The other thing about these tax proposals is that they can very easily "trump" views on Brexit.
Suppose someone is historically a Conservative, voted Remain and is very unhappy about leaving the EU. They've decided to vote LD or even Lab next time.
They've got kids and know they'll need to give them a hand with a deposit in the next few years.
Suddenly they've got a decision to make. What do they care about most - Brexit or helping their kids? Pretty obvious which will ultimately take priority for most people.
Most people?
What about those who will inherit sweet FA? How will they feel about Brexit?
In any case such Remainers are much more likely to be voting for the fiscally prudent Lib Dems than Corbyn's Labour.
Vote Liberal Democrat get Corbyn could be very effective for the Tories with the middle classes if the vote stays split 4-way like this.
Thats the thing about 4 parties within a few votes of each other. Those scares don't work.
The future is bright, the future is orange
Hallo Foxy. How was your hustings? Anyone impress you?
The other thing about these tax proposals is that they can very easily "trump" views on Brexit.
Suppose someone is historically a Conservative, voted Remain and is very unhappy about leaving the EU. They've decided to vote LD or even Lab next time.
They've got kids and know they'll need to give them a hand with a deposit in the next few years.
Suddenly they've got a decision to make. What do they care about most - Brexit or helping their kids? Pretty obvious which will ultimately take priority for most people.
Most people?
What about those who will inherit sweet FA? How will they feel about Brexit?
In any case such Remainers are much more likely to be voting for the fiscally prudent Lib Dems than Corbyn's Labour.
Vote Liberal Democrat get Corbyn could be very effective for the Tories with the middle classes if the vote stays split 4-way like this.
Thats the thing about 4 parties within a few votes of each other. Those scares don't work.
The future is bright, the future is orange
Yes they do work. 1983 saw to that. The LDs and their predecessors have been within a few percent many times before, they've never broken through to the hundreds of seats.
Well, we will see.
Tories about to hit the brick wall of reality, things have changed. They have lost all financial credibility.
It'll be interesting to see what Farage does. He could disband or he could let ambition get the better of him and wreck Boris's big day. Either way time for the second referendum parties to get their act together. The only party who seem united of purpose are the SNP and the more seats they win the happier I'll be
On tonight's polling it will either be a Tory and Brexit Party coalition plus maybe the DUP or a Labour plus LDs plus SNP plus Greens plus Plaid coalition
Exhibit 1 in the case for not moving the clocks forward in the summer.
In Scotland perhaps. But daylight at 9.30pm or 10pm is probably more useful for most of the UK in summer than the alternative of totally wasted daylight at 3am when 99% of the nation is in bed!
Let alone the electricity savings for the extra hour people don't need their lights on for for several months a year.
The other thing about these tax proposals is that they can very easily "trump" views on Brexit.
Suppose someone is historically a Conservative, voted Remain and is very unhappy about leaving the EU. They've decided to vote LD or even Lab next time.
They've got kids and know they'll need to give them a hand with a deposit in the next few years.
Suddenly they've got a decision to make. What do they care about most - Brexit or helping their kids? Pretty obvious which will ultimately take priority for most people.
Most people?
What about those who will inherit sweet FA? How will they feel about Brexit?
In any case such Remainers are much more likely to be voting for the fiscally prudent Lib Dems than Corbyn's Labour.
Vote Liberal Democrat get Corbyn could be very effective for the Tories with the middle classes if the vote stays split 4-way like this.
Thats the thing about 4 parties within a few votes of each other. Those scares don't work.
The future is bright, the future is orange
Hallo Foxy. How was your hustings? Anyone impress you?
Of course Corbyn's gift tax can be added to his garden tax.
This will all provide really solid material for the GE campaign.
Worth remembering how little time was spent by TMay in the 2017 GE campaign attacking Lab on tax. The new PM is surely going to play a very different game.
And the thing is that this is the sort of material that will cut through with the public. Many people don't understand IHT or CGT etc - but if they are told Corbyn will tax you when you give your child money for a house deposit then they will understand it very quickly indeed.
Unless, of course, you don't have the money to pay for your child's deposit. Most don't.
25% of mortgages are now financed by parental contributions and in London 50% of the wealth of the average household now comes from parental contributions
And 75 % aren't. Not to mention the majority who aren't buying at all. However, my frustration was rather with the dismissal of every single Labour plan. The Tories seem to think that is enough, rather than having ANY plan of any kind of their own, beyond delivering Brexit that is. And then everything will be fine.
Most people have still bought by 40, the Tories are building more housing plus enabling people to keep more of their own wealth as shown by the Osborne IHT cut and Hammond exempting first time buyers from stamp duty on properties under £300k
Report says it's on lifetime gifts. But when would it be paid? In same year as the gift? - ie like income so would be reported on tax return for the year with tax then payable 10 months post year end?
What if someone made a gift 10 or 20 years ago? Is Corbyn going to go back and tax that now? What if records not kept?
NB. I know gifts are taxable for 7 years under IHT (if person dies) so records should be kept 7 years at present. But that's a very different matter to going back over whole lifetime.
