If Boris goes before the next general election or after winning the next general election then Rishi Sunak is very likely to succeed him as Tory leader and PM having been a capable Chancellor of the Exchequer.
If Boris loses the next general election though and Starmer becomes PM would not rule out Priti Patel as next Tory leader as having lost power parties often pick the non centrist to lead them e.g. Hague beat Clarke in 1997 or Ed Miliband beat David Miliband in 2010
Most impressive … Vicky Young, She can at least summarise accurately. Funniest … Robert Peston. Not in a good way, but he did make me laugh out loud. Most up in his own arse. Hugh Pym.
Scientists … Jonathan van Tam. Most likely to call the media people idiots. Simon somebody. A virologist from Reading. Very clear and concise. Jenny Harries .. a good effort.
Politicians … Sunak … a smooth operator, he didn't look rattled. Mind you, it wasn't a stellar group.
The second slide from today on transport usage is interesting. It seems to be counter to a lot of the anecdotal reporting on here suggesting the lock down was crumbling. Tube and rail passenger numbers remain at 5-10% of normal so plenty of trains must be running empty or near empty - they are running on time though suggesting the real problem with the railway system is the passengers not the trains or the signals or the infrastructure - who'd have thunk it?
There are far fewer trains running, that will ensure that they are running on time now.
During normal conditions the network is ran with almost no spare capacity, once one service is running late all following services are affected as there is no slack on the network for service to catch up.
This has knock on affects as other services cross the lines that were affected by the initial delayed service, eventually things cascade to such a degree that the additional delays in the following services will get worse and worse until services are cancelled to get back to the original timetable.
What's needed to provide a reliable service is spare capacity on the network to deal with delays, that can be achieved by removing services from the network or conversely increasing the track capacity of the network.
So doing 43k tests yesterday. If Hancock had promised 50k, he would be looking forward to getting a bit of credit on Friday. Instead going to be getting 20 questions on why he missed his own target.
Bozo will send someone else out to bat on Friday. Maybe it is time to unleash The Truss?
Most impressive … Vicky Young, She can at least summarise accurately. Funniest … Robert Peston. Not in a good way, but he did make me laugh out loud. Most up in his own arse. Hugh Pym.
Scientists … Jonathan van Tam. Most likely to call the media people idiots. Simon somebody. A virologist from Reading. Very clear and concise. Jenny Harries .. a good effort.
Politicians … Sunak … a smooth operator, he didn't look rattled. Mind you, it wasn't a stellar group.
I'll put a shout out for the Chief Nursing Officer. Especially when she is wearing her uniform.
The shit Westminster government is starving them of capacity you bellend
How?
They have not provided the necessary equipment , that's how , the dummies cannot manage a fraction of their own targets, try to imagine how much they are sending to Scotland.
Isn't the NHS and public health 100% devolved to Scotland.
Which means the lack of testing is your Government's own fault especially as they haven't highlighted supply issues which they have for absolutely everything else.
Just like we are entitled to choose our view on the relationship with Europe, the Chinese can choose their relationship with the rest of the world.
Their choice is to use their trade power to limit foreign criticism of their regime as they think that strengthens them back home.
The rest of the world including the UK needs to accept that just like the EU needs to accept that the UK does not regard the EU as the EU would like them to.
He unveiled the magic money tree. Wait til he has to prune it.
Telegraph speculating on an IHT level of 80% this morning.
Back of the net!
I'd sooner set fire to it all than hand over 80% of my wealth to the government.
I'll stop off at the casino on my way to Dignitas before letting them rob me blind.
Well, it's that or use any one of the tax loopholes to keep it out of their hands.
Really? How bizarre.
I would like my wealth post death to help with the nation's public finances.
Pushed to think of a better use for it.
That's your choice. I would prefer mine to help those I want to help, namely my nearest and dearest. I do not want my life's work sacrificed on the altar of some "greater good".
Thankfully IHT is fairly easy to avoid with proper planning. It is my greatest wish, when I die, that the government should get none of it.
They have already taken a bite out of every penny I have ever earned while I'm alive, I'll be damned if I'm letting them come back for a second bite when I'm dead.
He unveiled the magic money tree. Wait til he has to prune it.
Telegraph speculating on an IHT level of 80% this morning.
Back of the net!
I'd sooner set fire to it all than hand over 80% of my wealth to the government.
I'll stop off at the casino on my way to Dignitas before letting them rob me blind.
Well, it's that or use any one of the tax loopholes to keep it out of their hands.
Really? How bizarre.
I would like my wealth post death to help with the nation's public finances.
Pushed to think of a better use for it.
That's your choice. I would prefer mine to help those I want to help, namely my nearest and dearest. I do not want my life's work sacrificed on the altar of some "greater good".
Thankfully IHT is fairly easy to avoid with proper planning. It is my greatest wish, when I die, that the government should get none of it.
They have already taken a bite out of every penny I have ever earned while I'm alive, I'll be damned if I'm letting them come back for a second bite when I'm dead.
You make it sound like the government is an enemy.
On April 15, the Washington Post reported that, in New York and Wuhan, between 14 and 30 percent of ICU patients had lost kidney function, requiring dialysis. New York hospitals were treating so much kidney failure “they need more personnel who can perform dialysis and have issued an urgent call for volunteers from other parts of the country.
The reported daily deaths from covid made it obvious ages ago that deaths in April would be higher than usual, the question was ‘how many would have died anyway?’ Not many it seems, although ‘highest on record’ is a bit misleading, it means highest since 2005 doesn’t it?
He unveiled the magic money tree. Wait til he has to prune it.
Telegraph speculating on an IHT level of 80% this morning.
Back of the net!
I'd sooner set fire to it all than hand over 80% of my wealth to the government.
I'll stop off at the casino on my way to Dignitas before letting them rob me blind.
Well, it's that or use any one of the tax loopholes to keep it out of their hands.
Really? How bizarre.
I would like my wealth post death to help with the nation's public finances.
Pushed to think of a better use for it.
That's your choice. I would prefer mine to help those I want to help, namely my nearest and dearest. I do not want my life's work sacrificed on the altar of some "greater good".
Thankfully IHT is fairly easy to avoid with proper planning. It is my greatest wish, when I die, that the government should get none of it.
They have already taken a bite out of every penny I have ever earned while I'm alive, I'll be damned if I'm letting them come back for a second bite when I'm dead.
Only easy to avoid because of the 7 year exemption which is easily abolished.
Unsurprising figure but I'm surprised as many as 7% went for Gove too - as someone who likes Gove. Shows the unreliability of polling respondents to answer the question actually asked.
Gove and Patel simply haven't done that much that's obvious compared to the others during Boris's absence. Their departments are not as key frontline as the others.
Nation likes person who gives them free stuff shock.
Nation likes person who took the risk to react quickly in what was a constructive manner. Given the usual speed of the Treasury when it comes to handing back money, it was a bloody miracle.
Compare and contrast with everyone else in government.
