

I don't necessarily agree. Our kids are raised on the principles their dad and I implement. Having a frugal understated lifestyle, no flashy holidays, no constant treats , no designer clothes, no paid family trips every weekend, so we can have a nest egg for them for basic needs like a home, and give their families a good start. My kids even work to pay for their own school trips (pet sitting, jam making and selling) so although they will put have contributed money for the household they would have made sacrifices

Ah yes, the good old “50% IHT will solve everything” argument — dusted off once more like a vintage Cath Kidston tea towel.
Look, I’m all for fairness and plugging gaps in public spending (I’d like my local NHS dentist to exist again too, thanks). But suggesting a flat 50% inheritance tax across the board feels less like tax reform and more like punishing people for having parents who happened to own something more valuable than a rusty Vauxhall Astra.
Let’s not pretend all inherited wealth is yacht money. For many, it’s a modest semi in a once-affordable area that's ballooned in value, not because Mum and Dad were secret hedge fund managers, but because the housing market went absolutely feral. A 50% IHT bill doesn’t feel like “making the rich pay their share” — it feels like penalising people who worked hard, paid taxes their entire lives, and just want to pass something on to their kids other than generational anxiety.
Absolutely, close the loopholes and ensure the truly super-wealthy pay their fair share (looking at you, trust funds, shell companies, and “non-doms”). But let’s not punish the middle class and high earners while playing Robin Hood in a council meeting.
People on state benefits are often seen as receiving unearned income. So, if anyone is feeling particularly snarky, they might go straight for their jugulars—just kidding.
Just my tuppence — now back to reusing teabags and checking if my kids' school has pencils this term.