Labour and a New Inheritance Tax Proposal

#1
Okey dokey. IHT makes me grind my gears already. Yes, it is a tax that I pay on something I inherit, I didn't earn it, but essentially it is a secondary tax on the earnings and CGT of my parents (both already dead so been there, done that), but this piece of mental WTF:

Labour tax raid on inherited wealth to leave families £875,000 worse off

UK's Labour interested in new inheritance tax - McDonnell - Reuters

How is really going to work? Stimulate the economy - I don't think so. Kill the only real source of actual capital gains for the majority of the population, given the current base rate? Penalise anyone who buys a house, effectively? Are they mad? Lost for words really, and it doesn't just apply to houses.
 
#2
Okey dokey. IHT makes me grind my gears already. Yes, it is a tax that I pay on something I inherit, I didn't earn it, but essentially it is a secondary tax on the earnings and CGT of my parents (both already dead so been there, done that), but this piece of mental WTF:

Labour tax raid on inherited wealth to leave families £875,000 worse off

UK's Labour interested in new inheritance tax - McDonnell - Reuters

How is really going to work? Stimulate the economy - I don't think so. Kill the only real source of actual capital gains for the majority of the population, given the current base rate? Penalise anyone who buys a house, effectively? Are they mad? Lost for words really, and it doesn't just apply to houses.
Shhhhh, don't mention inherited wealth too loudly. You might cause some embarrassment to some senior labour politicians. Bit like sending their kids to the detested and unfair grammar schools.

Sent from my Lenovo TB2-X30F using Tapatalk
 
#3
Okey dokey. IHT makes me grind my gears already. Yes, it is a tax that I pay on something I inherit, I didn't earn it, but essentially it is a secondary tax on the earnings and CGT of my parents (both already dead so been there, done that), but this piece of mental WTF:

Labour tax raid on inherited wealth to leave families £875,000 worse off

UK's Labour interested in new inheritance tax - McDonnell - Reuters

How is really going to work? Stimulate the economy - I don't think so. Kill the only real source of actual capital gains for the majority of the population, given the current base rate? Penalise anyone who buys a house, effectively? Are they mad? Lost for words really, and it doesn't just apply to houses.

Here we go again, labour sells off the gold at rock bottom and costs the country 30 billion, labour raids the pension schemes to fund it's half witted agenda. Leaves the country broke. Now this, which is just theft.

What I have, I earned. My parents were dirt poor and left me nothing. When I joined up my mother gave me a fiver which was all she had.
At 16 I had passed my O levels and all my mates were looking at 6th form and university. Dad said that his other kids were now his priority and I had to get a job. That broke his heart as he believed that education got you out of the position that he had found himself in. Dad was bought up in poverty living in a Dundee tenement.

I have worked myself into the ground to be able to leave something to my kids. My knees are shot to bits and I need to retire but I soldier on. These bastards want to give my kids inheritance to a load of feckless wasters.
Call themselves supporters of the working class. Liars and thiefs every one.
 
Last edited:
#4
Buying more votes with other people's money.

No change there then.
 
#6
Okey dokey. IHT makes me grind my gears already. Yes, it is a tax that I pay on something I inherit, I didn't earn it, but essentially it is a secondary tax on the earnings and CGT of my parents (both already dead so been there, done that), but this piece of mental WTF:

Labour tax raid on inherited wealth to leave families £875,000 worse off

UK's Labour interested in new inheritance tax - McDonnell - Reuters

How is really going to work? Stimulate the economy - I don't think so. Kill the only real source of actual capital gains for the majority of the population, given the current base rate? Penalise anyone who buys a house, effectively? Are they mad? Lost for words really, and it doesn't just apply to houses.

"Speaking on Sky News last night Mr McDonnell said he found the plans for a new IHT system "interesting" and that the Labour party would consider them.

This is the first time a senior party member has advocated the new regime, first reported in the Sunday Telegraph several weeks ago. "

Finding something 'interesting ' and 'advocating it' is typical yellow journalism. Oh look! It's the Daily Telegraph!
 
#7
Better get ready to be able to quote Mao's "Little Red Book", your life might depend on it when you're sent to a reeducation camp
 
#10
Here we go again, labour sells of the gold at rock bottom and costs the country 30 billion, labour raids the pension schemes to fund it's half witted agenda. Leaves the country broke. Now this which is just theft.

What I have, I earned. My parents were dirt poor and left me nothing. When I joined up my mother gave me a fiver which was all she had. I have worked myself into the ground to be able to leave something to my kids. These bastards want to give my kids inheritance to a load of feckless wasters.
Call themselves supporters of the working class. Liars and thiefs theives every one.
We all know Labour want to give their block supporters ( the feckless and underserving immigrants) money earnt by others. It has always been so.

The problem with socialism is eventually one runs out of other people's money.
 
#11
What's mine is mine, what is your's is our's.
 
#12
Okey dokey. IHT makes me grind my gears already. Yes, it is a tax that I pay on something I inherit, I didn't earn it, but essentially it is a secondary tax on the earnings and CGT of my parents (both already dead so been there, done that), but this piece of mental WTF:

Labour tax raid on inherited wealth to leave families £875,000 worse off

UK's Labour interested in new inheritance tax - McDonnell - Reuters

How is really going to work? Stimulate the economy - I don't think so. Kill the only real source of actual capital gains for the majority of the population, given the current base rate? Penalise anyone who buys a house, effectively? Are they mad? Lost for words really, and it doesn't just apply to houses.
Labours view of paradise exactly mirrors that view you got of East Berlin before the wall came down.
 