Note he's never once said "we're following the advice of our economists"...
Because that would be an absurd and meaningless phrase that most especially anyone who knows anything about economics would laugh at.
Why would anyone say anything so silly? There are economists for and against almost any action.
Of course, the same goes for science. As Prof Brian Cox said to Andrew Marr on Sunday:
"There’s no such thing as ‘the science’, which is a key lesson. If you hear a politician say ‘we’re following the science’, then what that means is they don’t really understand what science is. There isn’t such a thing as ‘the science’. Science is a mindset."
I wonder if that applies to campaigners on Global Warming, where 'follow the science' is also a mantra.
Just a musing on that...
Not accepting that increasing the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere will lead to the warmng of average global temperatures is not just outsider the "cloud of science" it is a hundred miles away.
Arguing that tiny trace volumes of CO2 are the only controlling factor and what the sun is up to is a disctraction seems thousands of miles away.
Increase in CO2 levels in the atmosphere 285 ppm to 410 ppm since 1850. That's a 44% increase. Saying the words "tiny trace" just makes you sound like an idiot.
"How can a tiny trace amount of botulinum toxin kill someone?"
Globally over decades the world is certainly outputting a lot of CO2.
The global atmospheric difference in CO2 between the UK going to net zero at a timescale like the government are proposing and the UK going at a timescale XR propose is a tiny trace difference.
Brexiteer= Climate change denier. What a surprise. Had enough of experts? Support Brexit and any other idiots charter that is in vogue with the pseudoscience Trumpian populist right wing.
A venn diagram of Trump fans/ Brexiteers/ climate change deniers/ end-lockdown-now advocates would show a great deal of overlap.
I've got no overlap.
Despise Trump and hopes he loses, want climate change tackling sensibly, think the lockdown needs to be ended when the time is right but not yet and Brexiteer. So one of your 4.
I have noted a persistent theme - that all Brexiters must be Trump supporters. Despite polling that indicates virtually no-one in the UK has any time for him.
The theme is that any British Trumptons were very very likely to be Brexiteers. Lots of people pretending they never had any time for him now he has become such an embarrassment but that was not what they were saying at the time he was elected. The UK Trump-rampers that come to mind are all UKIP types - who can forget all those photos of good old Nigel fawning over him. Remind me of any prominent remainers that were Trump fans - I'm sure there must be an odd one but I can't think of any..
There are massive parallels between the reasons Brexit and Trump won,
Really? Trump got mostly the same voters as Bush, McCain and Romney. He lost the popular vote and won only because Clinton was a uniquely unpopular candidate with a terrible campaign staff who set out to prove that the Obama campaign won 'wrong'.
Brexit had a quarter of a century campaign by the highest selling newspapers in the country covering every demographic.
I think the links are pretty tenuous.
I would have thought you would
What's the evidence that Trump voters are a unique coalition of left behind, economically anxious people as opposed to people who have voted Republican at every election for the last 20 years?
It doesn't really matter. When a politician that someone has strong feelings against is succesful, the reason for that success is always a deficiency on the side of their defeated opponent/campaign.
Clinton, Corbyn, Remain...
I wasn't asking a rhetorical question. My betting strategy for November is predicated on Trump not having a unique coalition and it just being the standard Republican voter base and that Trump's win was predicated on Romney voter voting for him whilst Obama voter stayed home or went third party instead of Clinton.
Voter screens in American polls will filter out 2016 non voters which means that Clinton haters willing to vote for Biden will not show up in current polling.
But, if Trump's voter share is not just the regualr GOP voters then my betting strategy is fucked.
I think the reasons for Brexit success and Trump success are completely different and trying to equate them as some kind of anti Liberal elitist movement is mistaken.
Trump did best with those earning $50k to $100k in 2016, Romney did best with those earning over $250k a year in 2012.
The Trump vote was more blue collar than the Romney vote without question, much as the Leave vote in 2016 was more working class than the vote for Cameron's Tories in 2010 and 2015
He unveiled the magic money tree. Wait til he has to prune it.
Telegraph speculating on an IHT level of 80% this morning.
Back of the net!
I'd sooner set fire to it all than hand over 80% of my wealth to the government.
I'll stop off at the casino on my way to Dignitas before letting them rob me blind.
Well, it's that or use any one of the tax loopholes to keep it out of their hands.
Really? How bizarre.
I would like my wealth post death to help with the nation's public finances.
Pushed to think of a better use for it.
That's your choice. I would prefer mine to help those I want to help, namely my nearest and dearest. I do not want my life's work sacrificed on the altar of some "greater good".
Thankfully IHT is fairly easy to avoid with proper planning. It is my greatest wish, when I die, that the government should get none of it.
They have already taken a bite out of every penny I have ever earned while I'm alive, I'll be damned if I'm letting them come back for a second bite when I'm dead.
He unveiled the magic money tree. Wait til he has to prune it.
Telegraph speculating on an IHT level of 80% this morning.
Back of the net!
I'd sooner set fire to it all than hand over 80% of my wealth to the government.
I'll stop off at the casino on my way to Dignitas before letting them rob me blind.
Well, it's that or use any one of the tax loopholes to keep it out of their hands.
Really? How bizarre.
I would like my wealth post death to help with the nation's public finances.
Pushed to think of a better use for it.
That's your choice. I would prefer mine to help those I want to help, namely my nearest and dearest. I do not want my life's work sacrificed on the altar of some "greater good".
Thankfully IHT is fairly easy to avoid with proper planning. It is my greatest wish, when I die, that the government should get none of it.
They have already taken a bite out of every penny I have ever earned while I'm alive, I'll be damned if I'm letting them come back for a second bite when I'm dead.
He unveiled the magic money tree. Wait til he has to prune it.
Telegraph speculating on an IHT level of 80% this morning.
Back of the net!
I'd sooner set fire to it all than hand over 80% of my wealth to the government.
I'll stop off at the casino on my way to Dignitas before letting them rob me blind.
Well, it's that or use any one of the tax loopholes to keep it out of their hands.
Really? How bizarre.
I would like my wealth post death to help with the nation's public finances.
Pushed to think of a better use for it.
That's your choice. I would prefer mine to help those I want to help, namely my nearest and dearest. I do not want my life's work sacrificed on the altar of some "greater good".
Thankfully IHT is fairly easy to avoid with proper planning. It is my greatest wish, when I die, that the government should get none of it.
They have already taken a bite out of every penny I have ever earned while I'm alive, I'll be damned if I'm letting them come back for a second bite when I'm dead.
He unveiled the magic money tree. Wait til he has to prune it.
Telegraph speculating on an IHT level of 80% this morning.
Back of the net!
I'd sooner set fire to it all than hand over 80% of my wealth to the government.
I'll stop off at the casino on my way to Dignitas before letting them rob me blind.
Well, it's that or use any one of the tax loopholes to keep it out of their hands.
Really? How bizarre.
I would like my wealth post death to help with the nation's public finances.
Pushed to think of a better use for it.
