Alan Shatter's campaign to abolish Inheritance Tax

Status
Not open for further replies.
During the meeting he (Alan Shatter) described the tax as a “resentment tax” favoured by people who were “jealous” of those who had “lawfully accumulated assets”.
He said it “was an “invention of the 1970s ... a sort of socialist dogma that there was something wrong that families should ... provide some financial assistance to other members of their family”.

Can't fault him there as agree wholeheartedly.
 
Last edited:
It’s bonkers that we tax people’s work at a marginal rate of 52% and often the gifts/windfalls they receive at 0%.

I would put the CAT rate at 20% with a threshold of €50k for Group A. Broader base, lower rate.

I have never run for office and never will on this ticket!
 
Knuttell said:
You're mixing up your taxes there Brendan. Please don't conflate the issue.
Click to expand...
The two issued are intrinsically linked. Taxing earned income at a higher rate than unearned income is, to me, morally abhorrent. If we want a society built on principles such as equality of opportunity then lower taxes on work and higher taxed on unearned income and inherited wealth are what we should be aiming for.
 
Brendan Burgess said:
Not at all.
The same principles apply.

People who are not impacted much by a tax think that it should be higher while those paying it think that it should be lower.
Click to expand...
I'll be impacted significantly by inheritance tax and I think it should be increased but taxes on work should be reduced by a corresponding amount.

Brendan Burgess said:
It applies to Income Tax just as much as it applies to Capitals Acquisition Tax.
Click to expand...
 
Capital transfers aren't even income.
 
Purple said:
I'll be impacted significantly by inheritance tax and I think it should be increased but taxes on work should be reduced by a corresponding amount.
Click to expand...
Increases in capital tax rates inevitably mean lower capital tax revenues.

When CAT & CGT rates were slashed in the late 1990s, CAT & CGT revenues boomed.

And if even a big increase in CAT & CGT revenues is returned to taxpayers in the form of an income tax cut (pigs will fly first) the amount of the cut will be barely noticeable, given the huge disconnect in scale between capital tax revenues and income tax revenues.
 
I have never really understood the expression "unearned income".

Isn't all income taxed in Ireland at the same rates whether it is from a salary or rent or dividends? ( Some exceptions for unit linked funds.)
 
Brendan Burgess said:
I have never really understood the expression "unearned income".

Isn't all income taxed in Ireland at the same rates whether it is from a salary or rent or dividends? ( Some exceptions for unit linked funds.)
Click to expand...
No, rental and investment income is taxed punitively with all sorts of minor passive-aggressive provisions that cumulatively drive up the effective rate.
 
T McGibney said:
Increases in capital tax rates inevitably mean lower capital tax revenues.
Click to expand...

I think that this is the problem. Increasing the rate of CGT and CAT won't make that much difference even if it is fairer.

However, I would favour leaving the rates the same at 33% but getting rid of all the exemptions.

1) The disappearance of capital gains on death makes no sense - it should be scrapped. That would increase the reveue.
2) Business and Agricultural Relief should become a deferral rather than a huge reduction in liability.
 
Brendan Burgess said:
2) Business and Agricultural Relief should become a deferral rather than a huge reduction in liability.
Click to expand...
So if a business person or farmer dies, their successor gets lumbered with a huge tax deferral that will sometime have to be paid?

How would that work? Who in their right mind is ever going to advance business capital investment or working capital finance to a such a successor whose entire collateral is effectively mortgaged to the State?

Is the failure rate in second- and third- generation firms in this country not bad enough as it is?

Many in this country and many on this site are almost obsessed with finding new and ingenious ways to tax others (and it's always others) as long and as hard as possible, while remaining blind to the general inefficacy of public expenditure generally and public expenditure waste in particular.
 
The point of Agricultural Relief and Business Property Relief is to keep family businesses intact and to protect employment. There should be further changes to stop non-farmers buying agricultural property solely with a view to pushing value through the relief inappropriately.

I think €500,000 is about the right level for the Parent/Child threshold. I do struggle with the fact that the State takes 52% of any incremental income I earn (i.e. the majority) and then takes interest in what I do with my clean, after tax money. Interestingly, gifts are not taxable in the UK.
 
Brendan Burgess said:
I have never really understood the expression "unearned income".

Isn't all income taxed in Ireland at the same rates whether it is from a salary or rent or dividends? ( Some exceptions for unit linked funds.)
Click to expand...
It depends on how you define income. For me someone giving me a big lump of cash is income. If I get it by working the State takes half of it. If I get it be inheriting it (not earning it) then the State doesn't take any of it.
 
I agree, and if the owners derive an income from the business they pay tax on it.
 
Purple said:
If I get a quarter of a million euro in cash from an inheritance from a parent it's income in everything but name. If I earn the same amount of money by working the marginal tax rate is 52%. I find that inequitable.
Click to expand...
It's clearly not income. It's a capital transfer. Income enhances wealth. Capital transfers dissipate it.

Look up any dictionary.
 
Most peoples wealth in this country was gained through property price appreciation. That isn't after tax income, that's just capital appreciation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Menu
Log in
Register