You can. Totally tax free.If you have earned it, and paid tax on it as you earned it, why can't you gift what's left to your wife? Or your kids? When you die, or before. Taxing the gift is wrong. I say that as a Labour party member.
You can. Totally tax free.If you have earned it, and paid tax on it as you earned it, why can't you gift what's left to your wife? Or your kids? When you die, or before. Taxing the gift is wrong. I say that as a Labour party member.
It is entitled, your children should crack on and make their own money. I don't expect or need to receive a penny from my parents. I have no expectations on anyone else's money.If thresholds come down…my aver.
It’s not entitled for my children to expect what your parents worked for, (me as parent in this example), to be left to you without being taxed.
The reason we work is to leave our children with the benefits of what we have worked for all our lives.
So they can have a better start in life than I experienced.
It’s called aspiration and wanting your children to have what you didn’t have. To provide for them in a way you weren’t provided for.
When my Mum died back in 2011 she left her estate to me and my Brother. I, immediately, gave my inheritance to my two sons and because of the 7 year taper relief rule the gift is now exempt from IHT. I’ve also taken financial advice and made plans to minimise liability in our wills.If you have earned it, and paid tax on it as you earned it, why can't you gift what's left to your wife? Or your kids? When you die, or before. Taxing the gift is wrong. I say that as a Labour party member.
If thresholds come down…my aver.
It’s not entitled for my children to expect what your parents worked for, (me as parent in this example), to be left to you without being taxed.
The reason we work is to leave our children with the benefits of what we have worked for all our lives.
So they can have a better start in life than I experienced.
It’s called aspiration and wanting your children to have what you didn’t have. To provide for them in a way you weren’t provided for.
Don’t know about percentages but according to The Guardian there are 69,000 self made millionaires in the UK and I honestly think that there couldn’t be that many from old money? Just an entrenched view that it’s the Lords and Dukes - in modern times it’s the grafters that earn the money
It isn't as simple as that. Some kids for a range of reasons may need more support than others.IHT doesn’t stop anyone passing on their wealth. With tax-free transfers between spouses, and the allowance ref property, you can pass on around £1m tax free, with the rest taxed at 40%. So the children of rich parents still get a huge boost.
Although obviously, because most adults will die in their 70s and 80s, their offspring are no longer children, and should already have provided for themselves (if they’re waiting for their inheritance before sorting out their lives, they probably need a kick up the arse!)
Out of interest, given all the various exemptions / thresholds / passing on the house adding to the threshold and so on - are you actually expecting your estate to pay IHT?If thresholds come down…my aver.
It’s not entitled for my children to expect what your parents worked for, (me as parent in this example), to be left to you without being taxed.
The reason we work is to leave our children with the benefits of what we have worked for all our lives.
So they can have a better start in life than I experienced.
It’s called aspiration and wanting your children to have what you didn’t have. To provide for them in a way you weren’t provided for.
I'm not sure they are pretending anything. They are simply confirming what they thought they knew, and what informed their manifesto which, as far as I am aware, did not promise tax cuts and that left some room for raising certain types of tax. It isn't just 'the books' it is other aspects of the economy. If everyone had access to everything there would be no scope for argument in parliament. Forgive me but I seem to recall rether heated disagreement in parliament.Bollocks.
Talking down the economy and trying to invent a bleaker narrative is one of the oldest tricks in the book when you're about to raise taxes!
The OBR gives the opposition (then Labour) all of the previous governments spending, debt and financial info ahead of them being elected. It's totally transparent these days, Labout had all of "the books" before they stepped foot in downing street, pretending there's some hidden 20B black holes the OBR reports didn't show is just trying to con the general public, to paint a narrative to justify what they're planning to do in the the budget and to seek to shift the blame for it.
Imho of course.
Naivety at best, rank partisanship at worst. This is a standard U.K. political tactic these days, had brain dead Liam Byrne not been so stupid with his “no money left note” there would have been a black hole found by the Tories in 2015 just as there was by Osbourne in 2010 much to Darling’s chagrin.I'm not sure they are pretending anything. They are simply confirming what they thought they knew, and what informed their manifesto which, as far as I am aware, did not promise tax cuts and that left some room for raising certain types of tax. It isn't just 'the books' it is other aspects of the economy. If everyone had access to everything there would be no scope for argument in parliament. Forgive me but I seem to recall rether heated disagreement in parliament.
And if they do, then the state should step in, using funds collected from things like IHTIt isn't as simple as that. Some kids for a range of reasons may need more support than others.
I don't necessarily disagree with most of this.If thresholds come down…my aver.
It’s not entitled for my children to expect what your parents worked for, (me as parent in this example), to be left to you without being taxed.
The reason we work is to leave our children with the benefits of what we have worked for all our lives.
So they can have a better start in life than I experienced.
It’s called aspiration and wanting your children to have what you didn’t have. To provide for them in a way you weren’t provided for.
you do understand what self made means though ? Your prejudice runs to self made millionaires unless they are the 34,000+ that apparently came from poverty?Did you actually read the article you are quoting ?
A survey of Britain's 69,000 self-made millionaires has unravelled the mindset of the successful entrepreneurs and found most like to take risks, half come from unprivileged backgrounds
And this is only 'self made millionaires'.
If you really believe most of the wealth today comes from 'the grafters' and not inherited money, then I really don't know where to start
you do understand what self made means though ? Your prejudice runs to self made millionaires unless they are the 34,000+ that apparently came from poverty?
Of course we have to define what the Guardian actually means by privilege but I don’t really want to go down that rabbit hole either
Me personally- I can’t be the guy to say people that pay vast amounts of tax should be paying more … if we are talking about tax evasion and closing loopholes then fair enough but I am firmly in the minority that think …they tax us when we earn it - they tax us when we spend it and they tax us when we save it … then what ? They tax us when we die?? So I am against increasing inheritance tax
If there's a £20Bn black hole in the budget then cut spending by £20Bn. Problem solved - next!
It is if I say it is.its not your kids house either, they need to go out and do what you did...
You do know that you can't be taxed if you're dead