That's your choice. I would prefer mine to help those I want to help, namely my nearest and dearest. I do not want my life's work sacrificed on the altar of some "greater good".
Thankfully IHT is fairly easy to avoid with proper planning. It is my greatest wish, when I die, that the government should get none of it.
They have already taken a bite out of every penny I have ever earned while I'm alive, I'll be damned if I'm letting them come back for a second bite when I'm dead.
Only easy to avoid because of the 7 year exemption which is easily abolished.
How would that work in practice though? If, for example, a parent gave their child a £50k lump sum for a first house deposit and then the parent died, say, 40 years later are you suggesting that the taxman may come knocking for tax on the 50k?
If not, then all you are really saying is that the 7 year rule should be elongated?
He unveiled the magic money tree. Wait til he has to prune it.
Telegraph speculating on an IHT level of 80% this morning.
Back of the net!
I'd sooner set fire to it all than hand over 80% of my wealth to the government.
I'll stop off at the casino on my way to Dignitas before letting them rob me blind.
Well, it's that or use any one of the tax loopholes to keep it out of their hands.
Really? How bizarre.
I would like my wealth post death to help with the nation's public finances.
Pushed to think of a better use for it.
That's your choice. I would prefer mine to help those I want to help, namely my nearest and dearest. I do not want my life's work sacrificed on the altar of some "greater good".
Thankfully IHT is fairly easy to avoid with proper planning. It is my greatest wish, when I die, that the government should get none of it.
They have already taken a bite out of every penny I have ever earned while I'm alive, I'll be damned if I'm letting them come back for a second bite when I'm dead.
I'm a big fan of the idea of completely separating coronavirus-related debt and having a separate tax which is only for paying that debt down. Maybe half a pence on income tax, or something.
He unveiled the magic money tree. Wait til he has to prune it.
Telegraph speculating on an IHT level of 80% this morning.
Back of the net!
I'd sooner set fire to it all than hand over 80% of my wealth to the government.
I'll stop off at the casino on my way to Dignitas before letting them rob me blind.
Well, it's that or use any one of the tax loopholes to keep it out of their hands.
Really? How bizarre.
I would like my wealth post death to help with the public finances of the country I have lived my life in.
Pushed to think of a better use for it.
On that basis you must be in favour of 100% IHT then?
I'd actually abolish it and tax as income as I think you and I agreed a while back.
Otherwise high rate but with a threshold so you can leave a little something to loved ones.
Yes, we did didn`t we.
What if someone dies and the only asset is their house, which has gone through that family`s generations for centuries? Say there is only one child beneficiary who wants to move into the said house (or maybe already lives there).
How can we tax that? Cruel to force the sale of the house? Or not?
He unveiled the magic money tree. Wait til he has to prune it.
Telegraph speculating on an IHT level of 80% this morning.
Back of the net!
I'd sooner set fire to it all than hand over 80% of my wealth to the government.
I'll stop off at the casino on my way to Dignitas before letting them rob me blind.
Well, it's that or use any one of the tax loopholes to keep it out of their hands.
Really? How bizarre.
I would like my wealth post death to help with the public finances of the country I have lived my life in.
Pushed to think of a better use for it.
On that basis you must be in favour of 100% IHT then?
I'd actually abolish it and tax as income as I think you and I agreed a while back.
Otherwise high rate but with a threshold so you can leave a little something to loved ones.
I think the state take too much in taxation but one area where they do not take enough is on the wealth of dead people. Its unfair on those that do not inherit and discourages a meritocracy. I think IHT tax however is hard to collect so I agree that gifts should be taxed on the receiver (during lifetime as well as on death) . The money should be used to provide opportunity and advancement for all but especially the young
Obviously for political advantage, although frankly you would've thought that it wouldn't make a whole lot of difference how good or bad the results were for them.
He unveiled the magic money tree. Wait til he has to prune it.
Telegraph speculating on an IHT level of 80% this morning.
Back of the net!
I'd sooner set fire to it all than hand over 80% of my wealth to the government.
I'll stop off at the casino on my way to Dignitas before letting them rob me blind.
Well, it's that or use any one of the tax loopholes to keep it out of their hands.
Really? How bizarre.
I would like my wealth post death to help with the nation's public finances.
Pushed to think of a better use for it.
That's your choice. I would prefer mine to help those I want to help, namely my nearest and dearest. I do not want my life's work sacrificed on the altar of some "greater good".
Thankfully IHT is fairly easy to avoid with proper planning. It is my greatest wish, when I die, that the government should get none of it.
They have already taken a bite out of every penny I have ever earned while I'm alive, I'll be damned if I'm letting them come back for a second bite when I'm dead.
Only easy to avoid because of the 7 year exemption which is easily abolished.
How would that work in practice though? If, for example, a parent gave their child a £50k lump sum for a first house deposit and then the parent died, say, 40 years later are you suggesting that the taxman may come knocking for tax on the 50k?
If not, then all you are really saying is that the 7 year rule should be elongated?
No, you don't have to link it to death. You get asked on your tax return every year whether you have made any gifts that tax year and if yes, pay the tax. I am not advocating this, just saying it might happen.
I'm a big fan of the idea of completely separating coronavirus-related debt and having a separate tax which is only for paying that debt down. Maybe half a pence on income tax, or something.
Or a supertax on those caught flouting the lockdown rules.
He unveiled the magic money tree. Wait til he has to prune it.
Telegraph speculating on an IHT level of 80% this morning.
Back of the net!
I'd sooner set fire to it all than hand over 80% of my wealth to the government.
I'll stop off at the casino on my way to Dignitas before letting them rob me blind.
Well, it's that or use any one of the tax loopholes to keep it out of their hands.
Really? How bizarre.
I would like my wealth post death to help with the nation's public finances.
Pushed to think of a better use for it.
That's your choice. I would prefer mine to help those I want to help, namely my nearest and dearest. I do not want my life's work sacrificed on the altar of some "greater good".
Thankfully IHT is fairly easy to avoid with proper planning. It is my greatest wish, when I die, that the government should get none of it.
They have already taken a bite out of every penny I have ever earned while I'm alive, I'll be damned if I'm letting them come back for a second bite when I'm dead.
He unveiled the magic money tree. Wait til he has to prune it.
Telegraph speculating on an IHT level of 80% this morning.
Back of the net!
I'd sooner set fire to it all than hand over 80% of my wealth to the government.
I'll stop off at the casino on my way to Dignitas before letting them rob me blind.
Well, it's that or use any one of the tax loopholes to keep it out of their hands.
Really? How bizarre.
I would like my wealth post death to help with the nation's public finances.
Pushed to think of a better use for it.
That's your choice. I would prefer mine to help those I want to help, namely my nearest and dearest. I do not want my life's work sacrificed on the altar of some "greater good".
Thankfully IHT is fairly easy to avoid with proper planning. It is my greatest wish, when I die, that the government should get none of it.