Apart from the odiousness of taxing presents to your children, it’s a tax which is remarkably easy to get round.
I suspect it is aimed at very wealthy people who avoid IHT by gifting millions to their children or grandchildren via trusts and then surviving the seven years. It is a big loophole.
I think Labour, if they go ahead with this, will have a high threshold (say £325,000 per child) which allows for gifting deposits on normal houses and avoids accounting for minor gifts.
That would be more reasonable but most unlikely to raise the mooted £9 billion.
Exhibit 1 in the case for not moving the clocks forward in the summer.
In Scotland perhaps. But daylight at 9.30pm or 10pm is probably more useful for most of the UK in summer than the alternative of totally wasted daylight at 3am when 99% of the nation is in bed!
Let alone the electricity savings for the extra hour people don't need their lights on for for several months a year.
Most of the claimed savings turned out to be illusory, one reason the EU is considering dropping the change.
The EU made the spring/autumn clock change the rule in all member states in 1996, based on the argument that it would reduce energy costs. But the Commission says the data on energy-saving is inconclusive.
There is also no reliable evidence that the clock changes reduce traffic accidents, the Commission says.
Of course Corbyn's gift tax can be added to his garden tax.
This will all provide really solid material for the GE campaign.
Worth remembering how little time was spent by TMay in the 2017 GE campaign attacking Lab on tax. The new PM is surely going to play a very different game.
And the thing is that this is the sort of material that will cut through with the public. Many people don't understand IHT or CGT etc - but if they are told Corbyn will tax you when you give your child money for a house deposit then they will understand it very quickly indeed.
Unless, of course, you don't have the money to pay for your child's deposit. Most don't.
25% of mortgages are now financed by parental contributions and in London 50% of the wealth of the average household now comes from parental contributions
Of course Corbyn's gift tax can be added to his garden tax.
This will all provide really solid material for the GE campaign.
Worth remembering how little time was spent by TMay in the 2017 GE campaign attacking Lab on tax. The new PM is surely going to play a very different game.
And the thing is that this is the sort of material that will cut through with the public. Many people don't understand IHT or CGT etc - but if they are told Corbyn will tax you when you give your child money for a house deposit then they will understand it very quickly indeed.
Unless, of course, you don't have the money to pay for your child's deposit. Most don't.
25% of mortgages are now financed by parental contributions and in London 50% of the wealth of the average household now comes from parental contributions
And 75 % aren't. Not to mention the majority who aren't buying at all. However, my frustration was rather with the dismissal of every single Labour plan. The Tories seem to think that is enough, rather than having ANY plan of any kind of their own, beyond delivering Brexit that is. And then everything will be fine.
Most people have still bought by 40, the Tories are building more housing plus enabling people to keep more of their own wealth as shown by the Osborne IHT cut and Hammond exempting first time buyers from stamp duty on properties under £300k
It must be some other Britain where the tax take is at a 30-year high.
Of course Corbyn's gift tax can be added to his garden tax.
This will all provide really solid material for the GE campaign.
Worth remembering how little time was spent by TMay in the 2017 GE campaign attacking Lab on tax. The new PM is surely going to play a very different game.
And the thing is that this is the sort of material that will cut through with the public. Many people don't understand IHT or CGT etc - but if they are told Corbyn will tax you when you give your child money for a house deposit then they will understand it very quickly indeed.
Unless, of course, you don't have the money to pay for your child's deposit. Most don't.
25% of mortgages are now financed by parental contributions and in London 50% of the wealth of the average household now comes from parental contributions
And 75 % aren't. Not to mention the majority who aren't buying at all. However, my frustration was rather with the dismissal of every single Labour plan. The Tories seem to think that is enough, rather than having ANY plan of any kind of their own, beyond delivering Brexit that is. And then everything will be fine.
Most people have still bought by 40, the Tories are building more housing plus enabling people to keep more of their own wealth as shown by the Osborne IHT cut and Hammond exempting first time buyers from stamp duty on properties under £300k
It must be some other Britain where the tax take is at a 30-year high.
I was going to go out but don't think I can be bothered.
Bit of Langedoc for me, having had a good night at the hustings. Swinson or Davey? both good candidates, albeit different strengths. Plenty of scope for optimism.
I've decided to opt for Davey... but I'll be equally happy if it's Swinson. I'm making a forced choice between two good options.
Exhibit 1 in the case for not moving the clocks forward in the summer.
In Scotland perhaps. But daylight at 9.30pm or 10pm is probably more useful for most of the UK in summer than the alternative of totally wasted daylight at 3am when 99% of the nation is in bed!
Let alone the electricity savings for the extra hour people don't need their lights on for for several months a year.
Most of the claimed savings turned out to be illusory, one reason the EU is considering dropping the change.
The EU made the spring/autumn clock change the rule in all member states in 1996, based on the argument that it would reduce energy costs. But the Commission says the data on energy-saving is inconclusive.
There is also no reliable evidence that the clock changes reduce traffic accidents, the Commission says.
