Inheritance tax

Santiago · Post by **Santiago** » Tue 16 Mar 2010 21:59

I think we have to consider how the country we live in gives us the opportunity to make money.

A Namibian could set up a small business and work really hard and really well, but he is never going to amass the amount of wealth of his Western counterparts.

I think sometimes we first-worlders get a little full of ourselves, no matter how we make our money. For 99% of people, the wealth we accumulate depends 95% upon the country we were born in and where we work. the other 5% is down to us as an individual.

Therefore we should not begrudge our governments for taxing us at 40 or 50% as without that environment all our efforts and entrepreneurial skills would be worth a handful of beans.

thumbelina · Post by **thumbelina** » Tue 16 Mar 2010 22:13

And the country we were born in and make our money in depends 100% on the entrepreneurs who have the balls to put everything on the line to create the businesses in the first place.

A culture which is virtually non existant in France.

I have no problem with being taxed at 40 or even 50% ONCE!

And, frankly, until you've been in that situation where YOUR money earned by the sweat off of YOUR brow and the sacrifices made by YOUR family over decades is being stolen by your Government, you cannot be expected to understand!

Serge · Post by **Serge** » Tue 16 Mar 2010 22:36

Santiago wrote:I think we have to consider how the country we live in gives us the opportunity to make money.

A Namibian could set up a small business and work really hard and really well, but he is never going to amass the amount of wealth of his Western counterparts.

I think sometimes we first-worlders get a little full of ourselves, no matter how we make our money. For 99% of people, the wealth we accumulate depends 95% upon the country we were born in and where we work. the other 5% is down to us as an individual.

Therefore we should not begrudge our governments for taxing us at 40 or 50% as without that environment all our efforts and entrepreneurial skills would be worth a handful of beans.

Is this a wind up or what you really believe?

john · Post by **john** » Tue 16 Mar 2010 22:52

It MUST be a wind up,Serge. It is,otherwise,quite the most bizarre notion I've ever come across.

Like Thumbs,I recognise that we need to pay tax when we are alive on income etc. But the idea of paying again when we die is simply potty. And the idea of a govt telling me who I can leave my money to is even more potty.

Rose · Post by **Rose** » Wed 17 Mar 2010 00:06

Living in the UK, I am getting sick of the government trying to take control of all aspects of our life. You can see this on my post about stupid regulations,

There was an interesting article about a remote pub in Sussex, in either the Times or the Telegraph at the weekend. It has a C16th date above its door but you can only get to it by driving. With what Lord Adonis is now proposing, you could not go out there for a pint of the beer they are serving, without booking a taxi home because you would be over the limit. How much longer will this historical inn survive?

Serge · Post by **Serge** » Wed 17 Mar 2010 00:24

john wrote:It MUST be a wind up,Serge. It is,otherwise,quite the most bizarre notion I've ever come across.

I think he has found religion John - it is nearly Easter ..........

Roger O · Post by **Roger O** » Wed 17 Mar 2010 00:57

Personally I think (and I'm not the only one - our boarding school headmaster - who was an British ethnicity expert - had a similar theory) that people of Anglo Saxon, Danish-Nordic and Celtic descendence look at life in three different ways.

(What's that got to do with anything Rog? I'll say if for you!!!!)

opas · Post by **opas** » Wed 17 Mar 2010 08:22

Serge wrote:
Santiago wrote:I think we have to consider how the country we live in gives us the opportunity to make money.

A Namibian could set up a small business and work really hard and really well, but he is never going to amass the amount of wealth of his Western counterparts.

I think sometimes we first-worlders get a little full of ourselves, no matter how we make our money. For 99% of people, the wealth we accumulate depends 95% upon the country we were born in and where we work. the other 5% is down to us as an individual.

Therefore we should not begrudge our governments for taxing us at 40 or 50% as without that environment all our efforts and entrepreneurial skills would be worth a handful of beans.

Is this a wind up or what you really believe?

Well heres a first, I agree with Serge on this one!

I am going for a lie down now

Serge · Post by **Serge** » Wed 17 Mar 2010 08:30

Roger O wrote: (What's that got to do with anything Rog? I'll say if for you!!!!)

So why post it then?

Roger O · Post by **Roger O** » Wed 17 Mar 2010 08:58

Because certain readers may possibly understand and agree?

john · Post by **john** » Wed 17 Mar 2010 09:10

Roger O wrote:Because certain readers may possibly understand and agree?

Sorry,Rog,You've lost me again.

Agree with what??

thumbelina · Post by **thumbelina** » Wed 17 Mar 2010 09:24

Serge and John!!!

