Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options

Good to see the Tories coming out and saying they want tax cuts

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6949753.stm

The inheritance tax band should rise, but it is a good way of promoting a slightly fairly society, and frankly is this really such a hardship?
Beep boop. I'm a bot.
«13

Comments

  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    budda wrote: »
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6949753.stm

    The inheritance tax band should rise, but it is a good way of promoting a slightly fairly society, and frankly is this really such a hardship?


    why the hell should inhertance tax be rised?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I haven't really looked at the issue of inheritance tax, but it seems to me that if you want to encourage a society where everyone is encouraged to work hard to earn what they have (which is the conservative ideal), then the idea of people getting vast amounts of inheritance, which they didn't work to earn, is directly in contrast with this idea.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Territt wrote: »
    why the hell should inhertance tax be rised?

    He never said that.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    budda wrote: »
    The inheritance tax band should rise
    He never said that.


    yes he did
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The tax band is the point at which you get taxed a certain amount. So rising the tax band would mean that you only get taxed 40% on inheritance of more than £350k, rather than £300k as it is currently.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Territt wrote: »
    yes he did

    he said RAISE the tax band not the amount of tax

    ie keep inheritance tax, but make it payable over £400k as opposed to currently

    that is technically a tax cut
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    ok i miss read it, anyways i think they should just scrap inheritance tax altogather
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Territ; Its normally a good idea to read and understand a post before replying.

    As has been pointed out what I suggested was effectively a tax reduction, though I dont think it should move very far, maybe up to £325K, then up a bit further over time.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    How do you pay tax on assets? Like if you have a house worth £500k, but you don't £80k in the bank to pay the 40% tax on that, what happens? Do you have to sell it and pay the tax?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    How do you pay tax on assets? Like if you have a house worth £500k, but you don't £80k in the bank to pay the 40% tax on that, what happens? Do you have to sell it and pay the tax?

    Thats normally the case yes. Or you could take a loan out on the property to pay the tax bill.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Territt wrote: »
    ok i miss read it, anyways i think they should just scrap inheritance tax altogather

    Why?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    budda wrote: »
    As has been pointed out what I suggested was effectively a tax reduction, though I dont think it should move very far, maybe up to £325K, then up a bit further over time.

    Well according to the article, the current government have plans to increase it to £350k already, in 2010.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    This is a stupid policy because the main people to benefit are wealthy houseowners in the SouhtEast of England, most of whom probably vote Tory already......

    They should be focusing on areas that Labour voters might not be so keen on e.g. civil liberties
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Toadborg wrote: »
    This is a stupid policy because the main people to benefit are wealthy houseowners in the SouhtEast of England,

    just because your a houseowner doesnt make you wealthy
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Toadborg wrote: »
    This is a stupid policy because the main people to benefit are wealthy houseowners in the SouhtEast of England, most of whom probably vote Tory already......

    They should be focusing on areas that Labour voters might not be so keen on e.g. civil liberties

    I dunno, the new "wet" David Cameron seems to be having a tough enough time holding onto traditional tory voters at the moment.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Territt wrote: »
    just because your a houseowner doesnt make you wealthy

    Having assets of over £300K does indeed make you wealthy.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Toadborg wrote: »
    This is a stupid policy because the main people to benefit are wealthy houseowners in the SouhtEast of England, most of whom probably vote Tory already......

    They should be focusing on areas that Labour voters might not be so keen on e.g. civil liberties

    yes, i know many people personally who'd put up with 5 years of tory economics to kill of the ID cards act as well as all the minor things

    it would make sense for a economically tight government who doesn't control as much money to be loose in regards to what is allowed ie allowing protest and free speech, whilst coming down hard on crimes against the person surely
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    budda wrote: »
    Having assets of over £300K does indeed make you wealthy.

    if you have a house worth 300k around where i live doesnt make you wealthy, you could just about get a nice family house for that around here
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Territt wrote: »
    just because your a houseowner doesnt make you wealthy

    In fact that is exactly what it does do, wealth is the value of your assets, most people's main asset is their home and if it is worth over 300k then you most certainly are a wealthy individual.........
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Territt wrote: »
    if you have a house worth 300k around where i live doesnt make you wealthy, you could just about get a nice family house for that around here

    I am virtually certain that the bank gets its dues first though, so you'd have to own the house outright, and if you own a £300k house outright you are wealthy.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Why should they scrap inheritance tax Territt?

    Of course it should be taxed, it's money going into your hands, so the goverment gets a slice.. that's how it works..
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Why should they scrap inheritance tax Territt?

    Of course it should be taxed, it's money going into your hands, so the goverment gets a slice.. that's how it works..


    its money that has already been taxed when it was earned
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Territt wrote: »
    its money that has already been taxed when it was earned

    Yes, but the people inheriting didnt earn it did they.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I'm all in favour of the idea. Why should people who have saved all their lives have money taken off them by the greedy hands of the state when they die? Individuals know better how to spend money than the state, hence why I always favour lower taxation. Let families keep the money for themselves - after all, they're not going to go and spend those extra thousands on pointless, illegal wars, are they?

    I do wonder who the Tories are trying to appeal to with this idea, though. Presumably to London and the South-East, where a house that costs less than £300k is as rare as hen's teeth. Mind you, I've no problem with that. Let's see some more proposals from the Tories, and I'll start taking them seriously again. Let's see them proposing the sacking of hundreds of thousands of civil servants, especially of all the morons doing non-jobs. (smoking cessation officers, I've got you in mind) Let's see them proposing giving less money to the European Union every year. Let's see them cut income tax and abolish National Insurance. Government is too big, the state is too big. Time for some real radicalism.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Territt wrote: »
    its money that has already been taxed when it was earned

    And? What exactly your point?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote: »
    Let's see them proposing the sacking of hundreds of thousands of civil servants, especially of all the morons doing non-jobs. (smoking cessation officers, I've got you in mind)

    So stopping people using up loads of the NHS budget and dying is a bad idea?
    stargalaxy wrote: »
    Let's see them cut income tax and abolish National Insurance. Government is too big, the state is too big. Time for some real radicalism.

    What the hell, all those people on pensions are just sponging scum anyway.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote: »
    Individuals know better how to spend money than the state

    How on earth did you reach that conclusion? Or are you unaware of the amount of people inde bt?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Sofie wrote: »
    And? What exactly your point?

    the point is that its unfair to tax the same money to times,
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    lol

    Territt - They might have paid tax when they earned it but the individual in receipt didn't pay tax on it.

    It's like my employer gets taxed on a big wedge when they get paid, they then give me a slice, so I have to pay my tax on it ? If I employed a sub-contractor, and gave them a slice, they'd pay their bit - see where I'm going here ?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Territt wrote: »
    the point is that its unfair to tax the same money to times,

    But its a tax on people earning money, the people inheriting are 'earning' it so therefore it should be taxed.
Sign In or Register to comment.