Regardless of that, it's still better to have the daylight from 9-10pm rather than 3-4am for the majority of the UK. Let's not forget that countries such as France and Spain are at the same longitude or even slightly further west of the UK yet they set their clocks an hour ahead of us so I can see why the evidence might be inconclusive.
It'll be interesting to see what Farage does. He could disband or he could let ambition get the better of him and wreck Boris's big day. Either way time for the second referendum parties to get their act together. The only party who seem united of purpose are the SNP and the more seats they win the happier I'll be
So will I. The SNP are the only grown up Party now - mainly because of Nicola.
Of course Corbyn's gift tax can be added to his garden tax.
This will all provide really solid material for the GE campaign.
Worth remembering how little time was spent by TMay in the 2017 GE campaign attacking Lab on tax. The new PM is surely going to play a very different game.
And the thing is that this is the sort of material that will cut through with the public. Many people don't understand IHT or CGT etc - but if they are told Corbyn will tax you when you give your child money for a house deposit then they will understand it very quickly indeed.
Unless, of course, you don't have the money to pay for your child's deposit. Most don't.
25% of mortgages are now financed by parental contributions and in London 50% of the wealth of the average household now comes from parental contributions
Just part of the way that social mobility is held back. We are all in favour of it, until it reaches our own families.
In the 60s, 70s and 80s it was possible to have social mobility without any losers because the middle-class was expanding during that time. That's probably why most people were relatively happy and relaxed then. These days it feels like a zero sum game where if other people are doing well it must be at someone else's expense, and vice versa, which sort of makes people feel a bit paranoid and tense. I wonder how many people were employed in, say, middle management in the 70s and 80s and had relatively secure jobs and houses?
Report says it's on lifetime gifts. But when would it be paid? In same year as the gift? - ie like income so would be reported on tax return for the year with tax then payable 10 months post year end?
What if someone made a gift 10 or 20 years ago? Is Corbyn going to go back and tax that now? What if records not kept?
NB. I know gifts are taxable for 7 years under IHT (if person dies) so records should be kept 7 years at present. But that's a very different matter to going back over whole lifetime.
In Ireland it is a tax on life time gifts, payable as soon as you go over the threshold.
For children the threshold is Euro 320,000. The rate is 33% above that.
Perhaps Corbyn is modelling his proposal on the Irish system?
Seems to be based on: 'Passing on: options for reforming inheritance taxation' by Resolution Foundation.
Of course in Ireland there is no inheritance tax on estates as such - there is capital acquisitions tax and gift tax on the recipient. You get a lifetime tax free allowance - on a cumulative basis - of 320,000 euro for gifts and inheritances from a parent, a mere 30,000 euro on gifts from lineal relatives (e.g. aunts, uncles and grandparents and siblings) and a mere 15,000 euro for life for gifts from others (e.g. friends or non lineal relatives like cousins).
So if a grandparent wishes to give a gift during their lifetime or leaves an inheritance to their granddaughter the latter has to pay 33% tax on anything over 30,000 euro. And once that allowance is used up - its for life remember - they pay 33% tax on every penny of any subsequent gift or inheritance from the same or another grandparent, aunt, uncle, sister, brother etc.
It really is a particularly nasty and pernicious tax on the estates of people who didn't have kids - as potentially one third of their entire estate can end up going to the Irish Revenue in CAT even on very small estates (e.g. below 50k euro).
It does have its merits though - someone in the UK could inherit £3.3 million tax free from 10 people and pay no inheritance tax but receive £500,000 from one estate and see that subject to nearly 100k in inheritance tax. However the Irish system would be better if they simply had the same tax free allowance (say 300k euro) irrespective of who leaves you the gift.
Hopefully Labour have thought this through though and actually have thought how it would work in the UK! Or is it another garden tax scenario which gets crucified in the press as they haven't done their homework and have no costed details of how it will work ?
Of course Corbyn's gift tax can be added to his garden tax.
This will all provide really solid material for the GE campaign.
Worth remembering how little time was spent by TMay in the 2017 GE campaign attacking Lab on tax. The new PM is surely going to play a very different game.
And the thing is that this is the sort of material that will cut through with the public. Many people don't understand IHT or CGT etc - but if they are told Corbyn will tax you when you give your child money for a house deposit then they will understand it very quickly indeed.
Unless, of course, you don't have the money to pay for your child's deposit. Most don't.
25% of mortgages are now financed by parental contributions and in London 50% of the wealth of the average household now comes from parental contributions
Just part of the way that social mobility is held back. We are all in favour of it, until it reaches our own families.
In the 60s, 70s and 80s it was possible to have social mobility without any losers because the middle-class was expanding during that time. That's probably why most people were relatively happy and relaxed then. These days it feels like a zero sum game where if other people are doing well it must be at someone else's expense, and vice versa, which sort of makes people feel a bit paranoid and tense.
Not to mention that a large proportion of retirees at the time had been killed in warfare, or by related diseases, and thus didn't need looking after in old age. On that unhappy note I bid you farewell.
Of course Corbyn's gift tax can be added to his garden tax.
This will all provide really solid material for the GE campaign.