Don't you know any better!!!!!!!??????????????????

Serge · Post by **Serge** » Wed 17 Mar 2010 09:26

thumbelina wrote:Serge and John!!!

Don't you know any better!!!!!!!??????????????????

Roger wrote:
Because certain readers may possibly understand and agree?

Ah, so you are the one ...............

Perhaps Rog would like to enlighten us all as to why he does not post all this 'special stuff' on any other forums ...................

Santiago · Post by **Santiago** » Wed 17 Mar 2010 10:44

It's not a windup, it's a challenge to look at things from a different perspective.

I don't like inheritance tax any more than anyone else but if you think of it as a tax in return for providing a society and econonomy where wealth increases, it makes some sense. It's also a way of levelling the scores.

All of you who talk about "coming from nothing" have the government to thank for encouraging that to happen.

For most people in Britain, for example, the taxable portion of their estate is pretty much the value of their house(s). Other forms of wealth can avoid inheritance tax.

I know a lot of people are awfully pleased with themselves about how much their house price has increased but we have to understand that the value of our property is determined by other people, not ourselves. If the socity we live discourages people from buying property, the value of ours will decrease very quickly. Did any of you see the program about Detroit?

Roger O · Post by **Roger O** » Wed 17 Mar 2010 10:51

Serge wrote: Perhaps Rog would like to enlighten us all as to why he does not post all this 'special stuff' on any other forums ...................

The answer to that, Serge, is in the first line of Santiago's comment above!

Serge · Post by **Serge** » Wed 17 Mar 2010 10:56

Roger O wrote:
Serge wrote: Perhaps Rog would like to enlighten us all as to why he does not post all this 'special stuff' on any other forums ...................
The answer to that, Serge, is in the first line of Santiago's comment above!

So, why don't you do it on other forums?

john · Post by **john** » Wed 17 Mar 2010 11:17

Santiago wrote:It's not a windup, it's a challenge to look at things from a different perspective.

I don't like inheritance tax any more than anyone else but if you think of it as a tax in return for providing a society and econonomy where wealth increases, it makes some sense. It's also a way of levelling the scores.

All of you who talk about "coming from nothing" have the government to thank for encouraging that to happen.

For most people in Britain, for example, the taxable portion of their estate is pretty much the value of their house(s). Other forms of wealth can avoid inheritance tax.

OK it's not a wind-up. So.........

Don't really know where to begin on this one. There are so many inaccuracies/half truths in the above,it's truly breathtaking.

The third paragraph is simply rubbish. It does not even warrant a comment.

It is true that there are devices where other forms of wealth can avoid IHT,but only up to a point.

So,shall we assume that you work hard,and sell lots of wine to Sainsbury's etc and make a pile in the next few years,Jon? You are seriously suggesting that in any given 12 mth period of your hard labour,you are happy to work up to and including July before you actuallly have any money to call your own.? Because ,in your utopian world, THAT is what we are talking about.

Different perspective? You can say that again!

opas · Post by **opas** » Wed 17 Mar 2010 11:43

Hear! hear!

I am on your wavelength John, but I couldn't have put it so eloquently.

Roger O · Post by **Roger O** » Wed 17 Mar 2010 14:09

Serge wrote:So, why don't you do it on other forums?

If you look through the threads of this link (including some with posts from me), you might just get an idea?
http://britishexpats.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=76
(Reminds me somewhat of how AD used to be back in the beginning!)

Serge · Post by **Serge** » Wed 17 Mar 2010 14:25

You misunderstand Rog.

You have actually answered a question and stayed on topic on that one, you also usually remain 'on topic' on LF and TF .................

So why all the thread diversions and other 'stuff' just on here?

mand · Post by **mand** » Wed 17 Mar 2010 17:49

i agree with thumerlina about what if your child was in prison etc...

my first encounter of the french inheritance system was after father in law died and mother in law had to pay inheritance tax on the furniture and house contents (the solicitor came around with a spoon counter to value everything) they had already paid tax on these when purchasing in the first place.

i agree it is nice that children are protected but it doesn't quite work for todays families where there are so many step families, step children are being raised to be treated as one family but when it comes to inheritance they are treated differently.
and therefore if 1 partner should have more children than the other the children won't get equal amounts...

Santiago · Post by **Santiago** » Wed 17 Mar 2010 17:51

I don't know what I find most insulting. Saying that I talk rubbish or suggesting that I would want to sell my wine to Sainsbury's

I'm not looking for an argument, just adding some food for thought.

Roger O · Post by **Roger O** » Wed 17 Mar 2010 17:59

Serge wrote:It's about Vets opening on Sundays Robert .