#13
70 to 50 years ago this may have been a winner but today most of those who would have voted Labour, the working class, now have money to pass on to their children. Any Labour voter in the large parts of the country have their own house which for many will be worth over 200k and some in the south getting on to 1/2 m or more.

Labour again believing their own research from a very small group who have lost contact with the Labour voters.
 

MrBane

LE
Moderator
Kit Reviewer
Reviews Editor
#14
This is another reason why you should be planning early doors as to how to pass off everything to the family before you pop it and stuff like this becomes a factor.

My grandad in the last month of his life (NS in Malaysia, Aiden, etc) went and shut down his bank accounts and gave it all to my gran to dispense among everyone as she saw fit.

6 Ps and all that.
 
#15
This is another reason why you should be planning early doors as to how to pass off everything to the family before you pop it and stuff like this becomes a factor.

My grandad in the last month of his life (NS in Malaysia, Aiden, etc) went and shut down his bank accounts and gave it all to my gran to dispense among everyone as she saw fit.

6 Ps and all that.
That's why they are looking at lifetime gifts not just end of days. We already have the 7 year wait (I got a phone call from my mother the day the time was up to tell me we were in the clear and Gordon was getting none of it).

It will be interesting how the manage to do the tracking going back over the years. Remember that birthday present you gave your kids 30 years ago, it's now worth X£ and we want the money added to your estate for tax purposes.
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
#16
There is an over-arching obsession with being 'fair' which seems to permeate not just political circles but also the civil service at the moment.

I've already made the point on the thread about the BBC's (im)partiality - the scramble to be 'fair' and report everyone's views obscures the majority and what people may be thinking. It's a form of control.

Earlier this week, I had a meeting with a friend and colleague to talk about some future work. We got talking about infrastructure procurement. My friend has recently been assured that in infrastructure procurements certain government agencies would, if they could, be involved "down to the individual bag of cement or bag of nuts and bolts".

This is deemed to make it more 'fair' for the smaller firms to compete. It completely ignores that fact that the horror stories of lightbulbs costing £50 to replace have involved the big infrastructure and service provision companies on major government frameworks. The justification is that it "reduces risk". It doesn't, it merely spreads the risk and, arguably, increases it. It would also grossly inflate the bureaucratic burden and increase administrative costs exponentially.

Why is this relevant to this discussion? Because language is being confused or deliberately misused.

I remarked on the Corbyn thread how the term "the rich" is being used to create a collective bogeyman of evil, self-serving, selfish individuals - Tory by implication - who are hoarding and keeping money from the deserving Rest Of Us.

Who is/are this 'Rest Of Us'?

The people who will be affected by this are Most Of Us - people who've scrimped and saved, who've been wise with money and who've looked to do all that used to be regarded as right in terms of providing for themselves and being as self-sufficient as possible.

Pause for a moment: providing for themselves.

There is nothing wrong with working hard to secure yourself if not a comfortable future than at least one without worry. That is not selfish. That is not taking away from someone else. It is making sure that you are independently capable and provided for.

There's another word: independence. People might consider what's going on here. Perhaps some of our politicians are very much against it.

As I've said before, the words 'equal' and 'equitable' are being willingly conflated but they are in fact very different.

The culmination of the thinking behind this money grab is that no-one works but we all get an equal amount of nothing, or else everyone works precisely the same amount and gets precisely the same. Ultimately, the only way that that could be made to work is by taking the economy back to a subsistence farming level.

The irony of that is that the Rest Of Us - many of whom are state-dependent - would then have to work. It would be interesting to see what they would have to say about that.

McDonnell and his cohort are playing a dangerous, disingenuous game. The people who 'support' them, in the main, aren't hardcore ideologues. They're the feckless and they're also fickle.
 
Last edited:
#18
I remarked on the Corbyn thread how the term "the rich" is being used to create a collective bogeyman of evil, self-serving, selfish individuals - Tory by implication - who are hoarding and keeping money from the deserving Rest Of Us.
Recent Labour party political film (council elections?) showed them giving 20k to different groups and what they would do with it. From paying off debt to starting a business. The money given to a millionaire (suit, spive, long nose, looking down at you) went into a offshore bank to make money.

The money came from the tax they had payed. My wife was a nurse and she never earned enough to pay 20k a year in tax.


The people who will be affected by this are Most Of Us - people who've scrimped and saved, who've been wise with money and who've looked to do all that used to be regarded as right in terms of providing for themselves and being as self-sufficient as possible.

Pause for a moment: providing for themselves.

There is nothing wrong with working hard to secure yourself if not a comfortable future than at least one without worry. That is not selfish. That is not taking away from someone else. It is making sure that you are independently capable and provided for.
My wife was until recently a CPN working with the elderly. Those who didn't work or who had not saved got everything free, those who had worked and saved paid for everything. Two things she learnt, 1 she never wants to go into care, she has seen it from the inside and 2 spend it now as the government will take it if you don't. We now go on two cruises a year but she still buy cheap bog roll.
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
#19
@offog the video makes the point. The person with money will squirrel the money away beyond reach where it will make more money.

The people with (more) money will do the same. The people that will get absolutely malletted by this proposal are very much working class.

Quite how others within the Labour Party aren't challenging this is ridiculous.

At the same time, BoJo should be thinking rather more about and challenging this than promising tax cuts.

Clowns to the Left of me, jokers to the Right... ne'er so apt.
 
#20
I think that we can all agree that equality of opportunity is a good thing and those who choose to work hard could succeed.

However the labour beloved equality of outcome just destroys. Why work hard when you get the same if you don't.

Are labour planning to give us the same pay and benefits as labour MPs, purely in the interests of fairness?

Sent from my Lenovo TB2-X30F using Tapatalk
 

Top