Worth remembering how little time was spent by TMay in the 2017 GE campaign attacking Lab on tax. The new PM is surely going to play a very different game.
And the thing is that this is the sort of material that will cut through with the public. Many people don't understand IHT or CGT etc - but if they are told Corbyn will tax you when you give your child money for a house deposit then they will understand it very quickly indeed.
Unless, of course, you don't have the money to pay for your child's deposit. Most don't.
25% of mortgages are now financed by parental contributions and in London 50% of the wealth of the average household now comes from parental contributions
And 75 % aren't. Not to mention the majority who aren't buying at all. However, my frustration was rather with the dismissal of every single Labour plan. The Tories seem to think that is enough, rather than having ANY plan of any kind of their own, beyond delivering Brexit that is. And then everything will be fine.
Most people have still bought by 40, the Tories are building more housing plus enabling people to keep more of their own wealth as shown by the Osborne IHT cut and Hammond exempting first time buyers from stamp duty on properties under £300k
It must be some other Britain where the tax take is at a 30-year high.
So are you complaining that taxes are too high? You think the Tories should cut them?
Of course Corbyn's gift tax can be added to his garden tax.
This will all provide really solid material for the GE campaign.
Worth remembering how little time was spent by TMay in the 2017 GE campaign attacking Lab on tax. The new PM is surely going to play a very different game.
And the thing is that this is the sort of material that will cut through with the public. Many people don't understand IHT or CGT etc - but if they are told Corbyn will tax you when you give your child money for a house deposit then they will understand it very quickly indeed.
Unless, of course, you don't have the money to pay for your child's deposit. Most don't.
25% of mortgages are now financed by parental contributions and in London 50% of the wealth of the average household now comes from parental contributions
And 75 % aren't. Not to mention the majority who aren't buying at all. However, my frustration was rather with the dismissal of every single Labour plan. The Tories seem to think that is enough, rather than having ANY plan of any kind of their own, beyond delivering Brexit that is. And then everything will be fine.
Most people have still bought by 40, the Tories are building more housing plus enabling people to keep more of their own wealth as shown by the Osborne IHT cut and Hammond exempting first time buyers from stamp duty on properties under £300k
It must be some other Britain where the tax take is at a 30-year high.
So are you complaining that taxes are too high? You think the Tories should cut them?
Merely pointing out that Britain is not perhaps the low tax regime that people imagine.
Of course Corbyn's gift tax can be added to his garden tax.
This will all provide really solid material for the GE campaign.
Worth remembering how little time was spent by TMay in the 2017 GE campaign attacking Lab on tax. The new PM is surely going to play a very different game.
And the thing is that this is the sort of material that will cut through with the public. Many people don't understand IHT or CGT etc - but if they are told Corbyn will tax you when you give your child money for a house deposit then they will understand it very quickly indeed.
Unless, of course, you don't have the money to pay for your child's deposit. Most don't.
25% of mortgages are now financed by parental contributions and in London 50% of the wealth of the average household now comes from parental contributions
And 75 % aren't. Not to mention the majority who aren't buying at all. However, my frustration was rather with the dismissal of every single Labour plan. The Tories seem to think that is enough, rather than having ANY plan of any kind of their own, beyond delivering Brexit that is. And then everything will be fine.
Most people have still bought by 40, the Tories are building more housing plus enabling people to keep more of their own wealth as shown by the Osborne IHT cut and Hammond exempting first time buyers from stamp duty on properties under £300k
It must be some other Britain where the tax take is at a 30-year high.
Have most people bought by 40 - maybe in the past but will that be so in future?
Official data on home ownership is at a household not a per person basis.
Take two houses - one with an old lady on her own the one next door with four adults in their 20s renting. The official ONS data would count that as 50% home ownership - as one household is owner occupied - but in reality only 20% of people own a home. So 50% homeownership but only 20% of voters own a home across those two houses.
You could equally look at a home where two adult kids live with their parents - officially that household is 100% owner occupied but only 50% of the adults and voters actually own a property.
I would bet if you counted homeownership correctly on the basis of how many Brits have their names on the deeds of a property the true homeownership level is probably well below the 60% official figure - and I expect will keep going down as prices get ever more out of whack with wages.
Report says it's on lifetime gifts. But when would it be paid? In same year as the gift? - ie like income so would be reported on tax return for the year with tax then payable 10 months post year end?
What if someone made a gift 10 or 20 years ago? Is Corbyn going to go back and tax that now? What if records not kept?
NB. I know gifts are taxable for 7 years under IHT (if person dies) so records should be kept 7 years at present. But that's a very different matter to going back over whole lifetime.
Apart from the odiousness of taxing presents to your children, it’s a tax which is remarkably easy to get round.
I've always felt that inheritance should be income like any other, but then again, other than love, sustinance, and an education, I don't plan on leaving my kids anything.
Or, to put it another way, I don't want a situation where my children benefit financially from my demise.
Of course Corbyn's gift tax can be added to his garden tax.
This will all provide really solid material for the GE campaign.