I usually don't start - just sometimes follows others' leads.

.... well there were a few times when I shoved the word football into
unlikely surroundings, but I gave up that rather childish habit!!

Anyway, these days I tend to keep more to BE, TF and LP for nice
straight line threads where I can be useful or get straight answers to
my own questions - which is, for me, what forums are all about.

Exception is, of course http://frenchrefugees.freeforums.org/index.php
so I visit that occasionally for special fun occasions..

Santiago · Post by **Santiago** » Wed 17 Mar 2010 22:39

mand,
Perhaps the inhertiance laws are there to try to encourage people to keep the family together and not pretend to be Ashley Cole

john · Post by **john** » Thu 18 Mar 2010 09:05

Santiago wrote:I don't know what I find most insulting. Saying that I talk rubbish or suggesting that I would want to sell my wine to Sainsbury's

I'm not looking for an argument, just adding some food for thought.

That's a fair point,Santiago,but if you make controversial statements (in the form of "food for thought"or whatever) you've got to back them up with some sort of evidence/rationale. Otherwise,you're laying yourself wide open to accusations of the insulting type you refer to.

Sainsbury's???? If I really wanted to insult you,I could have suggested you flog your vino to Morrisons,Asda or Kwik Save.

mand · Post by **mand** » Thu 18 Mar 2010 10:20

Santiago wrote:mand,
Perhaps the inhertiance laws are there to try to encourage people to keep the family together and not pretend to be Ashley Cole

ah but not everyone are on their second marriage because they couldn't keep it zipped...my friends husband died when her 2 kids were very small

Santiago · Post by **Santiago** » Thu 18 Mar 2010 20:16

Sorry Mand, I'm afraid I got a bit confused with your examples. I still think that in general the law is better than allowing all sorts of unfairness through wills.

thumbelina · Post by **thumbelina** » Thu 18 Mar 2010 20:22

But this law can GENERATE unfairness through wills and, as Mand rightly says, in todays society where there are more stepfamilies than ever, this can only be exacerbated.

In my opinion, the state should not be allowed to dictate to whom you leave your estate.

And the state should most certainly NOT get a cut of what you DO leave!

Eamon Avis · Post by **Eamon Avis** » Thu 18 Mar 2010 20:58

thumbelina wrote:But this law can GENERATE unfairness through wills and, as Mand rightly says, in todays society where there are more stepfamilies than ever, this can only be exacerbated.

In my opinion, the state should not be allowed to dictate to whom you leave your estate.

And the state should most certainly NOT get a cut of what you DO leave!

I agree with all three of your sentences Thumbers, but as Benjamin Franklin said "In this world nothing is certain but death and taxes."

Ian · Post by **Ian** » Thu 18 Mar 2010 23:33

Santiago has been the most reasonable of characters in this thread and would like to stand by his side.

[quote="Santiago"]It's not a windup, it's a challenge to look at things from a different perspective.

I don't like inheritance tax any more than anyone else but if you think of it as a tax in return for providing a society and econonomy where wealth increases, it makes some sense. It's also a way of levelling the scores.

All of you who talk about "coming from nothing" have the government to thank for encouraging that to happen.

For most people in Britain, for example, the taxable portion of their estate is pretty much the value of their house(s). Other forms of wealth can avoid inheritance tax.
[quote]

Here are the three myths about ineritance tax.

Myth One:, “Ordinary people” are forced to pay inheritance tax. In fact, only the richest 6 percent of estates pay a penny in inheritance tax. The remaining 94 percent of the population pay nothing. No economist disputes this. It is true that some people look nervously at their current house price and think it is close to the line for payment. But they fail to realise that virtually everyone spends their cash gradually in their old age, whittling down their estate to far below the taxable level.

Myth Two: Inheritance tax is a tax on “hard work” and “aspiration.” This argument is bizarre. By definition, you do no work for your inheritance. None. You could lie in bed all day, every day, doing nothing. And still inherit.

Myth Three: It’s a form of double taxation. I paid tax when I bought my house, why should I pay again when I die? This argument fails a logic test. You paid tax when you acquired your house; when another person (say, your child) acquires the house, they pay tax too, because they are – wait for it! – a different person.

The three myths are copied from http://www.johannhari.com/2007/10/10/my ... itance-tax
The figures in the article only apply to UK and are out of date a little but the principle of the three myths are still valid. As are privious comments in this thread that it it easy enough to give away your wealth while you are alive so why people get so worked up about what happens to it when you are dead seems most strange.

Connect with your social network account

Inheritance tax