Cyclone Posted October 28, 2015 Share Posted October 28, 2015 It's unlikely then that you'll leave an estate worth over £1million, so you're in favour of a measure which will simply reduce your income now (higher income tax) but won't benefit you or your children... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gomgeg Posted October 28, 2015 Share Posted October 28, 2015 It's unlikely then that you'll leave an estate worth over £1million, so you're in favour of a measure which will simply reduce your income now (higher income tax) but won't benefit you or your children... It's out of the question. But I'm in favour of any government that's committed to reducing income tax for me , my family and you and your family. Since 2010 the income tax threshold has gone from £6.000 to be next year £11.000. If we were on benefits on the recently announced benefit cap of £20.000 we wouldn't be paying any income tax, and the other benefits like free dental and optical care would be available to us. But life's not fair and I realise that and am content to allow a democratically elected government to make policy, and if labour gets in any time soon I'll accept that also. I might complain like labour supporters are now but there'll be nothing I can do about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exxon Posted October 28, 2015 Share Posted October 28, 2015 (edited) It's unlikely then that you'll leave an estate worth over £1million, so you're in favour of a measure which will simply reduce your income now (higher income tax) but won't benefit you or your children... Isn't the idea to raise the threshold to £1million. So the question should be about an estate worth more than £325,000. Currently an estate of £1,000,000 would be taxed at around £270,000. Not to be sniffed at and a lot of income tax to be saved. Edited October 28, 2015 by exxon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted October 28, 2015 Share Posted October 28, 2015 Gomgeg said he supported the idea of raising the threshold, despite being on a low income. At least that appears to be what he's saying. ---------- Post added 28-10-2015 at 19:20 ---------- It's out of the question. But I'm in favour of any government that's committed to reducing income tax for me , my family and you and your family. Err, right. But if they INCREASE the IHT threshold, they will have to increase other taxation to compensate, most likely income tax. Since 2010 the income tax threshold has gone from £6.000 to be next year £11.000. You can send a thank you note to the lib dems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poppet2 Posted October 28, 2015 Share Posted October 28, 2015 Socialists don't understand the concept of working hard, earning money, spending that money however you choose and keeping the economy going, and providing for your kids and the future. Anybody with more money than them should have it taken away from them and given to others who may not have worked so hard or saved as much. I always though Labour and socialism was meant to be about "the worker". Yeah right! So why are you blaming Labour when it's the Tories who are proposing this policy of no inheritance tax unless your estate is over a million pounds? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WiseOwl182 Posted October 28, 2015 Share Posted October 28, 2015 So why are you blaming Labour when it's the Tories who are proposing this policy of no inheritance tax unless your estate is over a million pounds? I guess it's because Labour would tax someone who has worked hard, saved, bought a house and done the right thing all their life, whereas the Tories want to raise the limit so only millionaires are caught by it. Conservatism is far better for the working and middle classes. The Labour party should be rebranded to the Welfare Party. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gomgeg Posted October 28, 2015 Share Posted October 28, 2015 Gomgeg said he supported the idea of raising the threshold, despite being on a low income. At least that appears to be what he's saying. ---------- Post added 28-10-2015 at 19:20 ---------- No, I'm saying you should be allowed to keep what you've worked for and pass it on to your kids, instead of it being taken and passed to the work shy and those who have kids they aren't capable of supporting. I think that's plain enough. I wouldn't worry if I were you, you won't be losing your benefits it the near future. Err, right. But if they INCREASE the IHT threshold, they will have to increase other taxation to compensate, most likely income tax. You can send a thank you note to the lib dems. Do you mean the party who were thrown out at the election? Another party of high tax and benefits as just been proved in the house of time servers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exxon Posted October 28, 2015 Share Posted October 28, 2015 Gomgeg said he supported the idea of raising the threshold, despite being on a low income. At least that appears to be what he's saying. Err, right. But if they INCREASE the IHT threshold, they will have to increase other taxation to compensate, most likely income tax. You can send a thank you note to the lib dems. But on the other hand if I thought all my hard earned was going to be taken by the government in inheritance tax I wouldn't bother to keep accumulating it. What's the point if I can't pass it on? So I'd probably cut my losses and take early retirement. So the government would lose out on many years of income tax and corporation tax. They would also lose out on rather a lot of VAT if I chose to spend my retirement in the holiday home. ---------- Post added 28-10-2015 at 20:12 ---------- I guess it's because Labour would tax someone who has worked hard, saved, bought a house and done the right thing all their life, whereas the Tories want to raise the limit so only millionaires are caught by it. Conservatism is far better for the working and middle classes. The Labour party should be rebranded to the Welfare Party. I can't help thinking that Labour are out of touch with reality here. With house prices rising at over 9% and average house prices heading towards £300,000 http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/average-uk-house-price-to-hit-300000-in-the-next-three-months-10511047.html Indeed as average houise prices in Wigan are around £125,000 in much of the country the average house alone would put an estate into inheritance tax territory. Add on a few savings, a car or two and it isn't difficult to see why inheritance tax is thought of as unfair by 2/3 of the population. The other third probably living in Wigan or places like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricgem2002 Posted October 28, 2015 Share Posted October 28, 2015 I guess it's because Labour would tax someone who has worked hard, saved, bought a house and done the right thing all their life, whereas the Tories want to raise the limit so only millionaires are caught by it. Conservatism is far better for the working and middle classes. The Labour party should be rebranded to the Welfare Party. how many millionaires do you think the tories will catch with this ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WiseOwl182 Posted October 28, 2015 Share Posted October 28, 2015 how many millionaires do you think the tories will catch with this ? Exactly the same number as with the threshold at £325k, but without catching any working or lower middle-class families. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now