The buzz term on Tory blogs this week is The Politics of Envy. I have seen the term on so many Tory blogs that I can only suspect that it has been sent out by Tory HQ's propaganda office as The word of the Week.
The Politics of Envy, apparently, is to support any policy that suggests that billionaires should pay more tax than those on the national minimum wage - a shocking idea according to Tory central blog control.
Sorry to disappoint my "New Tory" friends but I am sticking to the old fashioned idea of one nation conservatism, that people should be taxed according to their means!
Indeed.
ReplyDeleteIt is ultimately about scale and context. Scale, because if you tax too high at the too low, it is counter productive. Context, because in a climate where we need to start paying back debt, it is even more imperative those that can afford to help pay it back proportionally more than the poor.
It has a been a deft skill by the right wing media to portray many taxes as the issue of the middle class - inheritance tax being the prime example.
Taxed according to their means = at the same rate?
ReplyDelete"It has a been a deft skill by the right wing media to portray many taxes as the issue of the middle class - inheritance tax being the prime example."
ReplyDeleteInheritance tax is very much an issue of the home owning middle classes. It should also be abolished, not because who it targets but because it's morally wrong to tax the dead.
"Inheritance tax is very much an issue of the home owning middle classes. It should also be abolished, not because who it targets but because it's morally wrong to tax the dead."
ReplyDeleteWell fair enough, but how do you equate 6% of estates the issue of the middle classes? That seems like a very small middle to me.
No doubt it would be the devils spawn, but i recommend the TUC research into 'middle england'.
"It is only due if your estate including any assets held in trust and gifts made within seven years of death - is valued over the current Inheritance Tax threshold (£325,000 in 2009-10)."
ReplyDeleteI would imagine that quite a few more than 6% are subject to it, when you consider the surge in house prices over the last decade. Added to this it includes investments and pensions.
.....anyway as I said it's morally wrong. You've paid tax earning it, you've paid tax saving it, you've paid tax at every opportunity effectively punishing you for looking after your money and investing well....then when you finally depart the mortal coil...the bastards tax you again, this time for dying.
I don't care if your middle class or a millionaire...taxing someone for dying is wrong.
"You've paid tax earning it, you've paid tax saving it, you've paid tax at every opportunity effectively punishing you for looking after your money and investing well....then when you finally depart the mortal coil...the bastards tax you again, this time for dying."
ReplyDeleteBut that generalises in the extreme, my father in law has become a millionaire, often by investing his earnings in many tax free saving plans.
The threshold is going up to 600,000, a million under the tories. My understanding is that the bit that taxed is the bit that is above the threshold - again you are distorting the notions of the 'middle'. Most people wont pay it under the new threshold.
You are swallowing the mail whole on this, but it might be worth agreeing to disagree.
I can happily argue from a position of experience on this, my wife and son will no doubt be subject to the tax even at the tory threshold.
"But that generalises in the extreme, my father in law has become a millionaire, often by investing his earnings in many tax free saving plans."
ReplyDelete...but I'm sure he's paid a whack of tax though hasn't he. We are taxed at every turn. That's a fact.
"The threshold is going up to 600,000, "
As far as I saw that was only for married couples if one died.
"My understanding is that the bit that taxed is the bit that is above the threshold - again you are distorting the notions of the 'middle'. Most people wont pay it under the new threshold."
If the 'new' threshold is accross the board, then you are right, could you point me to an article confirming it? The 'old' threshold of £325,000 does effect a lot more of the people than 6%.
"You are swallowing the mail whole on this"
No, I'm anti-inheritance tax full stop. It's unfair and morally dubious way of topping up Government coffers.
"I can happily argue from a position of experience on this, my wife and son will no doubt be subject to the tax even at the tory threshold."
As someone who has already experienced being hit with inheritance tax on both sides of my family I can assure you that my opposition to it is based on reality and not on some alleged 'right wing spin'.
What's wrong with taxing the dead? At least they can't feel it.
ReplyDeleteYou can't seriously claim you want a meritocracy and end up with a world in which many people were advantaged because of their parents rather themselves.
That world existed, and it was pretty shit. It's not so good now, but at least inheritance tax if properly applied can even things out.