Worth remembering how little time was spent by TMay in the 2017 GE campaign attacking Lab on tax. The new PM is surely going to play a very different game.
And the thing is that this is the sort of material that will cut through with the public. Many people don't understand IHT or CGT etc - but if they are told Corbyn will tax you when you give your child money for a house deposit then they will understand it very quickly indeed.
Unless, of course, you don't have the money to pay for your child's deposit. Most don't.
25% of mortgages are now financed by parental contributions and in London 50% of the wealth of the average household now comes from parental contributions
There is a Bank of England timeseries for this going all the way back to the 1960s, and what's fascinating is that the percentage of home buyers getting parental help with the first mortgage has barely changed in half a century.
What has changed, however, is the scale of the help - especially in places like London. Essentially parents who won in the housing lottery have used some of their winnings to help their children,
I would bet if you counted homeownership correctly on the basis of how many Brits have their names on the deeds of a property the true homeownership level is probably well below the 60% official figure - and I expect will keep going down as prices get ever more out of whack with wages.
Is that "proper", though?
Historically, the question has always been "what proportion of homes are owned by the head of household?"
Furthermore, I'm not even sure you're correct in your broad assumption. You see, the average size of households in the UK has been in steady decline for a long time. (See: https://www.statista.com/statistics/281627/households-in-the-united-kingdom-uk-by-size/) Indeed, until 2008, more than twice as many households were "created" by falling household size than by immigration.
I would bet if you counted homeownership correctly on the basis of how many Brits have their names on the deeds of a property the true homeownership level is probably well below the 60% official figure - and I expect will keep going down as prices get ever more out of whack with wages.
Is that "proper", though?
Historically, the question has always been "what proportion of homes are owned by the head of household?"
Furthermore, I'm not even sure you're correct in your broad assumption. You see, the average size of households in the UK has been in steady decline for a long time. (See: https://www.statista.com/statistics/281627/households-in-the-united-kingdom-uk-by-size/) Indeed, until 2008, more than twice as many households were "created" by falling household size than by immigration.
I think what proportion of people own a home (i.e. is do they have their name on the deeds of at least one property) is a more useful measure of homeownership levels than what proportion of homes are owned by the head of the household.
Individual people have votes (the head of household criteria was ended in 1918!) - individual houses do not. One old lady living alone in a house next to four adult renters is not 50% homeownership but only 20%.
As for your household size point - single people living alone rent too? But the most likely section of society to live alone are the elderly - due to bereavements etc - and they are most likely of any group to be homeowners. So not sure I see the issue?
I would bet if you counted homeownership correctly on the basis of how many Brits have their names on the deeds of a property the true homeownership level is probably well below the 60% official figure - and I expect will keep going down as prices get ever more out of whack with wages.
Is that "proper", though?
Historically, the question has always been "what proportion of homes are owned by the head of household?"
Furthermore, I'm not even sure you're correct in your broad assumption. You see, the average size of households in the UK has been in steady decline for a long time. (See: https://www.statista.com/statistics/281627/households-in-the-united-kingdom-uk-by-size/) Indeed, until 2008, more than twice as many households were "created" by falling household size than by immigration.
I think what proportion of people own a home (i.e. is do they have their name on the deeds of at least one property) is a more useful measure of homeownership levels than what proportion of homes are owned by the head of the household.
Individual people have votes (the head of household criteria was ended in 1918!) - individual houses do not. One old lady living alone in a house next to four adult renters is not 50% homeownership but only 20%.
I still think you're broadly wrong at a statistical level, though. Back in 1980, the number of single person households below the age of 60 was negligible. Now there are 6.8 million of them.
So, the number of individuals on the deeds has increased with the falling number of people per household.
I would bet if you counted homeownership correctly on the basis of how many Brits have their names on the deeds of a property the true homeownership level is probably well below the 60% official figure - and I expect will keep going down as prices get ever more out of whack with wages.
Is that "proper", though?
Historically, the question has always been "what proportion of homes are owned by the head of household?"
Furthermore, I'm not even sure you're correct in your broad assumption. You see, the average size of households in the UK has been in steady decline for a long time. (See: https://www.statista.com/statistics/281627/households-in-the-united-kingdom-uk-by-size/) Indeed, until 2008, more than twice as many households were "created" by falling household size than by immigration.
Channel 4 Conservative leadership debate tonight, 6.30 till 8, sans Bojo.
#Battleforsecondplace
Probably, unless they can persuade 300 Conservative MPs and some political journalists that Brexit is complicated so they need to ask Boris some pointed questions. Trouble is, most candidates will be trying to duck difficult questions themselves.
Channel 4 Conservative leadership debate tonight, 6.30 till 8, sans Bojo.
#Battleforsecondplace
Probably, unless they can persuade 300 Conservative MPs and some political journalists that Brexit is complicated so they need to ask Boris some pointed questions. Trouble is, most candidates will be trying to duck difficult questions themselves.
The Gauke question: in a no-deal Brexit on WTO terms, should we raise tariffs against the EU or eliminate them for everyone else?
The Mock the Week question: if cocaine is indistinguishable from icing sugar, why do drug smugglers exist?
