If I, as a middle aged senior manager within my company, met an underage schoolgirl, befriended her, employed her at my company on graduation, then began an affair with her while she was in my employ, using company expenses to pay for jollies and using company resources to advance her career, then covered it up and lied to HR when asked about it, I would be looking at a sacking and I wouldn't rate my chances of future employment very highly.
Everything about this, from the age and power gap to the misuse of company resources and lying about it when confronted screams wrong, even if you want to hang onto the threadbare excuse that it was an affair that took place between two consenting adults.
It's simply not acceptable in a modern workplace.
On a related note, who remembers this corker of an ad from We Buy any Car on how to create the perfect modern workplace?
Perhaps it's not the fairest thing in the world to write a piece of imaginative fiction like that, and just imply that Schofield did the equivalent.
If you want to make accusations against Schofield, probably better to state them explicitly and then cite chapter and verse to back them up. Though admittedly that would be a lot harder than what you did.
Talking of chapter and verse, funnily enough the BBC carried a clip of one of Schofield's former colleagues quoting John, chapter 8, verse 7. Not a popular verse on social media, for obvious reasons.
Um, what accusations am I making personally, please? Imaginative fiction? I'm using publicly available stories published in the last week or so:
All this just makes you look prurient and curtain-twitchy, to be honest
Schofield did bad thing, is sacked, career likely over, end of
I'm just responding to the very serious accusation by @chris that I'm making things up - fairly important so as to not get OGH into trouble. Everything in my original post is now referenced using stories published in the national press.
I know you don't work in an office, so I'll simply say that I've seen this kind of thing happen all too often in workplace environments and it needs rooting out, hence why it sticks in my craw.
If someone wants to meet a 15 year old and five years later it turns into a relationship then well, it's probably a bit icky but not really scandalous. But when you use your connections to employ that person, become their boss, and use company resources to advance their career... that's when it makes me mad.
There is all sorts of justifications used for the vilification of Philip Schofield and some people will no doubt claim that homophobia is not theirs, but @leon is right about the prurience. I can't help thinking that if it had been Jeremy Clarkson or Boris Johnson shagging a 20 year old woman it would be seen very differently. In fact I am sure of it
As mentioned several times in my previous posts, for me it is absolutely not about the age gap or the sexuality of the parties involved.
For the record, I have precisely zero problem with consenting adults of any gender choosing to enter into a relationship with each other.
I do have questions over the appropriateness of someone in their late 40s meeting a 15 year old, then having a "friendship" that blossoms into a sexual relationship when they come of age, but I would have the same questions about a man in his 40s and a schoolgirl. It's not about gender - the power dynamic feels a little off here. However, I also accept it's none of my business, and stranger relationships blossom, where adults consent.
What I have a problem with is where the older person uses their influence to get the younger person a job at their company, then starts a sexual relationship with them while being their boss, and uses their influence to promote their partner's career, then lies about the relationship when asked by their HR department.
Normally, this sort of thing would not be front page news, except for the fact that the boss in question is a celeb with a "squeaky clean" reputation they have monetised (see the ads I posted below).
One can be outraged by this story without being either homophobic or in denial that cross-generational relationships do sometimes happen between consenting adults.
Why is Inheritance Tax levied on estates and not recipients? It seems it would be much more logical for the recipients of inheritance to be taxed, rather than the estates themselves.
And why not simply have a lifetime gift allowance, that includes pre-inheritance gifts?
You're absolutely right.
But, of course, the people who complain most loudly about Inheritance Tax aren't really complaining because of their deep sympathy for poor old grandma, whose dearest last wish is to pass on her earned estate (which definitely didn't result from house price rises since 1970 but the sweat of her dear old brow) to her nearest and dearest.
No, they just want a fat cheque when the old coffin dodger croaks at last. The complainants, to a large extent, ARE the recipients, and they don't want gran spreading her inheritence to a load of great-grand-nephews and whatever, as would be the incentive in your proposal.
I accept that is a generalisation, and people oppose IHT for various reasons. But there's quite a bit of truth in it.
I'm amazed that only 1-in-20 estates are over £325,000 in the UK. I would have thought the number would be more like 1-in-5 or 1-in-6.
Why is Inheritance Tax levied on estates and not recipients? It seems it would be much more logical for the recipients of inheritance to be taxed, rather than the estates themselves.
And why not simply have a lifetime gift allowance, that includes pre-inheritance gifts?
You're absolutely right.
But, of course, the people who complain most loudly about Inheritance Tax aren't really complaining because of their deep sympathy for poor old grandma, whose dearest last wish is to pass on her earned estate (which definitely didn't result from house price rises since 1970 but the sweat of her dear old brow) to her nearest and dearest.
No, they just want a fat cheque when the old coffin dodger croaks at last. The complainants, to a large extent, ARE the recipients, and they don't want gran spreading her inheritence to a load of great-grand-nephews and whatever, as would be the incentive in your proposal.
I accept that is a generalisation, and people oppose IHT for various reasons. But there's quite a bit of truth in it.
I'm amazed that only 1-in-20 estates are over £325,000 in the UK. I would have thought the number would be more like 1-in-5 or 1-in-6.
That 325000 does not include the first 180,000 of the value of the primary residence.
Plus, it's one of the easiest taxes to avoid.
Your figure would probably be correct if it weren't for that.
Why is Inheritance Tax levied on estates and not recipients? It seems it would be much more logical for the recipients of inheritance to be taxed, rather than the estates themselves.
And why not simply have a lifetime gift allowance, that includes pre-inheritance gifts?
You're absolutely right.
But, of course, the people who complain most loudly about Inheritance Tax aren't really complaining because of their deep sympathy for poor old grandma, whose dearest last wish is to pass on her earned estate (which definitely didn't result from house price rises since 1970 but the sweat of her dear old brow) to her nearest and dearest.
No, they just want a fat cheque when the old coffin dodger croaks at last. The complainants, to a large extent, ARE the recipients, and they don't want gran spreading her inheritence to a load of great-grand-nephews and whatever, as would be the incentive in your proposal.
I accept that is a generalisation, and people oppose IHT for various reasons. But there's quite a bit of truth in it.
I'm amazed that only 1-in-20 estates are over £325,000 in the UK. I would have thought the number would be more like 1-in-5 or 1-in-6.
I highly doubt that is true now given the average UK house price is £372,894 according to Rightmove and £696k in London
Why is Inheritance Tax levied on estates and not recipients? It seems it would be much more logical for the recipients of inheritance to be taxed, rather than the estates themselves.
And why not simply have a lifetime gift allowance, that includes pre-inheritance gifts?
You're absolutely right.
But, of course, the people who complain most loudly about Inheritance Tax aren't really complaining because of their deep sympathy for poor old grandma, whose dearest last wish is to pass on her earned estate (which definitely didn't result from house price rises since 1970 but the sweat of her dear old brow) to her nearest and dearest.
No, they just want a fat cheque when the old coffin dodger croaks at last. The complainants, to a large extent, ARE the recipients, and they don't want gran spreading her inheritence to a load of great-grand-nephews and whatever, as would be the incentive in your proposal.
I accept that is a generalisation, and people oppose IHT for various reasons. But there's quite a bit of truth in it.
I'm amazed that only 1-in-20 estates are over £325,000 in the UK. I would have thought the number would be more like 1-in-5 or 1-in-6.
That 325000 does not include the first 180,000 of the value of the primary residence.
Plus, it's one of the easiest taxes to avoid.
Your figure would probably be correct if it weren't for that.
What a ridiculous exemption. Just make the threshold £500k, and get rid of the primary residence absurdity.
Why is Inheritance Tax levied on estates and not recipients? It seems it would be much more logical for the recipients of inheritance to be taxed, rather than the estates themselves.
And why not simply have a lifetime gift allowance, that includes pre-inheritance gifts?
You're absolutely right.
But, of course, the people who complain most loudly about Inheritance Tax aren't really complaining because of their deep sympathy for poor old grandma, whose dearest last wish is to pass on her earned estate (which definitely didn't result from house price rises since 1970 but the sweat of her dear old brow) to her nearest and dearest.
No, they just want a fat cheque when the old coffin dodger croaks at last. The complainants, to a large extent, ARE the recipients, and they don't want gran spreading her inheritence to a load of great-grand-nephews and whatever, as would be the incentive in your proposal.
I accept that is a generalisation, and people oppose IHT for various reasons. But there's quite a bit of truth in it.
I'm amazed that only 1-in-20 estates are over £325,000 in the UK. I would have thought the number would be more like 1-in-5 or 1-in-6.
That 325000 does not include the first 180,000 of the value of the primary residence.
Plus, it's one of the easiest taxes to avoid.
Your figure would probably be correct if it weren't for that.
On the avoidance: that's why I would have a lifetime gifts (including inheritance) allowance, and tax the recipient, not the estate.
If I, as a middle aged senior manager within my company, met an underage schoolgirl, befriended her, employed her at my company on graduation, then began an affair with her while she was in my employ, using company expenses to pay for jollies and using company resources to advance her career, then covered it up and lied to HR when asked about it, I would be looking at a sacking and I wouldn't rate my chances of future employment very highly.
Everything about this, from the age and power gap to the misuse of company resources and lying about it when confronted screams wrong, even if you want to hang onto the threadbare excuse that it was an affair that took place between two consenting adults.
It's simply not acceptable in a modern workplace.
On a related note, who remembers this corker of an ad from We Buy any Car on how to create the perfect modern workplace?
Perhaps it's not the fairest thing in the world to write a piece of imaginative fiction like that, and just imply that Schofield did the equivalent.
If you want to make accusations against Schofield, probably better to state them explicitly and then cite chapter and verse to back them up. Though admittedly that would be a lot harder than what you did.
Talking of chapter and verse, funnily enough the BBC carried a clip of one of Schofield's former colleagues quoting John, chapter 8, verse 7. Not a popular verse on social media, for obvious reasons.
Um, what accusations am I making personally, please? Imaginative fiction? I'm using publicly available stories published in the last week or so:
All this just makes you look prurient and curtain-twitchy, to be honest
Schofield did bad thing, is sacked, career likely over, end of
I'm just responding to the very serious accusation by @chris that I'm making things up - fairly important so as to not get OGH into trouble. Everything in my original post is now referenced using stories published in the national press.
I know you don't work in an office, so I'll simply say that I've seen this kind of thing happen all too often in workplace environments and it needs rooting out, hence why it sticks in my craw.
If someone wants to meet a 15 year old and five years later it turns into a relationship then well, it's probably a bit icky but not really scandalous. But when you use your connections to employ that person, become their boss, and use company resources to advance their career... that's when it makes me mad.
There is all sorts of justifications used for the vilification of Philip Schofield and some people will no doubt claim that homophobia is not theirs, but @leon is right about the prurience. I can't help thinking that if it had been Jeremy Clarkson or Boris Johnson shagging a 20 year old woman it would be seen very differently. In fact I am sure of it
There is another issue here. His coming out was to silence this scandal in 2020, and he took steps to shut down the media reporting on this. The young man then appears to have been chucked under the bus. Given how difficult can still be for regular people, that appears incredibly cynical from Schofield.
Now saying he is making a big deal that is it all down to homophobia. Well when he came out the reaction went from rather OTT about his bravery, to rather dismissive, I thought he was gay, I didn't know he was married to a woman. Either way, bloke in telly in 2020 is gay, nobody cared / switched off This Morning because of it.