They have already taken a bite out of every penny I have ever earned while I'm alive, I'll be damned if I'm letting them come back for a second bite when I'm dead.
Only easy to avoid because of the 7 year exemption which is easily abolished.
How would that work in practice though? If, for example, a parent gave their child a £50k lump sum for a first house deposit and then the parent died, say, 40 years later are you suggesting that the taxman may come knocking for tax on the 50k?
If not, then all you are really saying is that the 7 year rule should be elongated?
No, you don't have to link it to death. You get asked on your tax return every year whether you have made any gifts that tax year and if yes, pay the tax. I am not advocating this, just saying it might happen.
I'm a big fan of the idea of completely separating coronavirus-related debt and having a separate tax which is only for paying that debt down. Maybe half a pence on income tax, or something.
Or a supertax on those caught flouting the lockdown rules.
This debt will be serviced for decades, far longer than any lockdown
He unveiled the magic money tree. Wait til he has to prune it.
Telegraph speculating on an IHT level of 80% this morning.
Back of the net!
I'd sooner set fire to it all than hand over 80% of my wealth to the government.
I'll stop off at the casino on my way to Dignitas before letting them rob me blind.
Well, it's that or use any one of the tax loopholes to keep it out of their hands.
Really? How bizarre.
I would like my wealth post death to help with the nation's public finances.
Pushed to think of a better use for it.
That's your choice. I would prefer mine to help those I want to help, namely my nearest and dearest. I do not want my life's work sacrificed on the altar of some "greater good".
Thankfully IHT is fairly easy to avoid with proper planning. It is my greatest wish, when I die, that the government should get none of it.
They have already taken a bite out of every penny I have ever earned while I'm alive, I'll be damned if I'm letting them come back for a second bite when I'm dead.
Only easy to avoid because of the 7 year exemption which is easily abolished.
How would that work in practice though? If, for example, a parent gave their child a £50k lump sum for a first house deposit and then the parent died, say, 40 years later are you suggesting that the taxman may come knocking for tax on the 50k?
If not, then all you are really saying is that the 7 year rule should be elongated?
No, you don't have to link it to death. You get asked on your tax return every year whether you have made any gifts that tax year and if yes, pay the tax. I am not advocating this, just saying it might happen.
Or both as he makes 7 figures while pilots make 6 figures
They are probably making losses in the nine figure category. Talk about fiddling while Rome burns.
They have £10 billion in reserves and management should lead by example
True, but cutting a one 7-figure salary is a hundredth the size of sacking 1,000 people in 6-figure salaries. It's just a gesture, but it won't actually do anything to help.
He unveiled the magic money tree. Wait til he has to prune it.
Telegraph speculating on an IHT level of 80% this morning.
Back of the net!
I'd sooner set fire to it all than hand over 80% of my wealth to the government.
I'll stop off at the casino on my way to Dignitas before letting them rob me blind.
Well, it's that or use any one of the tax loopholes to keep it out of their hands.
Really? How bizarre.
I would like my wealth post death to help with the nation's public finances.
Pushed to think of a better use for it.
That's your choice. I would prefer mine to help those I want to help, namely my nearest and dearest. I do not want my life's work sacrificed on the altar of some "greater good".
Thankfully IHT is fairly easy to avoid with proper planning. It is my greatest wish, when I die, that the government should get none of it.
They have already taken a bite out of every penny I have ever earned while I'm alive, I'll be damned if I'm letting them come back for a second bite when I'm dead.
He unveiled the magic money tree. Wait til he has to prune it.
Telegraph speculating on an IHT level of 80% this morning.
Back of the net!
I'd sooner set fire to it all than hand over 80% of my wealth to the government.
I'll stop off at the casino on my way to Dignitas before letting them rob me blind.
Well, it's that or use any one of the tax loopholes to keep it out of their hands.
Really? How bizarre.
I would like my wealth post death to help with the nation's public finances.
Pushed to think of a better use for it.
That's your choice. I would prefer mine to help those I want to help, namely my nearest and dearest. I do not want my life's work sacrificed on the altar of some "greater good".
Thankfully IHT is fairly easy to avoid with proper planning. It is my greatest wish, when I die, that the government should get none of it.
They have already taken a bite out of every penny I have ever earned while I'm alive, I'll be damned if I'm letting them come back for a second bite when I'm dead.
I'm a big fan of the idea of completely separating coronavirus-related debt and having a separate tax which is only for paying that debt down. Maybe half a pence on income tax, or something.
Or a supertax on those caught flouting the lockdown rules.
This debt will be serviced for decades, far longer than any lockdown
Exactly. An extra 10% income tax will sort the buggers out.
He unveiled the magic money tree. Wait til he has to prune it.
Telegraph speculating on an IHT level of 80% this morning.
Back of the net!
I'd sooner set fire to it all than hand over 80% of my wealth to the government.
I'll stop off at the casino on my way to Dignitas before letting them rob me blind.
Well, it's that or use any one of the tax loopholes to keep it out of their hands.
Really? How bizarre.
I would like my wealth post death to help with the nation's public finances.
Pushed to think of a better use for it.
That's your choice. I would prefer mine to help those I want to help, namely my nearest and dearest. I do not want my life's work sacrificed on the altar of some "greater good".
Thankfully IHT is fairly easy to avoid with proper planning. It is my greatest wish, when I die, that the government should get none of it.
They have already taken a bite out of every penny I have ever earned while I'm alive, I'll be damned if I'm letting them come back for a second bite when I'm dead.
Though Osborne helped reduce its impact though by creating a £1 million threshold for married couples
I think you’ll find it’s £650,000, not 1 million. 1 million was the aspiration but it was never introduced.
No - it`s a million. It was phased in and reached a million this tax year.
Not quite. It’s a million if you claim double relief of £175,000 on the main residence. But that’s something extra that you have to claim, it doesn’t happen automatically as part of inheritance tax.
Or both as he makes 7 figures while pilots make 6 figures
They are probably making losses in the nine figure category. Talk about fiddling while Rome burns.
They have £10 billion in reserves and management should lead by example
True, but cutting a one 7-figure salary is a hundredth the size of sacking 1,000 people in 6-figure salaries. It's just a gesture, but it won't actually do anything to help.
Yes it will help save a number of low paid or average paid jobs if he cuts or better still suspends his vast pay packet during this lockdown and if his executive board follows suit.
The same applies to businesses furloughing low paid staff on 80% of original pay and taking taxpayer funds to do so
Or both as he makes 7 figures while pilots make 6 figures
They are probably making losses in the nine figure category. Talk about fiddling while Rome burns.
They have £10 billion in reserves and management should lead by example
Yes, management should lead by example.
But British Airways does not have £10bn in reserves.
They have £5.7bn in cash and short-term investments, and £12bn in debt.
And they just lost around £1bn in an oil price hedge.
Management need to be objective enough to ask if they cut their salaries by a percentage would they still stay in the role.If so, then its wasted money paying them more!
He unveiled the magic money tree. Wait til he has to prune it.