The John Major question: should the SAS be sent in to neutralise a prime minister planning to undermine centuries-old parliamentary democracy by proroguing the Commons.
Channel 4 Conservative leadership debate tonight, 6.30 till 8, sans Bojo.
#Battleforsecondplace
Probably, unless they can persuade 300 Conservative MPs and some political journalists that Brexit is complicated so they need to ask Boris some pointed questions. Trouble is, most candidates will be trying to duck difficult questions themselves.
The Gauke question: in a no-deal Brexit on WTO terms, should we raise tariffs against the EU or eliminate them for everyone else?
The answer is...
It would be better to eliminate them for everyone else, in that that would have the smallest impact on UK manufacturing supply chains.
However.
1. It would be a real problem for the farming industry in the UK.
2. It would implicitly subsidise consumption over saving, further unbalancing the UK economy.
3. It would mean the UK had very little leverage in free trade negotiations with other countries. Simply: they would already have tariff free access to the UK, so why bother negotiating with us?
Channel 4 Conservative leadership debate tonight, 6.30 till 8, sans Bojo.
#Battleforsecondplace
Probably, unless they can persuade 300 Conservative MPs and some political journalists that Brexit is complicated so they need to ask Boris some pointed questions. Trouble is, most candidates will be trying to duck difficult questions themselves.
The Gauke question: in a no-deal Brexit on WTO terms, should we raise tariffs against the EU or eliminate them for everyone else?
The answer is...
It would be better to eliminate them for everyone else, in that that would have the smallest impact on UK manufacturing supply chains.
However.
1. It would be a real problem for the farming industry in the UK.
2. It would implicitly subsidise consumption over saving, further unbalancing the UK economy.
3. It would mean the UK had very little leverage in free trade negotiations with other countries. Simply: they would already have tariff free access to the UK, so why bother negotiating with us?
These are the very questions Brexiteers simply avoid. To them, it is the sunlit uplands. Of course, the very farmers who voted for Brexit will now demand higher subsidies.... and the rest of us [ mainly living in and around London ] will have to pay for it.
Report says it's on lifetime gifts. But when would it be paid? In same year as the gift? - ie like income so would be reported on tax return for the year with tax then payable 10 months post year end?
What if someone made a gift 10 or 20 years ago? Is Corbyn going to go back and tax that now? What if records not kept?
NB. I know gifts are taxable for 7 years under IHT (if person dies) so records should be kept 7 years at present. But that's a very different matter to going back over whole lifetime.
Apart from the odiousness of taxing presents to your children, it’s a tax which is remarkably easy to get round.
I've always felt that inheritance should be income like any other, but then again, other than love, sustinance, and an education, I don't plan on leaving my kids anything.
Or, to put it another way, I don't want a situation where my children benefit financially from my demise.
There is only one statement of Michael Portillo, a Tory, I agree with: he said on This Week that Income Tax should be reduced and Inheritence Tax increased because Income tax was on earned income and IHT on unearned income.
This is Boris Johnson’s contest to lose and most of the leading figures in the Scottish party are convinced the Tory membership is about to make a hideous blunder. “He’s the SNP’s candidate of choice. That fact alone is a serious worry,” says one senior Tory MSP. And yes, it is true that the prospect of Prime Minister Johnson has SNP politicians breaking out all the heart emojis. Perhaps they are mistaken about this; perhaps Johnson can once again be a Heineken candidate, who refreshes the parts other candidates cannot reach, even in Scotland. But it is worth observing that neither the Scottish Tories nor the SNP think he is.
First things must come first, however. That means seeing off the mortal threat posed by Nigel Farage and the Brexit Party. Unionism, to the minor extent it’s ever a true concern for home counties Tories, is not a priority. The SNP is a danger to be confronted another day, if indeed it ever comes to that. However much Scottish Tories might despair of this, there is at least some logic here.
Unfortunately, the essential message sent by cuddling the Brexit Party is a simple one: “Nigel Farage is right, please don’t vote for him.” The Tories are in this mess partly because, in the end, successive prime ministers have preferred to pander to the Tory right than muster the courage to tell them they’re wrong.
Report says it's on lifetime gifts. But when would it be paid? In same year as the gift? - ie like income so would be reported on tax return for the year with tax then payable 10 months post year end?
What if someone made a gift 10 or 20 years ago? Is Corbyn going to go back and tax that now? What if records not kept?
NB. I know gifts are taxable for 7 years under IHT (if person dies) so records should be kept 7 years at present. But that's a very different matter to going back over whole lifetime.
Apart from the odiousness of taxing presents to your children, it’s a tax which is remarkably easy to get round.
I've always felt that inheritance should be income like any other, but then again, other than love, sustinance, and an education, I don't plan on leaving my kids anything.
Or, to put it another way, I don't want a situation where my children benefit financially from my demise.
There is only one statement of Michael Portillo, a Tory, I agree with: he said on This Week that Income Tax should be reduced and Inheritence Tax increased because Income tax was on earned income and IHT on unearned income.