Secondly, he points to Leo as whataboutery, well lots of people regularly point out this is very dodgy behaviour...and the young ladies he dates, they aren't working for him.
Why is Inheritance Tax levied on estates and not recipients? It seems it would be much more logical for the recipients of inheritance to be taxed, rather than the estates themselves.
And why not simply have a lifetime gift allowance, that includes pre-inheritance gifts?
You're absolutely right.
But, of course, the people who complain most loudly about Inheritance Tax aren't really complaining because of their deep sympathy for poor old grandma, whose dearest last wish is to pass on her earned estate (which definitely didn't result from house price rises since 1970 but the sweat of her dear old brow) to her nearest and dearest.
No, they just want a fat cheque when the old coffin dodger croaks at last. The complainants, to a large extent, ARE the recipients, and they don't want gran spreading her inheritence to a load of great-grand-nephews and whatever, as would be the incentive in your proposal.
I accept that is a generalisation, and people oppose IHT for various reasons. But there's quite a bit of truth in it.
I'm amazed that only 1-in-20 estates are over £325,000 in the UK. I would have thought the number would be more like 1-in-5 or 1-in-6.
I highly doubt that is true now given the average UK house price is £372,894 according to Rightmove and £696k in London
Presumably, though, half of all estates are simple husband-to-wife, or wife-to-husband, where there is no inheritance tax to pay. That seriously cuts down the number paying it.
Why is Inheritance Tax levied on estates and not recipients? It seems it would be much more logical for the recipients of inheritance to be taxed, rather than the estates themselves.
And why not simply have a lifetime gift allowance, that includes pre-inheritance gifts?
You're absolutely right.
But, of course, the people who complain most loudly about Inheritance Tax aren't really complaining because of their deep sympathy for poor old grandma, whose dearest last wish is to pass on her earned estate (which definitely didn't result from house price rises since 1970 but the sweat of her dear old brow) to her nearest and dearest.
No, they just want a fat cheque when the old coffin dodger croaks at last. The complainants, to a large extent, ARE the recipients, and they don't want gran spreading her inheritence to a load of great-grand-nephews and whatever, as would be the incentive in your proposal.
I accept that is a generalisation, and people oppose IHT for various reasons. But there's quite a bit of truth in it.
I'm amazed that only 1-in-20 estates are over £325,000 in the UK. I would have thought the number would be more like 1-in-5 or 1-in-6.
That 325000 does not include the first 180,000 of the value of the primary residence.
Plus, it's one of the easiest taxes to avoid.
Your figure would probably be correct if it weren't for that.
What a ridiculous exemption. Just make the threshold £500k, and get rid of the primary residence absurdity.
Actually, I forgot another exemption. A married couple get a double allowance and there is no tax on an estate passing to the survivor.
So effectively the nil rate band for a widow/widower leaving an estate including a house to their children/grandchildren is around £830,000.
Not that hard for most people to make sure their assets come in under or close to that even with a very nice house in a rich area.
Why is Inheritance Tax levied on estates and not recipients? It seems it would be much more logical for the recipients of inheritance to be taxed, rather than the estates themselves.
And why not simply have a lifetime gift allowance, that includes pre-inheritance gifts?
You're absolutely right.
But, of course, the people who complain most loudly about Inheritance Tax aren't really complaining because of their deep sympathy for poor old grandma, whose dearest last wish is to pass on her earned estate (which definitely didn't result from house price rises since 1970 but the sweat of her dear old brow) to her nearest and dearest.
No, they just want a fat cheque when the old coffin dodger croaks at last. The complainants, to a large extent, ARE the recipients, and they don't want gran spreading her inheritence to a load of great-grand-nephews and whatever, as would be the incentive in your proposal.
I accept that is a generalisation, and people oppose IHT for various reasons. But there's quite a bit of truth in it.
I'm amazed that only 1-in-20 estates are over £325,000 in the UK. I would have thought the number would be more like 1-in-5 or 1-in-6.
I highly doubt that is true now given the average UK house price is £372,894 according to Rightmove and £696k in London
Presumably, though, half of all estates are simple husband-to-wife, or wife-to-husband, where there is no inheritance tax to pay. That seriously cuts down the number paying it.
Yes, the Osborne exemption effectively raised the threshold to £1 million for married couples' primary residence which made a difference
Why is Inheritance Tax levied on estates and not recipients? It seems it would be much more logical for the recipients of inheritance to be taxed, rather than the estates themselves.
And why not simply have a lifetime gift allowance, that includes pre-inheritance gifts?
You're absolutely right.
But, of course, the people who complain most loudly about Inheritance Tax aren't really complaining because of their deep sympathy for poor old grandma, whose dearest last wish is to pass on her earned estate (which definitely didn't result from house price rises since 1970 but the sweat of her dear old brow) to her nearest and dearest.
No, they just want a fat cheque when the old coffin dodger croaks at last. The complainants, to a large extent, ARE the recipients, and they don't want gran spreading her inheritence to a load of great-grand-nephews and whatever, as would be the incentive in your proposal.
I accept that is a generalisation, and people oppose IHT for various reasons. But there's quite a bit of truth in it.
I'm amazed that only 1-in-20 estates are over £325,000 in the UK. I would have thought the number would be more like 1-in-5 or 1-in-6.
Not really my subject - I was a CT man - but in my days in the tax biz I recall that Inheritance Tax was widely regarded as the most easily avoidable. It was paid largely by the careless.
This commentator makes a good point. The public generally give governments the benefit of the doubt on Covid. While the public recognise governments may have made the wrong calls at times, they also accept they were dealing with challenging and unclear situations. In any case the public doesn't agree on what the right calls should have been.
Given that, it's intriguing what the government is trying to hide.
Typical example would be a married couple - one dies. Their spouse 'inherits' tax free. The survivor then goes into a care home and has to pay the fees. What is left of the estate is below the threshold. They could be pretty affluent without having to pay anything.
I plan on avoiding inheritance tax by the simple expedient of spending all my money before I die.
Since I don’t have any descendants, I just don’t give a shit.
Mind you, I’ll probably have emulated you by spending it all as well.
I'm emulating you both not by spending my savings but by having fund managers who have somehow managed to lose more than a quarter in the past two years.
"total insouciance now and a desire to give everything (apart from the material he conveniently no longer has for 15 crucial months)"
Not quite. As far as one old phone is concerned, it's only material on it that he considers "relevant", and which is accessible to him, that Johnson has said he will give to the inquiry.
I plan on avoiding inheritance tax by the simple expedient of spending all my money before I die.
Since I don’t have any descendants, I just don’t give a shit.
Mind you, I’ll probably have emulated you by spending it all as well.
If I could bother getting around to it I'd probably leave something to my nieces and nephew. Currently my estate would be some way below the threshold but you never know in the future.
I plan on avoiding inheritance tax by the simple expedient of spending all my money before I die.
So do I. Nothing worse than w*nkers who want to build up an ever larger pile of capital so as to pass it on. It's as if they haven't got the sense to spend their own money on stuff they like.
The trans activist who disrupted a talk by Prof Kathleen Stock is the daughter of a council boss who introduced a four-day working week.
Riz Possnett’s mother Liz Watts was working on a PhD thesis on the topic when South Cambridgeshire District Council last year became the first to implement a trial to cut hours while staff remain on the same pay.
So much for just being a poor he/her/they, from a poor family. Mum and dad extremely well connected people, no wonder they can afford the swimming pool and hot tub.
God, I hate these posh/upper middle class people who pretend to be soil of the earth working class plebs.
I would of thought being very pro Trans almost certainly marks you out as being more likely to be upper middle class, at least by education, than working class. Probably even more so than opposition to Brexit which is equally a view most strongly held by the upper middle classes
Carlotta posted a link yesterday which, when followed, led to an Ipsos poll. I think as a rough rule of thumb it's age: Gen Z (1997+)>Millennials (1981-1996)>Gen X (1965-1980)>Boomers (1948-1964), with boomers the most agin.
Although I have to ask: you, as a Conservative member, may have access to datasets that the rest of us do not. Does the Party track these things by class?
I plan on avoiding inheritance tax by the simple expedient of spending all my money before I die.
Since I don’t have any descendants, I just don’t give a shit.
Mind you, I’ll probably have emulated you by spending it all as well.
If I could bother getting around to it I'd probably leave something to my nieces and nephew. Currently my estate would be some way below the threshold but you never know in the future.
I’ve got four god daughters two of whom are also my nieces who will do OK - but no more than that - out of my will.
The trans activist who disrupted a talk by Prof Kathleen Stock is the daughter of a council boss who introduced a four-day working week.
Riz Possnett’s mother Liz Watts was working on a PhD thesis on the topic when South Cambridgeshire District Council last year became the first to implement a trial to cut hours while staff remain on the same pay.
So much for just being a poor he/her/they, from a poor family. Mum and dad extremely well connected people, no wonder they can afford the swimming pool and hot tub.
God, I hate these posh/upper middle class people who pretend to be soil of the earth working class plebs.
I would of thought being very pro Trans almost certainly marks you out as being more likely to be upper middle class, at least by education, than working class. Probably even more so than opposition to Brexit which is equally a view most strongly held by the upper middle classes
Carlotta posted a link yesterday which, when followed, led to an Ipsos poll. I think as a rough rule of thumb it's age: Gen Z (1997+)>Millennials (1981-1996)>Gen X (1965-1980)>Boomers (1948-1964), with boomers the most agin.
Although I have to ask: you, as a Conservative member, may have access to datasets that the rest of us do not. Does the Party track these things by class?
No, the Tory party isn't interested in class at all. (Have you ever met any of them?)
I plan on avoiding inheritance tax by the simple expedient of spending all my money before I die.
Since I don’t have any descendants, I just don’t give a shit.
Mind you, I’ll probably have emulated you by spending it all as well.
I'm emulating you both not by spending my savings but by having fund managers who have somehow managed to lose more than a quarter in the past two years.
Actually, I forgot another exemption. A married couple get a double allowance and there is no tax on an estate passing to the survivor.
So effectively the nil rate band for a widow/widower leaving an estate including a house to their children/grandchildren is around £830,000.
Not that hard for most people to make sure their assets come in under or close to that even with a very nice house in a rich area.
For the rather more wealthy, who don't have most of their wealth tied up in the family home: Agricultural Relief. Business Relief. Trusts (but these aren't as effective as they used to be, thanks to Osborne). Most AIM-listed shares. Passing a pension fund completely tax-free to beneficiaries (that one is Osborne's fault!). Forestry.
There are reasons for most of these exemptions/allowances, but the overall picture is a mess.
The trans activist who disrupted a talk by Prof Kathleen Stock is the daughter of a council boss who introduced a four-day working week.
Riz Possnett’s mother Liz Watts was working on a PhD thesis on the topic when South Cambridgeshire District Council last year became the first to implement a trial to cut hours while staff remain on the same pay.
So much for just being a poor he/her/they, from a poor family. Mum and dad extremely well connected people, no wonder they can afford the swimming pool and hot tub.
God, I hate these posh/upper middle class people who pretend to be soil of the earth working class plebs.
I would of thought being very pro Trans almost certainly marks you out as being more likely to be upper middle class, at least by education, than working class. Probably even more so than opposition to Brexit which is equally a view most strongly held by the upper middle classes
Carlotta posted a link yesterday which, when followed, led to an Ipsos poll. I think as a rough rule of thumb it's age: Gen Z (1997+)>Millennials (1981-1996)>Gen X (1965-1980)>Boomers (1948-1964), with boomers the most agin.