Telegraph speculating on an IHT level of 80% this morning.
Back of the net!
I'd sooner set fire to it all than hand over 80% of my wealth to the government.
I'll stop off at the casino on my way to Dignitas before letting them rob me blind.
Well, it's that or use any one of the tax loopholes to keep it out of their hands.
I wouldn't bank on tax havens or loopholes serving the coming cull.
None of us enjoy paying tax but I simply don't understand your attitude. Who would you like to pay for schools, hospitals, police, army etc?
Irving Berlin once famously told his accountant off for trying to reduce his tax bill. ‘Are you crazy? I love this country! I WANT to pay my share of tax.’
He unveiled the magic money tree. Wait til he has to prune it.
Telegraph speculating on an IHT level of 80% this morning.
Back of the net!
I'd sooner set fire to it all than hand over 80% of my wealth to the government.
I'll stop off at the casino on my way to Dignitas before letting them rob me blind.
Well, it's that or use any one of the tax loopholes to keep it out of their hands.
Really? How bizarre.
I would like my wealth post death to help with the nation's public finances.
Pushed to think of a better use for it.
That's your choice. I would prefer mine to help those I want to help, namely my nearest and dearest. I do not want my life's work sacrificed on the altar of some "greater good".
Thankfully IHT is fairly easy to avoid with proper planning. It is my greatest wish, when I die, that the government should get none of it.
They have already taken a bite out of every penny I have ever earned while I'm alive, I'll be damned if I'm letting them come back for a second bite when I'm dead.
Though Osborne helped reduce its impact though by creating a £1 million threshold for married couples
I think you’ll find it’s £650,000, not 1 million. 1 million was the aspiration but it was never introduced.
No - it`s a million. It was phased in and reached a million this tax year.
Not quite. It’s a million if you claim double relief of £175,000 on the main residence. But that’s something extra that you have to claim, it doesn’t happen automatically as part of inheritance tax.
Yes, that`s right. You have to claim it, but it`s still a million if you do (as under the rules). I thought you were saying it was just an aspiration. It`s been introduced as intended.
He unveiled the magic money tree. Wait til he has to prune it.
Telegraph speculating on an IHT level of 80% this morning.
Back of the net!
I'd sooner set fire to it all than hand over 80% of my wealth to the government.
I'll stop off at the casino on my way to Dignitas before letting them rob me blind.
Well, it's that or use any one of the tax loopholes to keep it out of their hands.
Really? How bizarre.
I would like my wealth post death to help with the nation's public finances.
Pushed to think of a better use for it.
That's your choice. I would prefer mine to help those I want to help, namely my nearest and dearest. I do not want my life's work sacrificed on the altar of some "greater good".
Thankfully IHT is fairly easy to avoid with proper planning. It is my greatest wish, when I die, that the government should get none of it.
They have already taken a bite out of every penny I have ever earned while I'm alive, I'll be damned if I'm letting them come back for a second bite when I'm dead.
Only easy to avoid because of the 7 year exemption which is easily abolished.
How would that work in practice though? If, for example, a parent gave their child a £50k lump sum for a first house deposit and then the parent died, say, 40 years later are you suggesting that the taxman may come knocking for tax on the 50k?
If not, then all you are really saying is that the 7 year rule should be elongated?
No, you don't have to link it to death. You get asked on your tax return every year whether you have made any gifts that tax year and if yes, pay the tax. I am not advocating this, just saying it might happen.
The vast bulk of taxpayers never file returns.
No, but they are actually obliged to if they have something to report. If you have only PAYE income and never get sent a return, and make a huge capital gain once in your life, you are obliged to ask for a return to declare the gain.
He unveiled the magic money tree. Wait til he has to prune it.
Telegraph speculating on an IHT level of 80% this morning.
Back of the net!
I'd sooner set fire to it all than hand over 80% of my wealth to the government.
I'll stop off at the casino on my way to Dignitas before letting them rob me blind.
Well, it's that or use any one of the tax loopholes to keep it out of their hands.
Really? How bizarre.
I would like my wealth post death to help with the nation's public finances.
Pushed to think of a better use for it.
That's your choice. I would prefer mine to help those I want to help, namely my nearest and dearest. I do not want my life's work sacrificed on the altar of some "greater good".
Thankfully IHT is fairly easy to avoid with proper planning. It is my greatest wish, when I die, that the government should get none of it.
They have already taken a bite out of every penny I have ever earned while I'm alive, I'll be damned if I'm letting them come back for a second bite when I'm dead.
You are clearly a rugged outlaw who has hewn out a living completely alone and against the odds, opposed and hindered every step of the way by the Authorities.
Me, I went to school and uni and all that boring stuff. White collar.
He unveiled the magic money tree. Wait til he has to prune it.
Telegraph speculating on an IHT level of 80% this morning.
Back of the net!
I'd sooner set fire to it all than hand over 80% of my wealth to the government.
I'll stop off at the casino on my way to Dignitas before letting them rob me blind.
Well, it's that or use any one of the tax loopholes to keep it out of their hands.
I wouldn't bank on tax havens or loopholes serving the coming cull.
None of us enjoy paying tax but I simply don't understand your attitude. Who would you like to pay for schools, hospitals, police, army etc?
People who are opposed to IHT (my personal favourite tax as I`d rather pay tax dead than alive) tend to say "you`re being charged tax on something you`ve already paid tax on" without seeming to notice that that applies to everything other than income tax: VAT, council tax, etc etc.
He unveiled the magic money tree. Wait til he has to prune it.
Telegraph speculating on an IHT level of 80% this morning.
Back of the net!
I'd sooner set fire to it all than hand over 80% of my wealth to the government.
I'll stop off at the casino on my way to Dignitas before letting them rob me blind.
Well, it's that or use any one of the tax loopholes to keep it out of their hands.
Really? How bizarre.
I would like my wealth post death to help with the nation's public finances.
Pushed to think of a better use for it.
That's your choice. I would prefer mine to help those I want to help, namely my nearest and dearest. I do not want my life's work sacrificed on the altar of some "greater good".
Thankfully IHT is fairly easy to avoid with proper planning. It is my greatest wish, when I die, that the government should get none of it.
They have already taken a bite out of every penny I have ever earned while I'm alive, I'll be damned if I'm letting them come back for a second bite when I'm dead.
You are clearly a rugged outlaw who has hewn out a living completely alone and against the odds, opposed and hindered every step of the way by the Authorities.
Me, I went to school and uni and all that boring stuff. White collar.
There is something of the wild west about the libertarians amongst us, to be sure.
Or both as he makes 7 figures while pilots make 6 figures
They are probably making losses in the nine figure category. Talk about fiddling while Rome burns.
They have £10 billion in reserves and management should lead by example
True, but cutting a one 7-figure salary is a hundredth the size of sacking 1,000 people in 6-figure salaries. It's just a gesture, but it won't actually do anything to help.