'Taxed at every turn'? We're not taxed enough. Try living in a high-taxed country. You'll notice they have terrific schools, hospitals, welfare schemes etc, less inequality and better transport.
I experienced inheritance tax of 40% on my parents' house when they died. Fine. I didn't actually 'own' a single per cent of it, since I hadn't bought it, worked for it or built it, so getting 60 % was a pretty good deal for me. My parents would probably not have been happy, and they should have got one of those good lawyers tories get to avoid taxes, but they didn't. Do I honestly think I should have had more of their money? No. One can experience things both ways Dave.
" Do I honestly think I should have had more of their money?"
ReplyDeleteYes, because you have more of a right to it as a family member inheriting the money than the state.
If you'd rather leave your 'estate' to the state then fair enough, do so. I'd think you were a weirdo but it would be your choice. If like most people you want to provide for your next of kin, why should the stake take a whack of the money?
Taxing people for being good with money, providing for their families and being unfortunate enough to die is wrong.
Dave - hard to know where to start there:
ReplyDelete'If I'd rather leave my estate to the state then fair enough'. I thought we were discussing a tax rather than a wholesale confiscation system. A tax is where one pays a set amount for each pound to the state. Not the same thing. Don't change the goalposts.
Taxing people for being good with money? What? All taxation taxes money, and if it's providing for their own families that's the holy grail of being good with money then why bother taxing at all - we could just say we were providing for our family and thus didn't need taxing. Some people do actually say that - they send their kids to private schools, use BUPA, drive to work and watch Sky, and ask why they should pay for anything more than bin collection.
Unfortunate enough to die? We all die Dave. It's hard to take but it's true. Then even those we provide for die too. So it goes.
" thought we were discussing a tax rather than a wholesale confiscation system. A tax is where one pays a set amount for each pound to the state. Not the same thing. Don't change the goalposts."
ReplyDeleteSorry mistated my point, should've read 'a large chunk of my estate'.
"Taxing people for being good with money? What? All taxation taxes money, and if it's providing for their own families that's the holy grail of being good with money then why bother taxing at all - we could just say we were providing for our family and thus didn't need taxing. Some people do actually say that - they send their kids to private schools, use BUPA, drive to work and watch Sky, and ask why they should pay for anything more than bin collection."
Well that's going off on a tangent....my point was that the inheritance tax punishes those who invenst and save well. There's no denying that. The question is should these people have their savings and investments raided by the taxman after they die.
"Unfortunate enough to die? We all die Dave. It's hard to take but it's true. Then even those we provide for die too. So it goes."
...indeed....and at everypoint the taxman pickpockets just a little more.
I'm just going to make sure that I use my money to the max before I die. There are no pockets in shrouds and I'm buggered if the taxman is going to rob my next of kin.
"There are no pockets in shrouds and I'm buggered if the taxman is going to rob my next of kin."
ReplyDeleteNow that's the kind of fighting talk I like to hear...
It made me wonder why so many ancient civilizations buried people with their wealth - Egyptians, some early Roman, Assyrians, and lots of nomadic tribes etc. Maybe it was a way of settling the inheritance issue.
Any ancient historians out there? Perhaps Alwyn remembers?
I am not quite old enough to remember pre-Christian burial practices, but I understand that one of the reasons for burying wealth with the departed was so that they could pay tolls, bribes and taxes on their way to paradise.
ReplyDeleteInheritance tax is not a tax on the dead it is a tax on the living benefactors. If I have to pay tax on the minimum wage income that I have slogged my guts out to earn why should you get a tax free windfall on the unearned income that you get just because dad was a millionaire?
I'm just going to make sure that I use my money to the max before I die. There are no pockets in shrouds and I'm buggered if the taxman is going to rob my next of kin.
ReplyDeleteGood point but it won't work. There is only a finite amount that you can spend on consumable goods like good food and good wine. If you spend your millions on a good house, a classic car, good art etc they will add to your estate's final worth and be part of your heirs' inheritance tax valuation!
The only way in which the rich have spent their way out of inheritance tax in the past is by virtue of gambling debts, but that doesn't avoid the tax, it just passes it on. If you lose 10 million pounds to me on a bet the tax burden doesn't go away, it's just that my heirs pay it rather than yours!