Although I have to ask: you, as a Conservative member, may have access to datasets that the rest of us do not. Does the Party track these things by class?
No, the Tory party isn't interested in class at all. (Have you ever met any of them?)
The fall in house prices was some welcome news the other day. With wages going up by 6% that should mean a nice rebalancing of the earnings to prices ratio.
5 years of earnings growth at 5% p/a and a further 5% fall in house prices would see the ratio go back to something like 6:1 which would probably be reasonable. The idea that the housing affordability issue cannot be dealt with is baloney.
The truth is people simply don't die often enough for inheritance tax to be of much value. What we need is something that can be paid every year like a land value tax.
This commentator makes a good point. The public generally give governments the benefit of the doubt on Covid. While the public recognise governments may have made the wrong calls at times, they also accept they were dealing with challenging and unclear situations. In any case the public doesn't agree on what the right calls should have been.
Given that, it's intriguing what the government is trying to hide.
I plan on avoiding inheritance tax by the simple expedient of spending all my money before I die.
Since I don’t have any descendants, I just don’t give a shit.
Mind you, I’ll probably have emulated you by spending it all as well.
I'm emulating you both not by spending my savings but by having fund managers who have somehow managed to lose more than a quarter in the past two years.
Ouch. Sympathies.
He needs to read the small print; they probably didn’t lose anything but helped themselves to a nice wodge of his savings by way of congratulation for their sterling efforts.
Why is Inheritance Tax levied on estates and not recipients? It seems it would be much more logical for the recipients of inheritance to be taxed, rather than the estates themselves.
And why not simply have a lifetime gift allowance, that includes pre-inheritance gifts?
You're absolutely right.
But, of course, the people who complain most loudly about Inheritance Tax aren't really complaining because of their deep sympathy for poor old grandma, whose dearest last wish is to pass on her earned estate (which definitely didn't result from house price rises since 1970 but the sweat of her dear old brow) to her nearest and dearest.
No, they just want a fat cheque when the old coffin dodger croaks at last. The complainants, to a large extent, ARE the recipients, and they don't want gran spreading her inheritence to a load of great-grand-nephews and whatever, as would be the incentive in your proposal.
I accept that is a generalisation, and people oppose IHT for various reasons. But there's quite a bit of truth in it.
I'm amazed that only 1-in-20 estates are over £325,000 in the UK. I would have thought the number would be more like 1-in-5 or 1-in-6.
Not really my subject - I was a CT man - but in my days in the tax biz I recall that Inheritance Tax was widely regarded as the most easily avoidable. It was paid largely by the careless.
Perhaps times have changed.
When I was working it was described as the only voluntary tax.
Why is Inheritance Tax levied on estates and not recipients? It seems it would be much more logical for the recipients of inheritance to be taxed, rather than the estates themselves.
And why not simply have a lifetime gift allowance, that includes pre-inheritance gifts?
You're absolutely right.
But, of course, the people who complain most loudly about Inheritance Tax aren't really complaining because of their deep sympathy for poor old grandma, whose dearest last wish is to pass on her earned estate (which definitely didn't result from house price rises since 1970 but the sweat of her dear old brow) to her nearest and dearest.
No, they just want a fat cheque when the old coffin dodger croaks at last. The complainants, to a large extent, ARE the recipients, and they don't want gran spreading her inheritence to a load of great-grand-nephews and whatever, as would be the incentive in your proposal.
I accept that is a generalisation, and people oppose IHT for various reasons. But there's quite a bit of truth in it.
I'm amazed that only 1-in-20 estates are over £325,000 in the UK. I would have thought the number would be more like 1-in-5 or 1-in-6.
Not really my subject - I was a CT man - but in my days in the tax biz I recall that Inheritance Tax was widely regarded as the most easily avoidable. It was paid largely by the careless.
Perhaps times have changed.
When I was working it was described as the only voluntary tax.
That was the case, until house price rises caught many more people in the net, who often weren’t expecting it and didn’t plan. That it’s so easy for the genuinely wealthy to avoid, suggests that it’s better off either being scrapped or made difficult to avoid.
"Forty refugees in standoff with Home Office over cramped London hotel
Westminster Council leader Adam Hug has written to the Home Secretary demanding to know why the town hall was not informed the ‘vulnerable group’ had been moved to the borough"
I confess to being fascinated by old Southern culture and Southern ideology, which is very politically incorrect of me. Of course I don’t support it, but I would be lying if I said there was no romance in it.
Whereas I am simply appalled and disgusted by Nazism to the point where I won’t watch TV or reach books about it.
An interesting dilemma for bien pensant, centrist dad liberal Remoaners living on the Upper West Side.
I am fascinated by both - the Old South, and Nazism
But I don't beat myself up as a racist Nazi as a result
I am equally fascinated by Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot - and by war and conflict in general
I like dramatic history especially if it is laced with extreme, grandiose or peculiar politics. Humans like theatre. We read books about murder, not dishwashing. It is normal
I guess I could read "the history of Paddy Ashdown's Lib Dem campaigns" but somehow it is not quite as alluring
I like reading about them specifically because of reading about those who stood firm. Admiral Canaris, the White Rose movement and many others. Reading about what they did in the face of overwhelming odds is both inspirational and instructive. The same goes for those from the Antebellum South who chose to fight against their own states as a matter of principle. It puts thelie to those who claimed they either did not know or had no choice but to comply and become complicit.
Canaris was a anti-democratic hard core nationalist who was up for conquering Europe. He was involved in the Rosa Luxemburg murder and the coverup.
Reinhard Heidrich was a protégée - some suspect Heidrich was an infiltrator into the Nazi party, run by Canaris, initially. They remained good friends, despite becoming rivals in the Nazi secret police establishment, until Heidrich was assassinated.
Canaris used the Abwehr as a vehicle to get jews out of Germany. He was also opposed to Hitler from the very start and is credited with having used his contacts within the Spanish military to warn Franco about Hitler and being the cause of the Spanish not joining the war on the German side. He also sent warnings to the British about Hitler in the 1930s but was ignored. By the standards of the time he was as close as you were going to get on the German side to a democrat and he was certainly no Nazi.
This is what a cricket side being buggered looks like.
I can't get excited about England rolling over the Irish in cricket or San Marino in football. These grotesque mismatches have no place in modern sport. It's as bad as last Saturday's concluding race at Ffos Las where the 1/100 shot beat the 20/1 outsider by 31 lengths - not exactly racing.
Will tomorrow's Cup Final be a similar mismatch? You can get 3/10 City and 3/1 United to win outright - in 90 minutes, it's 1/2 City, 9/2 United and 7/2 the Draw.
I think I'll stick to puzzling out the Derby - my idea of the winner is MILITARY ORDER and I've backed WAIPIRO at 25s each way.
I plan on avoiding inheritance tax by the simple expedient of spending all my money before I die.
Since I don’t have any descendants, I just don’t give a shit.
Mind you, I’ll probably have emulated you by spending it all as well.
I'm emulating you both not by spending my savings but by having fund managers who have somehow managed to lose more than a quarter in the past two years.
I plan on avoiding inheritance tax by the simple expedient of spending all my money before I die.
Since I don’t have any descendants, I just don’t give a shit.
Mind you, I’ll probably have emulated you by spending it all as well.
I'm emulating you both not by spending my savings but by having fund managers who have somehow managed to lose more than a quarter in the past two years.
I confess to being fascinated by old Southern culture and Southern ideology, which is very politically incorrect of me. Of course I don’t support it, but I would be lying if I said there was no romance in it.
Whereas I am simply appalled and disgusted by Nazism to the point where I won’t watch TV or reach books about it.
An interesting dilemma for bien pensant, centrist dad liberal Remoaners living on the Upper West Side.
I am fascinated by both - the Old South, and Nazism
But I don't beat myself up as a racist Nazi as a result
I am equally fascinated by Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot - and by war and conflict in general
I like dramatic history especially if it is laced with extreme, grandiose or peculiar politics. Humans like theatre. We read books about murder, not dishwashing. It is normal
I guess I could read "the history of Paddy Ashdown's Lib Dem campaigns" but somehow it is not quite as alluring
My hatred of Nazism is ultimately not even ideological. It’s fear and repulsion.
I don’t go into it for the same reason I won’t read news articles about murdered/abused children.
I hear you on the kids thing. One place I can't go is books about true crime involving children. It is too distressing, as a parent
I read one brilliantly bleak book about Fred and Rosey West and it made me so sad I decided, never again
Somehow the Nazis are easier to read about than that. Also, they are more important. You need to read about Nazism to understand how it arose and how it can be opposed. Ditto Pol Pot, arguably even more so, as everyone has forgotten about him
The other day it happened to me again: an educated young woman admitted she had never heard of Pol Pot, the Khmer Rouge, none of it. Scandalous
Sean Thomas spoiled an excellent and sensitive article by the last few paragraphs where he clearly felt he ought to pay lip service to the politics of his hosts. It feels like it was written by two separate hands. A real shame.
I confess to being fascinated by old Southern culture and Southern ideology, which is very politically incorrect of me. Of course I don’t support it, but I would be lying if I said there was no romance in it.
Whereas I am simply appalled and disgusted by Nazism to the point where I won’t watch TV or reach books about it.
An interesting dilemma for bien pensant, centrist dad liberal Remoaners living on the Upper West Side.
I am fascinated by both - the Old South, and Nazism
But I don't beat myself up as a racist Nazi as a result
I am equally fascinated by Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot - and by war and conflict in general
I like dramatic history especially if it is laced with extreme, grandiose or peculiar politics. Humans like theatre. We read books about murder, not dishwashing. It is normal
I guess I could read "the history of Paddy Ashdown's Lib Dem campaigns" but somehow it is not quite as alluring
My hatred of Nazism is ultimately not even ideological. It’s fear and repulsion.
I don’t go into it for the same reason I won’t read news articles about murdered/abused children.
I hear you on the kids thing. One place I can't go is books about true crime involving children. It is too distressing, as a parent
I read one brilliantly bleak book about Fred and Rosey West and it made me so sad I decided, never again
Somehow the Nazis are easier to read about than that. Also, they are more important. You need to read about Nazism to understand how it arose and how it can be opposed. Ditto Pol Pot, arguably even more so, as everyone has forgotten about him
The other day it happened to me again: an educated young woman admitted she had never heard of Pol Pot, the Khmer Rouge, none of it. Scandalous
They were often talking about Pol Pot on children's TV show Blue Peter in the late 80s / early 90s if I remember correctly, because they were doing money raising campaigns for Cambodia on a regular basis.
I plan on avoiding inheritance tax by the simple expedient of spending all my money before I die.
Since I don’t have any descendants, I just don’t give a shit.
Mind you, I’ll probably have emulated you by spending it all as well.
I'm emulating you both not by spending my savings but by having fund managers who have somehow managed to lose more than a quarter in the past two years.
Ouch. Sympathies.
The supposed no-brainer strategy of "VTSAX and relax" would be down 20% in the last 18 months, so...
Problem with exiting one strategy and entering another one is often the capital gains to pay down on exiting the fund so... meh. 25% loss given market conditions isn't disastrously worse than general market conditions.
If I, as a middle aged senior manager within my company, met an underage schoolgirl, befriended her, employed her at my company on graduation, then began an affair with her while she was in my employ, using company expenses to pay for jollies and using company resources to advance her career, then covered it up and lied to HR when asked about it, I would be looking at a sacking and I wouldn't rate my chances of future employment very highly.