I find it odd that it is the estate which is taxed, and not the beneficiary. One of the key advantages to moving to treating inheritance as income (which it is), is that you move from taxing the estate to taxing the recipient.
(It is also mildly redistributionary, in that it becomes tax efficient to spread out your bequeaths, rather than concentrate them.)
This is Boris Johnson’s contest to lose and most of the leading figures in the Scottish party are convinced the Tory membership is about to make a hideous blunder. “He’s the SNP’s candidate of choice. That fact alone is a serious worry,” says one senior Tory MSP. And yes, it is true that the prospect of Prime Minister Johnson has SNP politicians breaking out all the heart emojis. Perhaps they are mistaken about this; perhaps Johnson can once again be a Heineken candidate, who refreshes the parts other candidates cannot reach, even in Scotland. But it is worth observing that neither the Scottish Tories nor the SNP think he is.
First things must come first, however. That means seeing off the mortal threat posed by Nigel Farage and the Brexit Party. Unionism, to the minor extent it’s ever a true concern for home counties Tories, is not a priority. The SNP is a danger to be confronted another day, if indeed it ever comes to that. However much Scottish Tories might despair of this, there is at least some logic here.
Unfortunately, the essential message sent by cuddling the Brexit Party is a simple one: “Nigel Farage is right, please don’t vote for him.” The Tories are in this mess partly because, in the end, successive prime ministers have preferred to pander to the Tory right than muster the courage to tell them they’re wrong.
… on thread.. that is of course if you believe the poll.. What people may be saying now and how they would actually vote in a GE are not necessarily one and the same thing.
… on thread.. that is of course if you believe the poll.. What people may be saying now and how they would actually vote in a GE are not necessarily one and the same thing.
Especially as, based on Peterborough and GE2017, Labour is unlikely to treat the election as a referendum on Brexit, and one gets the impression Boris would rather move on as well.
In the 60s, 70s and 80s [snip]. That's probably why most people were relatively happy and relaxed then.
Hold on. If you belive the tories, the seventies were not happy and relaxed. The dacade was cursed by the oil crisis, the three day week, devaluation, businesses wer hijacked by the unions and the minority Labour government was too scared to do anything about it.
If more than half of Hancock's support is going to Gove I'm struggling to see how Stewart gets the numbers to even get through the next round.
Where are his extra 14 MPs going to come from?
Agreed. As much as the media (and perhaps even the membership itself if HYUFD’s association is indicative) want to see him through, Stewart just didn’t make enough last time to be seen as a potential contender and MPs are not going to waste their votes.
His only hope is to radically outperform the others in tonight’s debates.
If more than half of Hancock's support is going to Gove I'm struggling to see how Stewart gets the numbers to even get through the next round.
Where are his extra 14 MPs going to come from?
Agreed. As much as the media (and perhaps even the membership itself if HYUFD’s association is indicative) want to see him through, Stewart just didn’t make enough last time to be seen as a potential contender and MPs are not going to waste their votes.
His only hope is to radically outperform the others in tonight’s debates.
He's putting himself in poll position if it all falls apart In the next 6 months and we face another one of these in short order.
In the 60s, 70s and 80s [snip]. That's probably why most people were relatively happy and relaxed then.
Hold on. If you belive the tories, the seventies were not happy and relaxed. The dacade was cursed by the oil crisis, the three day week, devaluation, businesses wer hijacked by the unions and the minority Labour government was too scared to do anything about it.
As one who brought up a family and ran a business through those times the 60's were indeed good, the 70's went downhill at first but were coming back and the 80's were, business-wise, tough. The latter largely due to punitive interest rates.
Of course Corbyn's gift tax can be added to his garden tax.
This will all provide really solid material for the GE campaign.
Worth remembering how little time was spent by TMay in the 2017 GE campaign attacking Lab on tax. The new PM is surely going to play a very different game.
And the thing is that this is the sort of material that will cut through with the public. Many people don't understand IHT or CGT etc - but if they are told Corbyn will tax you when you give your child money for a house deposit then they will understand it very quickly indeed.
Unless, of course, you don't have the money to pay for your child's deposit. Most don't.
Why, philosophically, is this a taxable event?
The money has been taxed when it was made. Why, because you choose to give it away rather than spend it should it be taxed again?
Comments
Tories about to hit the brick wall of reality, things have changed. They have lost all financial credibility.
Let alone the electricity savings for the extra hour people don't need their lights on for for several months a year.
The EU made the spring/autumn clock change the rule in all member states in 1996, based on the argument that it would reduce energy costs. But the Commission says the data on energy-saving is inconclusive.
There is also no reliable evidence that the clock changes reduce traffic accidents, the Commission says.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-45366390
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/corbyn-social-mobility-justice-commission-labour-angela-rayner-david-cameron-a8950001.html
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3199559/Corbyn-s-son-Seb-lands-second-plum-job-working-father-s-campaign-taking-time-post-researcher-MP.html
Of course in Ireland there is no inheritance tax on estates as such - there is capital acquisitions tax and gift tax on the recipient. You get a lifetime tax free allowance - on a cumulative basis - of 320,000 euro for gifts and inheritances from a parent, a mere 30,000 euro on gifts from lineal relatives (e.g. aunts, uncles and grandparents and siblings) and a mere 15,000 euro for life for gifts from others (e.g. friends or non lineal relatives like cousins).