Yes it will help save a number of low paid or average paid jobs if he cuts or better still suspends his vast pay packet during this lockdown and if his executive board follows suit.
The same applies to businesses furloughing low paid staff on 80% of original pay and taking taxpayer funds to do so
FWIW, the firm I work for is paying its furloughed employees full salary out of its own pocket and the board are giving 20% of their pay to charity.
I suppose that this might be regarded as both a demonstration of social responsibility and a reassurance to the markets of financial strength (an airline, for example, couldn't afford to shoulder the burden itself.) Whether or not we'll get any reward for it, who can say?
He unveiled the magic money tree. Wait til he has to prune it.
Telegraph speculating on an IHT level of 80% this morning.
Back of the net!
I'd sooner set fire to it all than hand over 80% of my wealth to the government.
I'll stop off at the casino on my way to Dignitas before letting them rob me blind.
Well, it's that or use any one of the tax loopholes to keep it out of their hands.
Really? How bizarre.
I would like my wealth post death to help with the nation's public finances.
Pushed to think of a better use for it.
That's your choice. I would prefer mine to help those I want to help, namely my nearest and dearest. I do not want my life's work sacrificed on the altar of some "greater good".
Thankfully IHT is fairly easy to avoid with proper planning. It is my greatest wish, when I die, that the government should get none of it.
They have already taken a bite out of every penny I have ever earned while I'm alive, I'll be damned if I'm letting them come back for a second bite when I'm dead.
Though Osborne helped reduce its impact though by creating a £1 million threshold for married couples
I think you’ll find it’s £650,000, not 1 million. 1 million was the aspiration but it was never introduced.
No - it`s a million. It was phased in and reached a million this tax year.
Not quite. It’s a million if you claim double relief of £175,000 on the main residence. But that’s something extra that you have to claim, it doesn’t happen automatically as part of inheritance tax.
Yes, that`s right. You have to claim it, but it`s still a million if you do (as under the rules). I thought you were saying it was just an aspiration. It`s been introduced as intended.
I disagree with it but there you go.
The point being it’s not inheritance tax relief. It’s relief on a main residence to particular individuals. The original idea was to raise the IHT threshold to 1 million, and that hasn’t happened. If, for example, a childless friend of my mother’s left me her estate, I could only (only!) claim £650,000 in relief, which would be automatically applied at probate.
By contrast, if my father died and left his estate to me (which he probably won’t do, btw) I could throw the house in to a value of £350,000, as long as I claimed it and provided the necessary documentation.
Can you see that that’s a bit different? Of course, it might legitimately be argued that it’s a sensible reform as the key problem with IHT was that it normally forced the sale of the family house. Meanwhile, in my (hypothetical) scenario of my mother’s friend I wouldn’t have the possible sentimental attachment to a house and anyone who can’t struggle by on £650k is probably too useless to manage on a million.
As the "New Normal Project" get started, I've been tasked by my employers to do some thinking (or perhaps drinking - the network connection wasn't brilliant) on this. Social distancing on public transport works fine with 5-10% of usual passenger numbers but get that up to 25% and you might start having some issues. I suppose someone not wearing a face mask could be as popular as someone trying to light up on the tube.
Thinking about commercial and office space - it's tempting to argue demand will collapse with the coming of home working but I'm less convinced. For one client I've worked out with social distancing they can accommodate half their workforce in their current space. Their belief is as demand and prices drop they will be able to afford more space and be able to accommodate more of their workforce in a single location.
It's a thought and it'll be interesting to see if a lot of the newly-created commercial space does go begging in town centre regeneration projects or whether we will see organisations taking more space at a lower price.
He unveiled the magic money tree. Wait til he has to prune it.
Telegraph speculating on an IHT level of 80% this morning.
Back of the net!
I'd sooner set fire to it all than hand over 80% of my wealth to the government.
I'll stop off at the casino on my way to Dignitas before letting them rob me blind.
Well, it's that or use any one of the tax loopholes to keep it out of their hands.
I wouldn't bank on tax havens or loopholes serving the coming cull.
None of us enjoy paying tax but I simply don't understand your attitude. Who would you like to pay for schools, hospitals, police, army etc?
Irving Berlin once famously told his accountant off for trying to reduce his tax bill. ‘Are you crazy? I love this country! I WANT to pay my share of tax.’
Well, it's a view, not one I share.
I don't believe that all taxation is theft, but taxation at 80%, on money that has already been taxed when you earned it, certainly is.
I've had muggers who have let me walk away with more.
He unveiled the magic money tree. Wait til he has to prune it.
Telegraph speculating on an IHT level of 80% this morning.
Back of the net!
I'd sooner set fire to it all than hand over 80% of my wealth to the government.
I'll stop off at the casino on my way to Dignitas before letting them rob me blind.
Well, it's that or use any one of the tax loopholes to keep it out of their hands.
Really? How bizarre.
I would like my wealth post death to help with the nation's public finances.
Pushed to think of a better use for it.
That's your choice. I would prefer mine to help those I want to help, namely my nearest and dearest. I do not want my life's work sacrificed on the altar of some "greater good".
Thankfully IHT is fairly easy to avoid with proper planning. It is my greatest wish, when I die, that the government should get none of it.
They have already taken a bite out of every penny I have ever earned while I'm alive, I'll be damned if I'm letting them come back for a second bite when I'm dead.
You are clearly a rugged outlaw who has hewn out a living completely alone and against the odds, opposed and hindered every step of the way by the Authorities.
Me, I went to school and uni and all that boring stuff. White collar.
There is something of the wild west about the libertarians amongst us, to be sure.
Emotionally I want to be a libertarian but then something like this happens and I just can’t make the leap of faith.
On IHT I believe that gifts to charity are exempt . So in effect you don't have to leave any money to the state ( I do have some sympathy and doubts as to the state efficiency of spending on stuff that helps society and people) but can leave money to a charity of your choice. that sounds more nicer than being mean and insisting it all goes to a narrow band of relatives who probably are richer than the average population anyway (being probably 60 and middle class at least)
That actually does surprise me. People are supportive of restriction, but I'd assumed a phased relaxation would be popular.
I think people would like to visit a small number of closest friends/family but are worried about the potential for abuse of this by others and Rt heading north again.
Or both as he makes 7 figures while pilots make 6 figures
They are probably making losses in the nine figure category. Talk about fiddling while Rome burns.
They have £10 billion in reserves and management should lead by example
True, but cutting a one 7-figure salary is a hundredth the size of sacking 1,000 people in 6-figure salaries. It's just a gesture, but it won't actually do anything to help.
Yes it will help save a number of low paid or average paid jobs if he cuts or better still suspends his vast pay packet during this lockdown and if his executive board follows suit.
The same applies to businesses furloughing low paid staff on 80% of original pay and taking taxpayer funds to do so
FWIW, the firm I work for is paying its furloughed employees full salary out of its own pocket and the board are giving 20% of their pay to charity.