Everything about this, from the age and power gap to the misuse of company resources and lying about it when confronted screams wrong, even if you want to hang onto the threadbare excuse that it was an affair that took place between two consenting adults.
It's simply not acceptable in a modern workplace.
On a related note, who remembers this corker of an ad from We Buy any Car on how to create the perfect modern workplace?
Perhaps it's not the fairest thing in the world to write a piece of imaginative fiction like that, and just imply that Schofield did the equivalent.
If you want to make accusations against Schofield, probably better to state them explicitly and then cite chapter and verse to back them up. Though admittedly that would be a lot harder than what you did.
Talking of chapter and verse, funnily enough the BBC carried a clip of one of Schofield's former colleagues quoting John, chapter 8, verse 7. Not a popular verse on social media, for obvious reasons.
Um, what accusations am I making personally, please? Imaginative fiction? I'm using publicly available stories published in the last week or so:
All this just makes you look prurient and curtain-twitchy, to be honest
Schofield did bad thing, is sacked, career likely over, end of
I'm just responding to the very serious accusation by @chris that I'm making things up - fairly important so as to not get OGH into trouble. Everything in my original post is now referenced using stories published in the national press.
I know you don't work in an office, so I'll simply say that I've seen this kind of thing happen all too often in workplace environments and it needs rooting out, hence why it sticks in my craw.
If someone wants to meet a 15 year old and five years later it turns into a relationship then well, it's probably a bit icky but not really scandalous. But when you use your connections to employ that person, become their boss, and use company resources to advance their career... that's when it makes me mad.
There is all sorts of justifications used for the vilification of Philip Schofield and some people will no doubt claim that homophobia is not theirs, but @leon is right about the prurience. I can't help thinking that if it had been Jeremy Clarkson or Boris Johnson shagging a 20 year old woman it would be seen very differently. In fact I am sure of it
There is another issue here. His coming out was to silence this scandal in 2020, and he took steps to shut down the media reporting on this. The young man then appears to have been chucked under the bus. Given how difficult can still be for regular people, that appears incredibly cynical from Schofield.
Now saying he is making a big deal that is it all down to homophobia. Well when he came out the reaction went from rather OTT about his bravery, to rather dismissive, I thought he was gay, I didn't know he was married to a woman. Either way, bloke in telly in 2020 is gay, nobody cared / switched off This Morning because of it.
Secondly, he points to Leo as whataboutery, well lots of people regularly point out this is very dodgy behaviour...and the young ladies he dates, they aren't working for him.
Yea, right of course. It isn't about homophobia at all. Well maybe not in your case, cos I am happy to give anyone the benefit of the doubt, even if you do not offer that to Schofield, but if you believe that The Sun, Mail and Express aren't loving the fact that they have outraged their small minded bigoted often homophobic readership then you are a little naïve
I confess to being fascinated by old Southern culture and Southern ideology, which is very politically incorrect of me. Of course I don’t support it, but I would be lying if I said there was no romance in it.
Whereas I am simply appalled and disgusted by Nazism to the point where I won’t watch TV or reach books about it.
An interesting dilemma for bien pensant, centrist dad liberal Remoaners living on the Upper West Side.
I am fascinated by both - the Old South, and Nazism
But I don't beat myself up as a racist Nazi as a result
I am equally fascinated by Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot - and by war and conflict in general
I like dramatic history especially if it is laced with extreme, grandiose or peculiar politics. Humans like theatre. We read books about murder, not dishwashing. It is normal
I guess I could read "the history of Paddy Ashdown's Lib Dem campaigns" but somehow it is not quite as alluring
My hatred of Nazism is ultimately not even ideological. It’s fear and repulsion.
I don’t go into it for the same reason I won’t read news articles about murdered/abused children.
I hear you on the kids thing. One place I can't go is books about true crime involving children. It is too distressing, as a parent
I read one brilliantly bleak book about Fred and Rosey West and it made me so sad I decided, never again
Somehow the Nazis are easier to read about than that. Also, they are more important. You need to read about Nazism to understand how it arose and how it can be opposed. Ditto Pol Pot, arguably even more so, as everyone has forgotten about him
The other day it happened to me again: an educated young woman admitted she had never heard of Pol Pot, the Khmer Rouge, none of it. Scandalous
Sean Thomas spoiled an excellent and sensitive article by the last few paragraphs where he clearly felt he ought to pay lip service to the politics of his hosts. It feels like it was written by two separate hands. A real shame.
The fall in house prices was some welcome news the other day. With wages going up by 6% that should mean a nice rebalancing of the earnings to prices ratio.
5 years of earnings growth at 5% p/a and a further 5% fall in house prices would see the ratio go back to something like 6:1 which would probably be reasonable. The idea that the housing affordability issue cannot be dealt with is baloney.
Is there a wage series anywhere ?
I can find for house prices, inflation, interest rates but anything for wages ?
I confess to being fascinated by old Southern culture and Southern ideology, which is very politically incorrect of me. Of course I don’t support it, but I would be lying if I said there was no romance in it.
Whereas I am simply appalled and disgusted by Nazism to the point where I won’t watch TV or reach books about it.
An interesting dilemma for bien pensant, centrist dad liberal Remoaners living on the Upper West Side.
I am fascinated by both - the Old South, and Nazism
But I don't beat myself up as a racist Nazi as a result
I am equally fascinated by Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot - and by war and conflict in general
I like dramatic history especially if it is laced with extreme, grandiose or peculiar politics. Humans like theatre. We read books about murder, not dishwashing. It is normal
I guess I could read "the history of Paddy Ashdown's Lib Dem campaigns" but somehow it is not quite as alluring
My hatred of Nazism is ultimately not even ideological. It’s fear and repulsion.
I don’t go into it for the same reason I won’t read news articles about murdered/abused children.
I hear you on the kids thing. One place I can't go is books about true crime involving children. It is too distressing, as a parent
I read one brilliantly bleak book about Fred and Rosey West and it made me so sad I decided, never again
Somehow the Nazis are easier to read about than that. Also, they are more important. You need to read about Nazism to understand how it arose and how it can be opposed. Ditto Pol Pot, arguably even more so, as everyone has forgotten about him
The other day it happened to me again: an educated young woman admitted she had never heard of Pol Pot, the Khmer Rouge, none of it. Scandalous
I’m not sure it’s a forgotten genocide as much as a frequently ignored one - the US at the time had some interest in that. The time around The Killing Fields movie is an obvious exception to that.
Clearly everyone has tuned into the cricket highlights.
When Ireland bowled out England for 85 at Lords in 2019, they shouldn't have had to wait so long for another match. This is what happens if you don't get enough practice at this level.
The fall in house prices was some welcome news the other day. With wages going up by 6% that should mean a nice rebalancing of the earnings to prices ratio.
5 years of earnings growth at 5% p/a and a further 5% fall in house prices would see the ratio go back to something like 6:1 which would probably be reasonable. The idea that the housing affordability issue cannot be dealt with is baloney.
Is there a wage series anywhere ?
I can find for house prices, inflation, interest rates but anything for wages ?
While everyone is down the pub or enjoying the mismatch that is the cricket, some thoughts on tomorrow's big sporting event - not Wembley but Epsom, home of that other iconic British sporting event, the Derby.
This year's renewal looks wide open. AUGUSTE RODIN is the one who could be a superstar in hiding - the trouble is, he flopped badly in the Guineas and were he with any other trainer, he'd be 10s or bigger but he's with Aidan O'Brien and the combination of that trainer's skills, a half mile further to gallop and some fast ground could just turn this equine equivalent of the ugly duckling into a swan. He was 11/4 at the start of the week but is now 9/2 and that's starting to get towards backable.
The money has come for Frankie Dettori's mount ARREST and there won't be a dry eye on the Downs if he wins the Derby in his final year. ARREST won well on the soft at Chester and he has fast ground form from his juvenile days but at Sandown and how he'll take to the fast ground and the downhill at Epsom I don't know. He was a bit of value at 6s but not at 3s.
MILITARY ORDER would be my choice for a winner - he looked good at Lingfield, albeit on the Polytrack, and as a full brother to Adayar, the 2021 winner, we can perhaps hope he'll handle the ground and the track well.
SPREWELL is another Irish challenger with claims but he's never gone on anything as quick as this.
The first three in the Dante turn up and while the Dante does throw up the odd winner, it can be a bit of a dead end and it's not as deep as you think. THE FOXES won well but WHITE BIRCH was finishing strongly while PASSENGER was arguably an unlucky third. They all have claims but I'm just not convinced the race is as strong as people think.
DUBAI MILE was fifth in the Guineas and that's often considered the best Derby trial but he was always up there and while I think he could make the running tomorrow, I'd be surprised if he stays there but of course Serpentine managed it in 2020.
My outsider is WAIPIRO who chased home MILITARY ORDER at Lingfield and I'm on at 25s. He shouldn't be good enough but Ed Walker is a decent trainer and I could see this one finishing well.
Damned nonsense. IHT abolition penalises the very people who work hard to earn money. Not Tory-votingf pensioners sitting on their thumbs as their houses go up in price, pampered by thge current IHT allowances.
You do realise the AVERAGE detached home in Scotland is worth £349,000 now? So over the £325k IHT threshold too.
Inheritance isn't very meritocratic though, now is it? Surely as an aspirational Tory you want everyone to go to a grammar school, work hard and make their own way in life. No legs up from the bank of mum and dad.
While everyone is down the pub or enjoying the mismatch that is the cricket, some thoughts on tomorrow's big sporting event - not Wembley but Epsom, home of that other iconic British sporting event, the Derby.
This year's renewal looks wide open. AUGUSTE RODIN is the one who could be a superstar in hiding - the trouble is, he flopped badly in the Guineas and were he with any other trainer, he'd be 10s or bigger but he's with Aidan O'Brien and the combination of that trainer's skills, a half mile further to gallop and some fast ground could just turn this equine equivalent of the ugly duckling into a swan. He was 11/4 at the start of the week but is now 9/2 and that's starting to get towards backable.
The money has come for Frankie Dettori's mount ARREST and there won't be a dry eye on the Downs if he wins the Derby in his final year. ARREST won well on the soft at Chester and he has fast ground form from his juvenile days but at Sandown and how he'll take to the fast ground and the downhill at Epsom I don't know. He was a bit of value at 6s but not at 3s.
MILITARY ORDER would be my choice for a winner - he looked good at Lingfield, albeit on the Polytrack, and as a full brother to Adayar, the 2021 winner, we can perhaps hope he'll handle the ground and the track well.
SPREWELL is another Irish challenger with claims but he's never gone on anything as quick as this.
The first three in the Dante turn up and while the Dante does throw up the odd winner, it can be a bit of a dead end and it's not as deep as you think. THE FOXES won well but WHITE BIRCH was finishing strongly while PASSENGER was arguably an unlucky third. They all have claims but I'm just not convinced the race is as strong as people think.
DUBAI MILE was fifth in the Guineas and that's often considered the best Derby trial but he was always up there and while I think he could make the running tomorrow, I'd be surprised if he stays there but of course Serpentine managed it in 2020.
My outsider is WAIPIRO who chased home MILITARY ORDER at Lingfield and I'm on at 25s. He shouldn't be good enough but Ed Walker is a decent trainer and I could see this one finishing well.
More importantly what odds those Animal Rebellion clowns turning up ?
