[Politics] Tory meltdown finally arrived [was: incoming]...

[Pevenseagull]

This gov officially levying the highest % of tax as a proportion of national income in our history. Their wastefulness and corruption exacerbates the problem of course, but it does ask the question as to how do we (the taxpayer) can afford the level of public expenditure now, let alone the extra we are calling for (eg nhs, climate change mitigation, cost of living support etc) going forward.
Not necessarily a party political point as it is one of the big problems all parties have to find a solution to, but all imply they can tax less and spend more. I don’t believe they actually think is viable but to deny it costs too many votes.
Not sure what the answer is.

Get rid of inheritance tax?

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Get rid of inheritance tax?

Yep, that will help.

Abolishing inheritance tax - which 96% of people never pay - is an unfunded tax cut of £7.2bn per year.

 

[nicko31]

Yep, that will help.

Abolishing inheritance tax - which 96% of people never pay - is an unfunded tax cut of £7.2bn per year.

They should be closing IHT loopholes like trusts, the 7 year rule etc.

If my kids inherit should need to pay tax on it, they didn't earn it

 

[rogersix]

I have always votes Conservative except for a couple of times recently when I voted for Mr Farage to ensure that Brexit got done. Now however I find it very hard to consider voting Conservative again for many reasons. On the other hand what alternatives are there? Labour? Never in a million years. Lib-Dem? No chance? Green? Never. So maybe I'll have to hope that Rishi will indeed change things in the Conservative Party and once again vote blue.

emigrate?

 

[rogersix]

Reform UK is indeed an option as long as a vote for them doesn't let Labour into No 10.

as i usually vote lib dem, i'm interested to know why you wouldn't vote labour?

 

[rogersix]

This gov officially levying the highest % of tax as a proportion of national income in our history. Their wastefulness and corruption exacerbates the problem of course, but it does ask the question as to how do we (the taxpayer) can afford the level of public expenditure now, let alone the extra we are calling for (eg nhs, climate change mitigation, cost of living support etc) going forward.
Not necessarily a party political point as it is one of the big problems all parties have to find a solution to, but all imply they can tax less and spend more. I don’t believe they actually think is viable but to deny it costs too many votes.
Not sure what the answer is.

a 100% inheritence tax would generate some revenue and would help greatly with the tories "levelling up" agenda

 

[nicko31]

a 100% inheritence tax would generate some revenue and would help greatly with the tories "levelling up" agenda

Or council tax flat of 0.5% of prop value across England, that would be transformative. But would anyone have the guts to do it?

 

[Hugo Rune]

a 100% inheritence tax would generate some revenue and would help greatly with the tories "levelling up" agenda

I’d like to see the rate doubled above £500k to 80%.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

I’d like to see the rate doubled above £500k to 80%.

Is that income pa or the value of the inheritance? If it's the latter, many homes in the SE would fall into that category.

 

[nicko31]

I’d like to see the rate doubled above £500k to 80%.

The problem is at that rate people would take extreme steps to avoid it.

I really don't get why middle England gets so upset about IHT, when you're dead you're dead

 

[jcdenton08]

The problem is at that rate people would take extreme steps to avoid it.

I really don't get why middle England gets so upset about IHT, when you're dead you're dead

I think the answer to this is pretty clear, and is indeed the same argument used in favour of direct action against climate change.

The answer being that if a person works hard their entire life, saves and/or invests their money wisely, when they die they are able to leave their surviving family including partners, children, grandchildren or dependent relatives in a good financial position.

The “when you’re dead you’re dead” argument is largely considered very selfish, in my view rightly, by those taking action on climate change, because of the world future generations will (or, indeed, won’t) inherit. How exactly is it right that you dismiss “middle England” as being “upset” (in your view clearly wrongly so) about losing 80% of assets they’ve worked hard to obtain?

 

[nicko31]

I think the answer to this is pretty clear, and is indeed the same argument used in favour of direct action against climate change.

The answer being that if a person works hard their entire life, saves and/or invests their money wisely, when they die they are able to leave their surviving family including partners, children, grandchildren or dependent relatives in a good financial position.

The “when you’re dead you’re dead” argument is largely considered very selfish, in my view rightly, by those taking action on climate change, because of the world future generations will (or, indeed, won’t) inherit. How exactly is it right that you dismiss “middle England” as being “upset” (in your view clearly wrongly so) about losing 80% of assets they’ve worked hard to obtain?

Oh come on, preserving the environment for everyone and preserving your estate to pass onto your kids as unearned income are hardly the same thing?

I'll pay for my kids education and give them a leg up if I can when they want to get a place, but for them to receiving my estate free of tax would be just wrong.

We also have the completely ludicrous situation where untaxed pension pots are completely exempt from IHT. My IFA informed me of this last year, I almost fell off my chair especially with pension pot now uncapped.

 

[rogersix]

I think the answer to this is pretty clear, and is indeed the same argument used in favour of direct action against climate change.