I suppose that this might be regarded as both a demonstration of social responsibility and a reassurance to the markets of financial strength (an airline, for example, couldn't afford to shoulder the burden itself.) Whether or not we'll get any reward for it, who can say?
Full pay on furlough sounds like a better deal than the 80% pay for working full time that some employers are offering.
Irving Berlin once famously told his accountant off for trying to reduce his tax bill. ‘Are you crazy? I love this country! I WANT to pay my share of tax.’
At a more modest level I had the same conversation when I came back to Britain after being elected, and asked an accountant to recommend a fund for my savings that didn't use any tax avoidance or offshore havens. He was genuinely baffled by the stipulation - not opposed to it, but just bemused, as though I'd said I only wanted to invest in Bulgarian bonds.
As for IHT, I'm with Kinabalu - part of the deal of living in Britain is to pay a fair share, not avoid it. If that's mostly when I'm dead, so much the better.
On IHT I believe that gifts to charity are exempt . So in effect you don't have to leave any money to the state ( I do have some sympathy and doubts as to the state efficiency of spending on stuff that helps society and people) but can leave money to a charity of your choice. that sounds more nicer than being mean and insisting it all goes to a narrow band of relatives who probably are richer than the average population anyway (being probably 60 and middle class at least)
What about people who believe the whole point of life is to give your children a better life than the one you had?
To be forced to surrender everything (or 80% of everything) you have worked for your whole life and hand it over to the state instead of giving it to your children is completely against human nature.
Or both as he makes 7 figures while pilots make 6 figures
They are probably making losses in the nine figure category. Talk about fiddling while Rome burns.
They have £10 billion in reserves and management should lead by example
True, but cutting a one 7-figure salary is a hundredth the size of sacking 1,000 people in 6-figure salaries. It's just a gesture, but it won't actually do anything to help.
Yes it will help save a number of low paid or average paid jobs if he cuts or better still suspends his vast pay packet during this lockdown and if his executive board follows suit.
The same applies to businesses furloughing low paid staff on 80% of original pay and taking taxpayer funds to do so
FWIW, the firm I work for is paying its furloughed employees full salary out of its own pocket and the board are giving 20% of their pay to charity.
I suppose that this might be regarded as both a demonstration of social responsibility and a reassurance to the markets of financial strength (an airline, for example, couldn't afford to shoulder the burden itself.) Whether or not we'll get any reward for it, who can say?
Full pay on furlough sounds like a better deal than the 80% pay for working full time that some employers are offering.
Yes. Very much so, in fact. I’d be quite happy to be furloughed for 80% of salary, never mind 100% (cue jokes about summer holidays).
One thing this crisis definitely is doing is showing who the good employers are. One friend of mine has been furloughed on full salary. The boss said it was his way of paying back his staff’s hard work and loyalty over the years by making sure they were financially OK through the crisis. Another firm of my acquaintance sacked 10% of its workforce without warning or severance pay within a week of lockdown starting.
No prizes for guessing who is going to come out of this one with his customer base intact...
On IHT I believe that gifts to charity are exempt . So in effect you don't have to leave any money to the state ( I do have some sympathy and doubts as to the state efficiency of spending on stuff that helps society and people) but can leave money to a charity of your choice. that sounds more nicer than being mean and insisting it all goes to a narrow band of relatives who probably are richer than the average population anyway (being probably 60 and middle class at least)
What about people who believe the whole point of life is to give your children a better life than the one you had?
To be forced to surrender everything (or 80% of everything) you have worked for your whole life and hand it over to the state instead of giving it to your children is completely against human nature.
Well its only against the nature of those that believe in that. A fair few granted but human nature is generally about being communal and giving everyone a fair go and not being overly selfish. As I said I am not a great believer in the state but think charities and similar organisations offer so much more than either state monoliths or personal gains. So to be able to leave to a charity OF YOUR CHOICE is a great way to encourage wealth distribution on death imo
On IHT I believe that gifts to charity are exempt . So in effect you don't have to leave any money to the state ( I do have some sympathy and doubts as to the state efficiency of spending on stuff that helps society and people) but can leave money to a charity of your choice. that sounds more nicer than being mean and insisting it all goes to a narrow band of relatives who probably are richer than the average population anyway (being probably 60 and middle class at least)
What about people who believe the whole point of life is to give your children a better life than the one you had?
To be forced to surrender everything (or 80% of everything) you have worked for your whole life and hand it over to the state instead of giving it to your children is completely against human nature.
Yes I agree it is. Trouble is life`s so unfair. I can remember being most disgruntled when an acquaintance of mine inherited almost a million from his mother a few years ago. As an only child he copped the lot. Unfair on those who don`t have wealthy parents, unfair on those have to share the spoils with other beneficiaries.
Irving Berlin once famously told his accountant off for trying to reduce his tax bill. ‘Are you crazy? I love this country! I WANT to pay my share of tax.’
At a more modest level I had the same conversation when I came back to Britain after being elected, and asked an accountant to recommend a fund for my savings that didn't use any tax avoidance or offshore havens. He was genuinely baffled by the stipulation - not opposed to it, but just bemused, as though I'd said I only wanted to invest in Bulgarian bonds.
As for IHT, I'm with Kinabalu - part of the deal of living in Britain is to pay a fair share, not avoid it. If that's mostly when I'm dead, so much the better.
Irving Berlin once famously told his accountant off for trying to reduce his tax bill. ‘Are you crazy? I love this country! I WANT to pay my share of tax.’
At a more modest level I had the same conversation when I came back to Britain after being elected, and asked an accountant to recommend a fund for my savings that didn't use any tax avoidance or offshore havens. He was genuinely baffled by the stipulation - not opposed to it, but just bemused, as though I'd said I only wanted to invest in Bulgarian bonds.
As for IHT, I'm with Kinabalu - part of the deal of living in Britain is to pay a fair share, not avoid it. If that's mostly when I'm dead, so much the better.
You don’t have kids tho. So there’s that.
Why is that in any way relevant to Nick’s point?
Well it could be relevant. Kinabalu too? I guess it`s possible that if you have no offspring you are more likely to be in favour of IHT. Disappointing if that is the rationale - so I doubt that it is.
Irving Berlin once famously told his accountant off for trying to reduce his tax bill. ‘Are you crazy? I love this country! I WANT to pay my share of tax.’
At a more modest level I had the same conversation when I came back to Britain after being elected, and asked an accountant to recommend a fund for my savings that didn't use any tax avoidance or offshore havens. He was genuinely baffled by the stipulation - not opposed to it, but just bemused, as though I'd said I only wanted to invest in Bulgarian bonds.
As for IHT, I'm with Kinabalu - part of the deal of living in Britain is to pay a fair share, not avoid it. If that's mostly when I'm dead, so much the better.
You don’t have kids tho. So there’s that.
Why is that in any way relevant to Nick’s point?
Its easy not to want to pass something to your kids if you don't have any.
That actually does surprise me. People are supportive of restriction, but I'd assumed a phased relaxation would be popular.