I plan on avoiding inheritance tax by the simple expedient of spending all my money before I die.
Since I don’t have any descendants, I just don’t give a shit.
Mind you, I’ll probably have emulated you by spending it all as well.
I'm emulating you both not by spending my savings but by having fund managers who have somehow managed to lose more than a quarter in the past two years.
Ouch.
What is their mandate?
It's a pension fund so I assume they lost half of it in "safe, defensive" bonds and lost the other half in shares. They'd have done better buying lottery scratchcards but there was a queue at the newsagents.
I confess to being fascinated by old Southern culture and Southern ideology, which is very politically incorrect of me. Of course I don’t support it, but I would be lying if I said there was no romance in it.
Whereas I am simply appalled and disgusted by Nazism to the point where I won’t watch TV or reach books about it.
An interesting dilemma for bien pensant, centrist dad liberal Remoaners living on the Upper West Side.
I am fascinated by both - the Old South, and Nazism
But I don't beat myself up as a racist Nazi as a result
I am equally fascinated by Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot - and by war and conflict in general
I like dramatic history especially if it is laced with extreme, grandiose or peculiar politics. Humans like theatre. We read books about murder, not dishwashing. It is normal
I guess I could read "the history of Paddy Ashdown's Lib Dem campaigns" but somehow it is not quite as alluring
My hatred of Nazism is ultimately not even ideological. It’s fear and repulsion.
I don’t go into it for the same reason I won’t read news articles about murdered/abused children.
I hear you on the kids thing. One place I can't go is books about true crime involving children. It is too distressing, as a parent
I read one brilliantly bleak book about Fred and Rosey West and it made me so sad I decided, never again
Somehow the Nazis are easier to read about than that. Also, they are more important. You need to read about Nazism to understand how it arose and how it can be opposed. Ditto Pol Pot, arguably even more so, as everyone has forgotten about him
The other day it happened to me again: an educated young woman admitted she had never heard of Pol Pot, the Khmer Rouge, none of it. Scandalous
I’m not sure it’s a forgotten genocide as much as a frequently ignored one - the US at the time had some interest in that. The time around The Killing Fields movie is an obvious exception to that.
The Dead Kennedys did a good song about it too.
It was over 40 years ago, so not surprised if the youngsters don't know about Pol Pot any more than they do about Biafra or Mengistu.
Why is Inheritance Tax levied on estates and not recipients? It seems it would be much more logical for the recipients of inheritance to be taxed, rather than the estates themselves.
And why not simply have a lifetime gift allowance, that includes pre-inheritance gifts?
You're absolutely right.
But, of course, the people who complain most loudly about Inheritance Tax aren't really complaining because of their deep sympathy for poor old grandma, whose dearest last wish is to pass on her earned estate (which definitely didn't result from house price rises since 1970 but the sweat of her dear old brow) to her nearest and dearest.
No, they just want a fat cheque when the old coffin dodger croaks at last. The complainants, to a large extent, ARE the recipients, and they don't want gran spreading her inheritence to a load of great-grand-nephews and whatever, as would be the incentive in your proposal.
I accept that is a generalisation, and people oppose IHT for various reasons. But there's quite a bit of truth in it.
I'm amazed that only 1-in-20 estates are over £325,000 in the UK. I would have thought the number would be more like 1-in-5 or 1-in-6.
That 325000 does not include the first 180,000 of the value of the primary residence.
Plus, it's one of the easiest taxes to avoid.
Your figure would probably be correct if it weren't for that.
What a ridiculous exemption. Just make the threshold £500k, and get rid of the primary residence absurdity.
Actually, I forgot another exemption. A married couple get a double allowance and there is no tax on an estate passing to the survivor.
So effectively the nil rate band for a widow/widower leaving an estate including a house to their children/grandchildren is around £830,000.
Not that hard for most people to make sure their assets come in under or close to that even with a very nice house in a rich area.
If the home owner requires nursing home residency the average house value will be consumed in around five years at costs of around 6 grand a month per person. If they are a couple riddled with dementia make that two and a half years before the family home is reduced to c28 grand per person and a pile of dust.
I confess to being fascinated by old Southern culture and Southern ideology, which is very politically incorrect of me. Of course I don’t support it, but I would be lying if I said there was no romance in it.
Whereas I am simply appalled and disgusted by Nazism to the point where I won’t watch TV or reach books about it.
An interesting dilemma for bien pensant, centrist dad liberal Remoaners living on the Upper West Side.
I am fascinated by both - the Old South, and Nazism
But I don't beat myself up as a racist Nazi as a result
I am equally fascinated by Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot - and by war and conflict in general
I like dramatic history especially if it is laced with extreme, grandiose or peculiar politics. Humans like theatre. We read books about murder, not dishwashing. It is normal
I guess I could read "the history of Paddy Ashdown's Lib Dem campaigns" but somehow it is not quite as alluring
My hatred of Nazism is ultimately not even ideological. It’s fear and repulsion.
I don’t go into it for the same reason I won’t read news articles about murdered/abused children.
I hear you on the kids thing. One place I can't go is books about true crime involving children. It is too distressing, as a parent
I read one brilliantly bleak book about Fred and Rosey West and it made me so sad I decided, never again
Somehow the Nazis are easier to read about than that. Also, they are more important. You need to read about Nazism to understand how it arose and how it can be opposed. Ditto Pol Pot, arguably even more so, as everyone has forgotten about him
The other day it happened to me again: an educated young woman admitted she had never heard of Pol Pot, the Khmer Rouge, none of it. Scandalous
I’m not sure it’s a forgotten genocide as much as a frequently ignored one - the US at the time had some interest in that. The time around The Killing Fields movie is an obvious exception to that.
The Dead Kennedys did a good song about it too.
It was over 40 years ago, so not surprised if the youngsters don't know about Pol Pot any more than they do about Biafra or Mengistu.
Years not been terribly kind to old Jello, though the fire still burns strong.
The trans activist who disrupted a talk by Prof Kathleen Stock is the daughter of a council boss who introduced a four-day working week.
Riz Possnett’s mother Liz Watts was working on a PhD thesis on the topic when South Cambridgeshire District Council last year became the first to implement a trial to cut hours while staff remain on the same pay.
So much for just being a poor he/her/they, from a poor family. Mum and dad extremely well connected people, no wonder they can afford the swimming pool and hot tub.
God, I hate these posh/upper middle class people who pretend to be soil of the earth working class plebs.
I would of thought being very pro Trans almost certainly marks you out as being more likely to be upper middle class, at least by education, than working class. Probably even more so than opposition to Brexit which is equally a view most strongly held by the upper middle classes
The only Trans person I know well is a friend of Fox jr2, and whose father is a smallholder and works in engineering too.
I think working class Trans people are like working class guys, under recognised rather than non existent.
Why is Inheritance Tax levied on estates and not recipients? It seems it would be much more logical for the recipients of inheritance to be taxed, rather than the estates themselves.
And why not simply have a lifetime gift allowance, that includes pre-inheritance gifts?
You're absolutely right.
But, of course, the people who complain most loudly about Inheritance Tax aren't really complaining because of their deep sympathy for poor old grandma, whose dearest last wish is to pass on her earned estate (which definitely didn't result from house price rises since 1970 but the sweat of her dear old brow) to her nearest and dearest.
No, they just want a fat cheque when the old coffin dodger croaks at last. The complainants, to a large extent, ARE the recipients, and they don't want gran spreading her inheritence to a load of great-grand-nephews and whatever, as would be the incentive in your proposal.
I accept that is a generalisation, and people oppose IHT for various reasons. But there's quite a bit of truth in it.
I'm amazed that only 1-in-20 estates are over £325,000 in the UK. I would have thought the number would be more like 1-in-5 or 1-in-6.
That 325000 does not include the first 180,000 of the value of the primary residence.
Plus, it's one of the easiest taxes to avoid.
Your figure would probably be correct if it weren't for that.
What a ridiculous exemption. Just make the threshold £500k, and get rid of the primary residence absurdity.
Actually, I forgot another exemption. A married couple get a double allowance and there is no tax on an estate passing to the survivor.
So effectively the nil rate band for a widow/widower leaving an estate including a house to their children/grandchildren is around £830,000.
Not that hard for most people to make sure their assets come in under or close to that even with a very nice house in a rich area.
If the home owner requires nursing home residency the average house value will be consumed in around five years at costs of around 6 grand a month per person. If they are a couple riddled with dementia make that two and a half years before the family home is reduced to c28 grand per person and a pile of dust.
Yes but if they have a major capital asset, why shouldn't they pay rather than the tax payer?
Why is Inheritance Tax levied on estates and not recipients? It seems it would be much more logical for the recipients of inheritance to be taxed, rather than the estates themselves.
And why not simply have a lifetime gift allowance, that includes pre-inheritance gifts?
You're absolutely right.
But, of course, the people who complain most loudly about Inheritance Tax aren't really complaining because of their deep sympathy for poor old grandma, whose dearest last wish is to pass on her earned estate (which definitely didn't result from house price rises since 1970 but the sweat of her dear old brow) to her nearest and dearest.
No, they just want a fat cheque when the old coffin dodger croaks at last. The complainants, to a large extent, ARE the recipients, and they don't want gran spreading her inheritence to a load of great-grand-nephews and whatever, as would be the incentive in your proposal.
I accept that is a generalisation, and people oppose IHT for various reasons. But there's quite a bit of truth in it.
I'm amazed that only 1-in-20 estates are over £325,000 in the UK. I would have thought the number would be more like 1-in-5 or 1-in-6.
That 325000 does not include the first 180,000 of the value of the primary residence.
Plus, it's one of the easiest taxes to avoid.
Your figure would probably be correct if it weren't for that.
What a ridiculous exemption. Just make the threshold £500k, and get rid of the primary residence absurdity.
Actually, I forgot another exemption. A married couple get a double allowance and there is no tax on an estate passing to the survivor.
So effectively the nil rate band for a widow/widower leaving an estate including a house to their children/grandchildren is around £830,000.
Not that hard for most people to make sure their assets come in under or close to that even with a very nice house in a rich area.
If the home owner requires nursing home residency the average house value will be consumed in around five years at costs of around 6 grand a month per person. If they are a couple riddled with dementia make that two and a half years before the family home is reduced to c28 grand per person and a pile of dust.
Yes but if they have a major capital asset, why shouldn't they pay rather than the tax payer?
There should be a sane way to insure against care costs otherwise you just end up penalising the prudent (or unlucky).
The trans activist who disrupted a talk by Prof Kathleen Stock is the daughter of a council boss who introduced a four-day working week.
Riz Possnett’s mother Liz Watts was working on a PhD thesis on the topic when South Cambridgeshire District Council last year became the first to implement a trial to cut hours while staff remain on the same pay.
So much for just being a poor he/her/they, from a poor family. Mum and dad extremely well connected people, no wonder they can afford the swimming pool and hot tub.
God, I hate these posh/upper middle class people who pretend to be soil of the earth working class plebs.
I would of thought being very pro Trans almost certainly marks you out as being more likely to be upper middle class, at least by education, than working class. Probably even more so than opposition to Brexit which is equally a view most strongly held by the upper middle classes
The only Trans person I know well is a friend of Fox jr2, and whose father is a smallholder and works in engineering too.
I think working class Trans people are like working class guys, under recognised rather than non existent.
I don’t know any trans people. But, if it’s not my imagination, I see a reasonable amount of trans people in NYC.