The answer being that if a person works hard their entire life, saves and/or invests their money wisely, when they die they are able to leave their surviving family including partners, children, grandchildren or dependent relatives in a good financial position.

The “when you’re dead you’re dead” argument is largely considered very selfish, in my view rightly, by those taking action on climate change, because of the world future generations will (or, indeed, won’t) inherit. How exactly is it right that you dismiss “middle England” as being “upset” (in your view clearly wrongly so) about losing 80% of assets they’ve worked hard to obtain?

they almost certainly haven't "worked hard", more daily mail spin

 

[The Clamp]

This gov officially levying the highest % of tax as a proportion of national income in our history. Their wastefulness and corruption exacerbates the problem of course, but it does ask the question as to how do we (the taxpayer) can afford the level of public expenditure now, let alone the extra we are calling for (eg nhs, climate change mitigation, cost of living support etc) going forward.
Not necessarily a party political point as it is one of the big problems all parties have to find a solution to, but all imply they can tax less and spend more. I don’t believe they actually think is viable but to deny it costs too many votes.
Not sure what the answer is.

We cannot afford a Tory government. They are too expensive and too wasteful with other people’s money.

It’s like having a wayward cousin, spunking the family fortune on loose women and gambling.

Cut. Them. Off.

And quick before they sell any more of the family silver. And blame the servants.

 

[BBassic]

We cannot afford a Tory government. They are too expensive and too wasteful with other people’s money.

It’s like having a wayward cousin, spunking the family fortune on loose women and gambling.

Cut. Them. Off.

And quick before they sell any more of the family silver. And blame the servants.

Perhaps relocate them also? To a large furrow, of some sort? A ditch, if you will.

 

[beorhthelm]

The problem is at that rate people would take extreme steps to avoid it.

I really don't get why middle England gets so upset about IHT, when you're dead you're dead

its the sense of fairness. you've worked and earnt money, saved, invested etc. paid tax along the way, then the state takes some more on death.

there are problems with blanket IHT, which is why there are so many exemptions and loopholes, probably the easiest tax to avoid. it doesn't fall on the wealthiest, it falls upon middle classes who haven't done any tax planning. would be better to get rid and tax the recipient income tax or CGT on the gain. more difficult to avoid, fewer objections because middle england accept those taxes.

 

[rogersix]

We cannot afford a Tory government. They are too expensive and too wasteful with other people’s money.

It’s like having a wayward cousin, spunking the family fortune on loose women and gambling.

Cut. Them. Off.

And quick before they sell any more of the family silver. And blame the servants.

fukin plough the lot of them into a ditch

once and finally forever,

are we witnessing the last death throes of the british empire?

 

[loz]

Me and my sisters have just paid 150k in inheritance tax, I personally have no problem with that, and I know my mum who when younger was a Liberal would have no problem with it either.

It’s unearned income on a house bought in 1956 and sold in 2023, very happy to pay my way as a sign of a civilised country is everyone paying tax for the good of all.

I can never get people avoiding tax then using the utilities our taxes pay for, it’s stealing as far as I am concerned.

 

[Stato]

How exactly is it right that you dismiss “middle England” as being “upset” (in your view clearly wrongly so) about losing 80% of assets they’ve worked hard to obtain?

The argument against inheritence tax is always couched in the terms that everybody paying it started with nothing and built up their wealth from the gutter. These cases are very rare. It's more likely that these people would be losing 80% of assets they've "worked hard" to inherit from their parents or obtained from investments, or because of the massive rise in property prices.

Most of us work hard all our lives. There is little correlation between how many hours you've worked and how much money you have. "Middle England" is upset about this because very few people are happy to confront the truth that financial success is most often less to do with what you've done and more to do with where you happened to land when you were born. People find admitting this truth very difficult, because it seems to come accompanied by an inherent self-criticism, or belittling of their percieved acheivements. As with institutional racism, a lot of those on the right end of the inequality take it personally if they are forced to acknowledge that everybody's chances of success are less to do with them and more to do with protections of privilege put in place long before they were born*. As Leon Rosselson put it:

"By theft and murder they took the land
Now everywhere the walls spring up at their command."

It's easier on the pysche and on the bank balance to continue the pretence that the world isn't unfair and that you got where you are because you're more special than those who didn't. Scientific research suggests that this isn't the case: Valentine Duke won the $1 bet.

* - Back when Mike Harding was a stand up he had a bit about his grandad wandering across countryside only to be confronted by the Lord of the Manor telling him he's on his land. Grandad responds by asking how you can own that was just there before you were born and how he got it. The Lord says that he inherited it from his father and his father and his father. In response Grandad asks him how the first member of his family got it and the Lord says proudly that he fought for it. "Take your jacket off then," says Grandad "I'll fight you for it now."

 

[The Clamp]

fukin plough the lot of them into a ditch

once and finally forever,

are we witnessing the last death throes of the british empire?

I should like to see their ‘ands cut orf.