I think people would like to visit a small number of closest friends/family but are worried about the potential for abuse of this by others and Rt heading north again.
Or blokes fretting at the prospect of no longer having a cast iron justification for not having their mother in law come to visit.
On IHT I believe that gifts to charity are exempt . So in effect you don't have to leave any money to the state ( I do have some sympathy and doubts as to the state efficiency of spending on stuff that helps society and people) but can leave money to a charity of your choice. that sounds more nicer than being mean and insisting it all goes to a narrow band of relatives who probably are richer than the average population anyway (being probably 60 and middle class at least)
What about people who believe the whole point of life is to give your children a better life than the one you had?
To be forced to surrender everything (or 80% of everything) you have worked for your whole life and hand it over to the state instead of giving it to your children is completely against human nature.
Well its only against the nature of those that believe in that. A fair few granted but human nature is generally about being communal and giving everyone a fair go and not being overly selfish. As I said I am not a great believer in the state but think charities and similar organisations offer so much more than either state monoliths or personal gains. So to be able to leave to a charity OF YOUR CHOICE is a great way to encourage wealth distribution on death imo
Sounds like you're going to leave it to Donkey Sanctuary.
Comments
If Boris loses the next general election though and Starmer becomes PM would not rule out Priti Patel as next Tory leader as having lost power parties often pick the non centrist to lead them e.g. Hague beat Clarke in 1997 or Ed Miliband beat David Miliband in 2010
Most impressive … Vicky Young, She can at least summarise accurately.
Funniest … Robert Peston. Not in a good way, but he did make me laugh out loud.
Most up in his own arse. Hugh Pym.
Scientists … Jonathan van Tam. Most likely to call the media people idiots. Simon somebody. A virologist from Reading. Very clear and concise. Jenny Harries .. a good effort.
Politicians … Sunak … a smooth operator, he didn't look rattled. Mind you, it wasn't a stellar group.
I would like my wealth post death to help with the public finances of the country I have lived my life in.
Pushed to think of a better use for it.
During normal conditions the network is ran with almost no spare capacity, once one service is running late all following services are affected as there is no slack on the network for service to catch up.
This has knock on affects as other services cross the lines that were affected by the initial delayed service, eventually things cascade to such a degree that the additional delays in the following services will get worse and worse until services are cancelled to get back to the original timetable.
What's needed to provide a reliable service is spare capacity on the network to deal with delays, that can be achieved by removing services from the network or conversely increasing the track capacity of the network.
See one of main reasons for HS2.
Which means the lack of testing is your Government's own fault especially as they haven't highlighted supply issues which they have for absolutely everything else.
Their choice is to use their trade power to limit foreign criticism of their regime as they think that strengthens them back home.
The rest of the world including the UK needs to accept that just like the EU needs to accept that the UK does not regard the EU as the EU would like them to.
Thankfully IHT is fairly easy to avoid with proper planning. It is my greatest wish, when I die, that the government should get none of it.
They have already taken a bite out of every penny I have ever earned while I'm alive, I'll be damned if I'm letting them come back for a second bite when I'm dead.
https://onemileatatime.com/british-airways-pilots-pay-cut/
Speaking as someone who had a kidney removed due to cancer a few years back, it cheered me up no end!!
I may never go out again.
The Trump vote was more blue collar than the Romney vote without question, much as the Leave vote in 2016 was more working class than the vote for Cameron's Tories in 2010 and 2015
https://twitter.com/DavidTWilcock/status/1254767242773884928?s=20
If not, then all you are really saying is that the 7 year rule should be elongated?
https://twitter.com/ddiamond/status/1255193968809250823
https://twitter.com/heraldscotland/status/1255117339839942656?s=20
Otherwise high rate but with a threshold so you can leave a little something to loved ones.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inflationandpriceindices/bulletins/housepriceindex/june2019
Though Osborne helped reduce its impact though by creating a £1 million threshold for married couples
What if someone dies and the only asset is their house, which has gone through that family`s generations for centuries? Say there is only one child beneficiary who wants to move into the said house (or maybe already lives there).
How can we tax that? Cruel to force the sale of the house? Or not?
But British Airways does not have £10bn in reserves.
They have £5.7bn in cash and short-term investments, and £12bn in debt.
And they just lost around £1bn in an oil price hedge.
https://www.debenhamsottaway.co.uk/news/2017/05/inheritance-tax-threshold-really-1-million/
None of us enjoy paying tax but I simply don't understand your attitude. Who would you like to pay for schools, hospitals, police, army etc?
The same applies to businesses furloughing low paid staff on 80% of original pay and taking taxpayer funds to do so
I disagree with it but there you go.
Me, I went to school and uni and all that boring stuff. White collar.
Is Nicola denying face masks to care homes and hospitals?
I suppose that this might be regarded as both a demonstration of social responsibility and a reassurance to the markets of financial strength (an airline, for example, couldn't afford to shoulder the burden itself.) Whether or not we'll get any reward for it, who can say?
By contrast, if my father died and left his estate to me (which he probably won’t do, btw) I could throw the house in to a value of £350,000, as long as I claimed it and provided the necessary documentation.
Can you see that that’s a bit different? Of course, it might legitimately be argued that it’s a sensible reform as the key problem with IHT was that it normally forced the sale of the family house. Meanwhile, in my (hypothetical) scenario of my mother’s friend I wouldn’t have the possible sentimental attachment to a house and anyone who can’t struggle by on £650k is probably too useless to manage on a million.
Thinking about commercial and office space - it's tempting to argue demand will collapse with the coming of home working but I'm less convinced. For one client I've worked out with social distancing they can accommodate half their workforce in their current space. Their belief is as demand and prices drop they will be able to afford more space and be able to accommodate more of their workforce in a single location.
It's a thought and it'll be interesting to see if a lot of the newly-created commercial space does go begging in town centre regeneration projects or whether we will see organisations taking more space at a lower price.
I don't believe that all taxation is theft, but taxation at 80%, on money that has already been taxed when you earned it, certainly is.
I've had muggers who have let me walk away with more.
https://twitter.com/J_CD_T/status/1255070137712996355?s=20
As for IHT, I'm with Kinabalu - part of the deal of living in Britain is to pay a fair share, not avoid it. If that's mostly when I'm dead, so much the better.
To be forced to surrender everything (or 80% of everything) you have worked for your whole life and hand it over to the state instead of giving it to your children is completely against human nature.
One thing this crisis definitely is doing is showing who the good employers are. One friend of mine has been furloughed on full salary. The boss said it was his way of paying back his staff’s hard work and loyalty over the years by making sure they were financially OK through the crisis. Another firm of my acquaintance sacked 10% of its workforce without warning or severance pay within a week of lockdown starting.
No prizes for guessing who is going to come out of this one with his customer base intact...
Cheltenham, Liverpool, Manchester. Study claiming to show extra deaths in local hospitals 25-30 days post-event. Not hugely convincing.
https://twitter.com/jamescracknell/status/1254395457033379843