Which is odd because the demographic of Manhattan skews older than Central London. But there appear to be more (young) trans people here.
Why is Inheritance Tax levied on estates and not recipients? It seems it would be much more logical for the recipients of inheritance to be taxed, rather than the estates themselves.
And why not simply have a lifetime gift allowance, that includes pre-inheritance gifts?
You're absolutely right.
But, of course, the people who complain most loudly about Inheritance Tax aren't really complaining because of their deep sympathy for poor old grandma, whose dearest last wish is to pass on her earned estate (which definitely didn't result from house price rises since 1970 but the sweat of her dear old brow) to her nearest and dearest.
No, they just want a fat cheque when the old coffin dodger croaks at last. The complainants, to a large extent, ARE the recipients, and they don't want gran spreading her inheritence to a load of great-grand-nephews and whatever, as would be the incentive in your proposal.
I accept that is a generalisation, and people oppose IHT for various reasons. But there's quite a bit of truth in it.
I'm amazed that only 1-in-20 estates are over £325,000 in the UK. I would have thought the number would be more like 1-in-5 or 1-in-6.
That 325000 does not include the first 180,000 of the value of the primary residence.
Plus, it's one of the easiest taxes to avoid.
Your figure would probably be correct if it weren't for that.
What a ridiculous exemption. Just make the threshold £500k, and get rid of the primary residence absurdity.
Actually, I forgot another exemption. A married couple get a double allowance and there is no tax on an estate passing to the survivor.
So effectively the nil rate band for a widow/widower leaving an estate including a house to their children/grandchildren is around £830,000.
Not that hard for most people to make sure their assets come in under or close to that even with a very nice house in a rich area.
If the home owner requires nursing home residency the average house value will be consumed in around five years at costs of around 6 grand a month per person. If they are a couple riddled with dementia make that two and a half years before the family home is reduced to c28 grand per person and a pile of dust.
This is basically right - there are certain wheezes that can be used to protect at least some of the value of a house from the grasping mitts of the local council under very particular circumstances, but basically it's pot luck as to whether the heirs of elderly homeowners receive a life-transforming fortune or the last few grand.
It's one of the myriad ways in which dementia is oh so very cruel. Sufferers, particularly as the rot becomes more advanced, frequently linger on with no quality of life for years, AND burn almost everything they wanted to leave to their kids in the process.
The trans activist who disrupted a talk by Prof Kathleen Stock is the daughter of a council boss who introduced a four-day working week.
Riz Possnett’s mother Liz Watts was working on a PhD thesis on the topic when South Cambridgeshire District Council last year became the first to implement a trial to cut hours while staff remain on the same pay.
So much for just being a poor he/her/they, from a poor family. Mum and dad extremely well connected people, no wonder they can afford the swimming pool and hot tub.
God, I hate these posh/upper middle class people who pretend to be soil of the earth working class plebs.
I would of thought being very pro Trans almost certainly marks you out as being more likely to be upper middle class, at least by education, than working class. Probably even more so than opposition to Brexit which is equally a view most strongly held by the upper middle classes
The only Trans person I know well is a friend of Fox jr2, and whose father is a smallholder and works in engineering too.
I think working class Trans people are like working class guys, under recognised rather than non existent.
I don’t know any trans people. But, if it’s not my imagination, I see a reasonable amount of trans people in NYC.
Which is odd because the demographic of Manhattan skews older than Central London. But there appear to be more (young) trans people here.
Why is Inheritance Tax levied on estates and not recipients? It seems it would be much more logical for the recipients of inheritance to be taxed, rather than the estates themselves.
And why not simply have a lifetime gift allowance, that includes pre-inheritance gifts?
You're absolutely right.
But, of course, the people who complain most loudly about Inheritance Tax aren't really complaining because of their deep sympathy for poor old grandma, whose dearest last wish is to pass on her earned estate (which definitely didn't result from house price rises since 1970 but the sweat of her dear old brow) to her nearest and dearest.
No, they just want a fat cheque when the old coffin dodger croaks at last. The complainants, to a large extent, ARE the recipients, and they don't want gran spreading her inheritence to a load of great-grand-nephews and whatever, as would be the incentive in your proposal.
I accept that is a generalisation, and people oppose IHT for various reasons. But there's quite a bit of truth in it.
I'm amazed that only 1-in-20 estates are over £325,000 in the UK. I would have thought the number would be more like 1-in-5 or 1-in-6.
That 325000 does not include the first 180,000 of the value of the primary residence.
Plus, it's one of the easiest taxes to avoid.
Your figure would probably be correct if it weren't for that.
What a ridiculous exemption. Just make the threshold £500k, and get rid of the primary residence absurdity.
Actually, I forgot another exemption. A married couple get a double allowance and there is no tax on an estate passing to the survivor.
So effectively the nil rate band for a widow/widower leaving an estate including a house to their children/grandchildren is around £830,000.
Not that hard for most people to make sure their assets come in under or close to that even with a very nice house in a rich area.
If the home owner requires nursing home residency the average house value will be consumed in around five years at costs of around 6 grand a month per person. If they are a couple riddled with dementia make that two and a half years before the family home is reduced to c28 grand per person and a pile of dust.
This is basically right - there are certain wheezes that can be used to protect at least some of the value of a house from the grasping mitts of the local council under very particular circumstances, but basically it's pot luck as to whether the heirs of elderly homeowners receive a life-transforming fortune or the last few grand.
It's one of the myriad ways in which dementia is oh so very cruel. Sufferers, particularly as the rot becomes more advanced, frequently linger on with no quality of life for years, AND burn almost everything they wanted to leave to their kids in the process.
Yes but I wonder how life-transforming the inheritance would actually be, given that probably anyone whose parents are well-off are probably better off themselves, they'd probably be sharing any legacy with siblings, and are probably also past middle age.
Why is Inheritance Tax levied on estates and not recipients? It seems it would be much more logical for the recipients of inheritance to be taxed, rather than the estates themselves.
And why not simply have a lifetime gift allowance, that includes pre-inheritance gifts?
You're absolutely right.
But, of course, the people who complain most loudly about Inheritance Tax aren't really complaining because of their deep sympathy for poor old grandma, whose dearest last wish is to pass on her earned estate (which definitely didn't result from house price rises since 1970 but the sweat of her dear old brow) to her nearest and dearest.
No, they just want a fat cheque when the old coffin dodger croaks at last. The complainants, to a large extent, ARE the recipients, and they don't want gran spreading her inheritence to a load of great-grand-nephews and whatever, as would be the incentive in your proposal.
I accept that is a generalisation, and people oppose IHT for various reasons. But there's quite a bit of truth in it.
I'm amazed that only 1-in-20 estates are over £325,000 in the UK. I would have thought the number would be more like 1-in-5 or 1-in-6.
That 325000 does not include the first 180,000 of the value of the primary residence.
Plus, it's one of the easiest taxes to avoid.
Your figure would probably be correct if it weren't for that.
What a ridiculous exemption. Just make the threshold £500k, and get rid of the primary residence absurdity.
Actually, I forgot another exemption. A married couple get a double allowance and there is no tax on an estate passing to the survivor.
So effectively the nil rate band for a widow/widower leaving an estate including a house to their children/grandchildren is around £830,000.
Not that hard for most people to make sure their assets come in under or close to that even with a very nice house in a rich area.
If the home owner requires nursing home residency the average house value will be consumed in around five years at costs of around 6 grand a month per person. If they are a couple riddled with dementia make that two and a half years before the family home is reduced to c28 grand per person and a pile of dust.
This is basically right - there are certain wheezes that can be used to protect at least some of the value of a house from the grasping mitts of the local council under very particular circumstances, but basically it's pot luck as to whether the heirs of elderly homeowners receive a life-transforming fortune or the last few grand.
It's one of the myriad ways in which dementia is oh so very cruel. Sufferers, particularly as the rot becomes more advanced, frequently linger on with no quality of life for years, AND burn almost everything they wanted to leave to their kids in the process.
Yes. And it isn't even treated as a disease, even though it clearly is one.
The NHS won't provide any care for a dementia sufferer, but if you get cancer, it is a different matter.
I know it will be expensive, but there needs to be an equitable solution instead of a lottery.
The trans activist who disrupted a talk by Prof Kathleen Stock is the daughter of a council boss who introduced a four-day working week.
Riz Possnett’s mother Liz Watts was working on a PhD thesis on the topic when South Cambridgeshire District Council last year became the first to implement a trial to cut hours while staff remain on the same pay.
So much for just being a poor he/her/they, from a poor family. Mum and dad extremely well connected people, no wonder they can afford the swimming pool and hot tub.
God, I hate these posh/upper middle class people who pretend to be soil of the earth working class plebs.
I would of thought being very pro Trans almost certainly marks you out as being more likely to be upper middle class, at least by education, than working class. Probably even more so than opposition to Brexit which is equally a view most strongly held by the upper middle classes
The only Trans person I know well is a friend of Fox jr2, and whose father is a smallholder and works in engineering too.
I think working class Trans people are like working class guys, under recognised rather than non existent.
I have no idea who the parents are of the very few trans people I know. It seems utterly irrelevant. Why would anyone want to make a point about this?
The trans activist who disrupted a talk by Prof Kathleen Stock is the daughter of a council boss who introduced a four-day working week.
Riz Possnett’s mother Liz Watts was working on a PhD thesis on the topic when South Cambridgeshire District Council last year became the first to implement a trial to cut hours while staff remain on the same pay.
So much for just being a poor he/her/they, from a poor family. Mum and dad extremely well connected people, no wonder they can afford the swimming pool and hot tub.
God, I hate these posh/upper middle class people who pretend to be soil of the earth working class plebs.
I would of thought being very pro Trans almost certainly marks you out as being more likely to be upper middle class, at least by education, than working class. Probably even more so than opposition to Brexit which is equally a view most strongly held by the upper middle classes
The only Trans person I know well is a friend of Fox jr2, and whose father is a smallholder and works in engineering too.
I think working class Trans people are like working class guys, under recognised rather than non existent.
I have no idea who the parents are of the very few trans people I know. It seems utterly irrelevant. Why would anyone want to make a point about this?
I confess to being fascinated by old Southern culture and Southern ideology, which is very politically incorrect of me. Of course I don’t support it, but I would be lying if I said there was no romance in it.
Whereas I am simply appalled and disgusted by Nazism to the point where I won’t watch TV or reach books about it.
An interesting dilemma for bien pensant, centrist dad liberal Remoaners living on the Upper West Side.
I am fascinated by both - the Old South, and Nazism
But I don't beat myself up as a racist Nazi as a result
I am equally fascinated by Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot - and by war and conflict in general
I like dramatic history especially if it is laced with extreme, grandiose or peculiar politics. Humans like theatre. We read books about murder, not dishwashing. It is normal
I guess I could read "the history of Paddy Ashdown's Lib Dem campaigns" but somehow it is not quite as alluring
My hatred of Nazism is ultimately not even ideological. It’s fear and repulsion.
I don’t go into it for the same reason I won’t read news articles about murdered/abused children.
I hear you on the kids thing. One place I can't go is books about true crime involving children. It is too distressing, as a parent
I read one brilliantly bleak book about Fred and Rosey West and it made me so sad I decided, never again
Somehow the Nazis are easier to read about than that. Also, they are more important. You need to read about Nazism to understand how it arose and how it can be opposed. Ditto Pol Pot, arguably even more so, as everyone has forgotten about him
The other day it happened to me again: an educated young woman admitted she had never heard of Pol Pot, the Khmer Rouge, none of it. Scandalous
I’m not sure it’s a forgotten genocide as much as a frequently ignored one - the US at the time had some interest in that. The time around The Killing Fields movie is an obvious exception to that.