So if a grandparent wishes to give a gift during their lifetime or leaves an inheritance to their granddaughter the latter has to pay 33% tax on anything over 30,000 euro. And once that allowance is used up - its for life remember - they pay 33% tax on every penny of any subsequent gift or inheritance from the same or another grandparent, aunt, uncle, sister, brother etc.
It really is a particularly nasty and pernicious tax on the estates of people who didn't have kids - as potentially one third of their entire estate can end up going to the Irish Revenue in CAT even on very small estates (e.g. below 50k euro).
It does have its merits though - someone in the UK could inherit £3.3 million tax free from 10 people and pay no inheritance tax but receive £500,000 from one estate and see that subject to nearly 100k in inheritance tax. However the Irish system would be better if they simply had the same tax free allowance (say 300k euro) irrespective of who leaves you the gift.
Hopefully Labour have thought this through though and actually have thought how it would work in the UK! Or is it another garden tax scenario which gets crucified in the press as they haven't done their homework and have no costed details of how it will work ?
On that unhappy note I bid you farewell.
Official data on home ownership is at a household not a per person basis.
Take two houses - one with an old lady on her own the one next door with four adults in their 20s renting. The official ONS data would count that as 50% home ownership - as one household is owner occupied - but in reality only 20% of people own a home. So 50% homeownership but only 20% of voters own a home across those two houses.
You could equally look at a home where two adult kids live with their parents - officially that household is 100% owner occupied but only 50% of the adults and voters actually own a property.
I would bet if you counted homeownership correctly on the basis of how many Brits have their names on the deeds of a property the true homeownership level is probably well below the 60% official figure - and I expect will keep going down as prices get ever more out of whack with wages.
Or, to put it another way, I don't want a situation where my children benefit financially from my demise.
"Marriage is shit. I don't see why gay people should be exempt."
(I would note that he was going through an unhappy breakup at the time.)
What has changed, however, is the scale of the help - especially in places like London. Essentially parents who won in the housing lottery have used some of their winnings to help their children,
Historically, the question has always been "what proportion of homes are owned by the head of household?"
Furthermore, I'm not even sure you're correct in your broad assumption. You see, the average size of households in the UK has been in steady decline for a long time. (See: https://www.statista.com/statistics/281627/households-in-the-united-kingdom-uk-by-size/) Indeed, until 2008, more than twice as many households were "created" by falling household size than by immigration.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1140116/Boris-Johnson-height-how-tall-is-Boris-johnson-weight-loss-girlfriend-carrie-symonds
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wDjdXl9IUdc
Individual people have votes (the head of household criteria was ended in 1918!) - individual houses do not. One old lady living alone in a house next to four adult renters is not 50% homeownership but only 20%.
As for your household size point - single people living alone rent too? But the most likely section of society to live alone are the elderly - due to bereavements etc - and they are most likely of any group to be homeowners. So not sure I see the issue?
So, the number of individuals on the deeds has increased with the falling number of people per household.
The Mock the Week question: if cocaine is indistinguishable from icing sugar, why do drug smugglers exist?
The John Major question: should the SAS be sent in to neutralise a prime minister planning to undermine centuries-old parliamentary democracy by proroguing the Commons.
It would be better to eliminate them for everyone else, in that that would have the smallest impact on UK manufacturing supply chains.
However.
1. It would be a real problem for the farming industry in the UK.
2. It would implicitly subsidise consumption over saving, further unbalancing the UK economy.
3. It would mean the UK had very little leverage in free trade negotiations with other countries. Simply: they would already have tariff free access to the UK, so why bother negotiating with us?
First things must come first, however. That means seeing off the mortal threat posed by Nigel Farage and the Brexit Party. Unionism, to the minor extent it’s ever a true concern for home counties Tories, is not a priority. The SNP is a danger to be confronted another day, if indeed it ever comes to that. However much Scottish Tories might despair of this, there is at least some logic here.
Unfortunately, the essential message sent by cuddling the Brexit Party is a simple one: “Nigel Farage is right, please don’t vote for him.” The Tories are in this mess partly because, in the end, successive prime ministers have preferred to pander to the Tory right than muster the courage to tell them they’re wrong.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/scotland/buckle-up-for-boris-itll-be-a-bumpy-ride-sf0bth09c
(It is also mildly redistributionary, in that it becomes tax efficient to spread out your bequeaths, rather than concentrate them.)
The next election will certainly be interesting.
Where are his extra 14 MPs going to come from?
His only hope is to radically outperform the others in tonight’s debates.
They had one hit single which went global. The rest of their music is socialist and/or anarchist, with many scathing lyics about the establishment.
The money has been taxed when it was made. Why, because you choose to give it away rather than spend it should it be taxed again?
New Fred
* Q: Boris is a homophobe and a misogynist. Do you think he is a suitable PM?