The Dead Kennedys did a good song about it too.
It was over 40 years ago, so not surprised if the youngsters don't know about Pol Pot any more than they do about Biafra or Mengistu.
Brings to mind a delightful Dead Kennedy's cover by Nouvelle Vague :
About Time is the most underrated film released since 2000.
When I first got together with my now wife I watched that shit on a Friday night. The only film worse we saw together was Ps I Love You.
This seems ripe for a "Worst film you've ever seen in the cinema" series.
For me - "Triple Bogey on a Par Five Hole". Apart from being awful, when I walked - as the single viewer - into the room the ticket person asked in confidential tones ".... Are you... sure?".
About Time is the most underrated film released since 2000.
When I first got together with my now wife I watched that shit on a Friday night. The only film worse we saw together was Ps I Love You.
This seems ripe for a "Worst film you've ever seen in the cinema" series.
For me - "Triple Bogey on a Par Five Hole". Apart from being awful, when I walked - as the single viewer - into the room the ticket person asked in confidential tones ".... Are you... sure?".
Easy peasy:
The four worst, all of which were so bad I couldn't make it through to the end, were:
- The Da Vinci Code - Wimbledon - Boat Trip - Second Exotic Marigold Yawnfest
Why is Inheritance Tax levied on estates and not recipients? It seems it would be much more logical for the recipients of inheritance to be taxed, rather than the estates themselves.
And why not simply have a lifetime gift allowance, that includes pre-inheritance gifts?
You're absolutely right.
But, of course, the people who complain most loudly about Inheritance Tax aren't really complaining because of their deep sympathy for poor old grandma, whose dearest last wish is to pass on her earned estate (which definitely didn't result from house price rises since 1970 but the sweat of her dear old brow) to her nearest and dearest.
No, they just want a fat cheque when the old coffin dodger croaks at last. The complainants, to a large extent, ARE the recipients, and they don't want gran spreading her inheritence to a load of great-grand-nephews and whatever, as would be the incentive in your proposal.
I accept that is a generalisation, and people oppose IHT for various reasons. But there's quite a bit of truth in it.
I'm amazed that only 1-in-20 estates are over £325,000 in the UK. I would have thought the number would be more like 1-in-5 or 1-in-6.
That 325000 does not include the first 180,000 of the value of the primary residence.
Plus, it's one of the easiest taxes to avoid.
Your figure would probably be correct if it weren't for that.
What a ridiculous exemption. Just make the threshold £500k, and get rid of the primary residence absurdity.
Actually, I forgot another exemption. A married couple get a double allowance and there is no tax on an estate passing to the survivor.
So effectively the nil rate band for a widow/widower leaving an estate including a house to their children/grandchildren is around £830,000.
Not that hard for most people to make sure their assets come in under or close to that even with a very nice house in a rich area.
If the home owner requires nursing home residency the average house value will be consumed in around five years at costs of around 6 grand a month per person. If they are a couple riddled with dementia make that two and a half years before the family home is reduced to c28 grand per person and a pile of dust.
This is basically right - there are certain wheezes that can be used to protect at least some of the value of a house from the grasping mitts of the local council under very particular circumstances, but basically it's pot luck as to whether the heirs of elderly homeowners receive a life-transforming fortune or the last few grand.
It's one of the myriad ways in which dementia is oh so very cruel. Sufferers, particularly as the rot becomes more advanced, frequently linger on with no quality of life for years, AND burn almost everything they wanted to leave to their kids in the process.
Yes but I wonder how life-transforming the inheritance would actually be, given that probably anyone whose parents are well-off are probably better off themselves, they'd probably be sharing any legacy with siblings, and are probably also past middle age.
Self-evidently this is going to vary wildly depending on the number of heirs and the value of the home; however, let's say that the average deceased pensioner house is worth about £300,000 and the average number of heirs is two (siblings, receiving half each.) That's £150,000 which, depending on the circumstances of said late-middle aged heir, might pay off the mortgage, go towards a substantial deposit for kids trapped renting, purchase a flat to provide rental income, or accelerate the glidepath to early retirement. And there could very easily be two potential such fat inheritances coming to a couple, one from each set of parents.
Yes. And it isn't even treated as a disease, even though it clearly is one.
The NHS won't provide any care for a dementia sufferer, but if you get cancer, it is a different matter.
I know it will be expensive, but there needs to be an equitable solution instead of a lottery.
Oh yes, dementia care on the state would be very expensive, and realistically the only way to pay for it - given that incomes are already being taxed to buggery - would be... substantially higher taxation of assets. The obvious choices being things such as land value taxation of homeowners, and higher and more broad-based taxation of legacies.
The grey vote, it would seem, resents and despises such suggestions. In effect, they'd rather keep a grip on all their loot and trust to pot luck that they don't end up demented, rather than contributing to what would amount to a collective insurance scheme to levy a chunk of all estates, so as to ensure that no estates are wiped out.
The trans activist who disrupted a talk by Prof Kathleen Stock is the daughter of a council boss who introduced a four-day working week.
Riz Possnett’s mother Liz Watts was working on a PhD thesis on the topic when South Cambridgeshire District Council last year became the first to implement a trial to cut hours while staff remain on the same pay.
So much for just being a poor he/her/they, from a poor family. Mum and dad extremely well connected people, no wonder they can afford the swimming pool and hot tub.
God, I hate these posh/upper middle class people who pretend to be soil of the earth working class plebs.
I would of thought being very pro Trans almost certainly marks you out as being more likely to be upper middle class, at least by education, than working class. Probably even more so than opposition to Brexit which is equally a view most strongly held by the upper middle classes
The only Trans person I know well is a friend of Fox jr2, and whose father is a smallholder and works in engineering too.
I think working class Trans people are like working class guys, under recognised rather than non existent.
I have no idea who the parents are of the very few trans people I know. It seems utterly irrelevant. Why would anyone want to make a point about this?
Opportunity to use the word “smallholder”.
They're dad farms about 40 acres, so a reasonable description I would think, and hence the need for a second job in engineering. I have known them since Fox Jr was in Beavers together.
HYUFD was rather implying that being Trans is a middle class affectation. I don't think it is.
Why is Inheritance Tax levied on estates and not recipients? It seems it would be much more logical for the recipients of inheritance to be taxed, rather than the estates themselves.
And why not simply have a lifetime gift allowance, that includes pre-inheritance gifts?
You're absolutely right.
But, of course, the people who complain most loudly about Inheritance Tax aren't really complaining because of their deep sympathy for poor old grandma, whose dearest last wish is to pass on her earned estate (which definitely didn't result from house price rises since 1970 but the sweat of her dear old brow) to her nearest and dearest.
No, they just want a fat cheque when the old coffin dodger croaks at last. The complainants, to a large extent, ARE the recipients, and they don't want gran spreading her inheritence to a load of great-grand-nephews and whatever, as would be the incentive in your proposal.
I accept that is a generalisation, and people oppose IHT for various reasons. But there's quite a bit of truth in it.
I'm amazed that only 1-in-20 estates are over £325,000 in the UK. I would have thought the number would be more like 1-in-5 or 1-in-6.
That 325000 does not include the first 180,000 of the value of the primary residence.
Plus, it's one of the easiest taxes to avoid.
Your figure would probably be correct if it weren't for that.
What a ridiculous exemption. Just make the threshold £500k, and get rid of the primary residence absurdity.
Actually, I forgot another exemption. A married couple get a double allowance and there is no tax on an estate passing to the survivor.
So effectively the nil rate band for a widow/widower leaving an estate including a house to their children/grandchildren is around £830,000.
Not that hard for most people to make sure their assets come in under or close to that even with a very nice house in a rich area.
If the home owner requires nursing home residency the average house value will be consumed in around five years at costs of around 6 grand a month per person. If they are a couple riddled with dementia make that two and a half years before the family home is reduced to c28 grand per person and a pile of dust.
Yes but if they have a major capital asset, why shouldn't they pay rather than the tax payer?
I don't disagree. I was merely suggesting that the notion peddled by Liz Truss, HYUFD and their disciples that everyone has a million pound plus property to bequeath to their nearest and dearest is somewhat scuppered, not by inheritance tax but by residential care costs.
Why is Inheritance Tax levied on estates and not recipients? It seems it would be much more logical for the recipients of inheritance to be taxed, rather than the estates themselves.
And why not simply have a lifetime gift allowance, that includes pre-inheritance gifts?
You're absolutely right.
But, of course, the people who complain most loudly about Inheritance Tax aren't really complaining because of their deep sympathy for poor old grandma, whose dearest last wish is to pass on her earned estate (which definitely didn't result from house price rises since 1970 but the sweat of her dear old brow) to her nearest and dearest.
No, they just want a fat cheque when the old coffin dodger croaks at last. The complainants, to a large extent, ARE the recipients, and they don't want gran spreading her inheritence to a load of great-grand-nephews and whatever, as would be the incentive in your proposal.
I accept that is a generalisation, and people oppose IHT for various reasons. But there's quite a bit of truth in it.
I'm amazed that only 1-in-20 estates are over £325,000 in the UK. I would have thought the number would be more like 1-in-5 or 1-in-6.
That 325000 does not include the first 180,000 of the value of the primary residence.
Plus, it's one of the easiest taxes to avoid.
Your figure would probably be correct if it weren't for that.
What a ridiculous exemption. Just make the threshold £500k, and get rid of the primary residence absurdity.
Actually, I forgot another exemption. A married couple get a double allowance and there is no tax on an estate passing to the survivor.
So effectively the nil rate band for a widow/widower leaving an estate including a house to their children/grandchildren is around £830,000.
Not that hard for most people to make sure their assets come in under or close to that even with a very nice house in a rich area.
If the home owner requires nursing home residency the average house value will be consumed in around five years at costs of around 6 grand a month per person. If they are a couple riddled with dementia make that two and a half years before the family home is reduced to c28 grand per person and a pile of dust.
This is basically right - there are certain wheezes that can be used to protect at least some of the value of a house from the grasping mitts of the local council under very particular circumstances, but basically it's pot luck as to whether the heirs of elderly homeowners receive a life-transforming fortune or the last few grand.
It's one of the myriad ways in which dementia is oh so very cruel. Sufferers, particularly as the rot becomes more advanced, frequently linger on with no quality of life for years, AND burn almost everything they wanted to leave to their kids in the process.
Yes. And it isn't even treated as a disease, even though it clearly is one.
The NHS won't provide any care for a dementia sufferer, but if you get cancer, it is a different matter.
I know it will be expensive, but there needs to be an equitable solution instead of a lottery.
But Dementia is treated as a disease by the NHS.
If someone winds up in Social Care because of a stroke, or blindness or Schizophrenia, they also have to pay for it.
About Time is the most underrated film released since 2000.
When I first got together with my now wife I watched that shit on a Friday night. The only film worse we saw together was Ps I Love You.
This seems ripe for a "Worst film you've ever seen in the cinema" series.
For me - "Triple Bogey on a Par Five Hole". Apart from being awful, when I walked - as the single viewer - into the room the ticket person asked in confidential tones ".... Are you... sure?".
Easy peasy:
The four worst, all of which were so bad I couldn't make it through to the end, were:
- The Da Vinci Code - Wimbledon - Boat Trip - Second Exotic Marigold Yawnfest
Goodness - you need to watch 'Triple Bogey...'. Those are all high-octane engaging masterpieces in comparison.
The only film I've nearly walked out on is 'Dog Days' ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog_Days_(2001_film) ) which is... utterly soul destroying. And repulsive. And... any other grim term you care to throw around.
Why is Inheritance Tax levied on estates and not recipients? It seems it would be much more logical for the recipients of inheritance to be taxed, rather than the estates themselves.
And why not simply have a lifetime gift allowance, that includes pre-inheritance gifts?
You're absolutely right.
But, of course, the people who complain most loudly about Inheritance Tax aren't really complaining because of their deep sympathy for poor old grandma, whose dearest last wish is to pass on her earned estate (which definitely didn't result from house price rises since 1970 but the sweat of her dear old brow) to her nearest and dearest.
No, they just want a fat cheque when the old coffin dodger croaks at last. The complainants, to a large extent, ARE the recipients, and they don't want gran spreading her inheritence to a load of great-grand-nephews and whatever, as would be the incentive in your proposal.
I accept that is a generalisation, and people oppose IHT for various reasons. But there's quite a bit of truth in it.
I'm amazed that only 1-in-20 estates are over £325,000 in the UK. I would have thought the number would be more like 1-in-5 or 1-in-6.
That 325000 does not include the first 180,000 of the value of the primary residence.
Plus, it's one of the easiest taxes to avoid.
Your figure would probably be correct if it weren't for that.
What a ridiculous exemption. Just make the threshold £500k, and get rid of the primary residence absurdity.
Actually, I forgot another exemption. A married couple get a double allowance and there is no tax on an estate passing to the survivor.
So effectively the nil rate band for a widow/widower leaving an estate including a house to their children/grandchildren is around £830,000.
Not that hard for most people to make sure their assets come in under or close to that even with a very nice house in a rich area.
If the home owner requires nursing home residency the average house value will be consumed in around five years at costs of around 6 grand a month per person. If they are a couple riddled with dementia make that two and a half years before the family home is reduced to c28 grand per person and a pile of dust.
This is basically right - there are certain wheezes that can be used to protect at least some of the value of a house from the grasping mitts of the local council under very particular circumstances, but basically it's pot luck as to whether the heirs of elderly homeowners receive a life-transforming fortune or the last few grand.
It's one of the myriad ways in which dementia is oh so very cruel. Sufferers, particularly as the rot becomes more advanced, frequently linger on with no quality of life for years, AND burn almost everything they wanted to leave to their kids in the process.
Yes but I wonder how life-transforming the inheritance would actually be, given that probably anyone whose parents are well-off are probably better off themselves, they'd probably be sharing any legacy with siblings, and are probably also past middle age.
Self-evidently this is going to vary wildly depending on the number of heirs and the value of the home; however, let's say that the average deceased pensioner house is worth about £300,000 and the average number of heirs is two (siblings, receiving half each.) That's £150,000 which, depending on the circumstances of said late-middle aged heir, might pay off the mortgage, go towards a substantial deposit for kids trapped renting, purchase a flat to provide rental income, or accelerate the glidepath to early retirement. And there could very easily be two potential such fat inheritances coming to a couple, one from each set of parents.
Life-enhancing rather than life-changing in most cases, I should think, owing to the likely age and life-circumstance of the beneficiaries.
Comments
For the record, I have precisely zero problem with consenting adults of any gender choosing to enter into a relationship with each other.
I do have questions over the appropriateness of someone in their late 40s meeting a 15 year old, then having a "friendship" that blossoms into a sexual relationship when they come of age, but I would have the same questions about a man in his 40s and a schoolgirl. It's not about gender - the power dynamic feels a little off here. However, I also accept it's none of my business, and stranger relationships blossom, where adults consent.
What I have a problem with is where the older person uses their influence to get the younger person a job at their company, then starts a sexual relationship with them while being their boss, and uses their influence to promote their partner's career, then lies about the relationship when asked by their HR department.
Normally, this sort of thing would not be front page news, except for the fact that the boss in question is a celeb with a "squeaky clean" reputation they have monetised (see the ads I posted below).
One can be outraged by this story without being either homophobic or in denial that cross-generational relationships do sometimes happen between consenting adults.
Plus, it's one of the easiest taxes to avoid.
Your figure would probably be correct if it weren't for that.
https://www.rightmove.co.uk/news/house-price-index/
Now saying he is making a big deal that is it all down to homophobia. Well when he came out the reaction went from rather OTT about his bravery, to rather dismissive, I thought he was gay, I didn't know he was married to a woman. Either way, bloke in telly in 2020 is gay, nobody cared / switched off This Morning because of it.
Secondly, he points to Leo as whataboutery, well lots of people regularly point out this is very dodgy behaviour...and the young ladies he dates, they aren't working for him.
So effectively the nil rate band for a widow/widower leaving an estate including a house to their children/grandchildren is around £830,000.
Not that hard for most people to make sure their assets come in under or close to that even with a very nice house in a rich area.
Perhaps times have changed.
Mind you, I’ll probably have emulated you by spending it all as well.
Or possibly something...
Not quite. As far as one old phone is concerned, it's only material on it that he considers "relevant", and which is accessible to him, that Johnson has said he will give to the inquiry.
Although I have to ask: you, as a Conservative member, may have access to datasets that the rest of us do not. Does the Party track these things by class?
There are reasons for most of these exemptions/allowances, but the overall picture is a mess.
5 years of earnings growth at 5% p/a and a further 5% fall in house prices would see the ratio go back to something like 6:1 which would probably be reasonable. The idea that the housing affordability issue cannot be dealt with is baloney.
Westminster Council leader Adam Hug has written to the Home Secretary demanding to know why the town hall was not informed the ‘vulnerable group’ had been moved to the borough"
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/refugees-home-office-london-hotel-suella-braverman-westminster-council-b1085158.html
Will tomorrow's Cup Final be a similar mismatch? You can get 3/10 City and 3/1 United to win outright - in 90 minutes, it's 1/2 City, 9/2 United and 7/2 the Draw.
I think I'll stick to puzzling out the Derby - my idea of the winner is MILITARY ORDER and I've backed WAIPIRO at 25s each way.
What is their mandate?
For example:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_G4dHRN2Dug
Problem with exiting one strategy and entering another one is often the capital gains to pay down on exiting the fund so... meh. 25% loss given market conditions isn't disastrously worse than general market conditions.
I can find for house prices, inflation, interest rates but anything for wages ?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Dawson_Dewhirst
I’m not sure it’s a forgotten genocide as much as a frequently ignored one - the US at the time had some interest in that.
The time around The Killing Fields movie is an obvious exception to that.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/earningsandworkinghours
While everyone is down the pub or enjoying the mismatch that is the cricket, some thoughts on tomorrow's big sporting event - not Wembley but Epsom, home of that other iconic British sporting event, the Derby.
This year's renewal looks wide open. AUGUSTE RODIN is the one who could be a superstar in hiding - the trouble is, he flopped badly in the Guineas and were he with any other trainer, he'd be 10s or bigger but he's with Aidan O'Brien and the combination of that trainer's skills, a half mile further to gallop and some fast ground could just turn this equine equivalent of the ugly duckling into a swan. He was 11/4 at the start of the week but is now 9/2 and that's starting to get towards backable.
The money has come for Frankie Dettori's mount ARREST and there won't be a dry eye on the Downs if he wins the Derby in his final year. ARREST won well on the soft at Chester and he has fast ground form from his juvenile days but at Sandown and how he'll take to the fast ground and the downhill at Epsom I don't know. He was a bit of value at 6s but not at 3s.
MILITARY ORDER would be my choice for a winner - he looked good at Lingfield, albeit on the Polytrack, and as a full brother to Adayar, the 2021 winner, we can perhaps hope he'll handle the ground and the track well.
SPREWELL is another Irish challenger with claims but he's never gone on anything as quick as this.
The first three in the Dante turn up and while the Dante does throw up the odd winner, it can be a bit of a dead end and it's not as deep as you think. THE FOXES won well but WHITE BIRCH was finishing strongly while PASSENGER was arguably an unlucky third. They all have claims but I'm just not convinced the race is as strong as people think.
DUBAI MILE was fifth in the Guineas and that's often considered the best Derby trial but he was always up there and while I think he could make the running tomorrow, I'd be surprised if he stays there but of course Serpentine managed it in 2020.
My outsider is WAIPIRO who chased home MILITARY ORDER at Lingfield and I'm on at 25s. He shouldn't be good enough but Ed Walker is a decent trainer and I could see this one finishing well.
P S. I've had mine and spent it.
It was over 40 years ago, so not surprised if the youngsters don't know about Pol Pot any more than they do about Biafra or Mengistu.
Rua da Assunção nº75, Lisboa, Lisboa, 1100-042, Portugal
+351 213 470 964
reservations@brownshotelgroup.com
We booked a small room and it was, but so what. Nice central location, very friendly, no complaints.
Note - There are two Brown's hotels and I can't speak for the other one.
I think working class Trans people are like working class guys, under recognised rather than non existent.
Joined a call to discuss throwing a party next week for Pride month.
One of the young team members suggested that to do so short notice might cause offence to the LGBTQI+ community as it seemed too frivolous.
Everyone solemnly agreed.
Conclusion, party goes ahead, but it’ll be about summer instead.
Pride will make do with a “something later in the month”, “maybe a guest speaker”. Save us from these new puritans.
But, if it’s not my imagination, I see a reasonable amount of trans people in NYC.
Which is odd because the demographic of Manhattan skews older than Central London. But there appear to be more (young) trans people here.
Could just be anecdata.
It's one of the myriad ways in which dementia is oh so very cruel. Sufferers, particularly as the rot becomes more advanced, frequently linger on with no quality of life for years, AND burn almost everything they wanted to leave to their kids in the process.
https://www.tripadvisor.co.uk/Hotel_Review-g189158-d4067231-Reviews-Olissippo_Saldanha-Lisbon_Lisbon_District_Central_Portugal.html
The NHS won't provide any care for a dementia sufferer, but if you get cancer, it is a different matter.
I know it will be expensive, but there needs to be an equitable solution instead of a lottery.
https://www.bairroaltohotel.com/en/
Do not miss visiting the Gulbenkian.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calouste_Gulbenkian_Museum
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DElRqo8u1vQ
(Rather less horrific than the theme, I admit)
For me - "Triple Bogey on a Par Five Hole". Apart from being awful, when I walked - as the single viewer - into the room the ticket person asked in confidential tones ".... Are you... sure?".
The four worst, all of which were so bad I couldn't make it through to the end, were:
- The Da Vinci Code
- Wimbledon
- Boat Trip
- Second Exotic Marigold Yawnfest
The grey vote, it would seem, resents and despises such suggestions. In effect, they'd rather keep a grip on all their loot and trust to pot luck that they don't end up demented, rather than contributing to what would amount to a collective insurance scheme to levy a chunk of all estates, so as to ensure that no estates are wiped out.
HYUFD was rather implying that being Trans is a middle class affectation. I don't think it is.
If someone winds up in Social Care because of a stroke, or blindness or Schizophrenia, they also have to pay for it.
The only film I've nearly walked out on is 'Dog Days' ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog_Days_(2001_film) ) which is... utterly soul destroying. And repulsive. And... any other grim term you care to throw around.