CAT should be applied to transfers of businesses and farms.

Bluefin

Registered User
Messages
164
As someone who lives in a rural area I'm amazed how any farmer purchasing land today can manage to make a return on the cost of land.. The only way I believe that this is possible at all is that they are taking a very long investment perspective.. Generational and not just the next one..
 

24601

Registered User
Messages
373
Inheritance tax is a nonsense. Why should tax be charged on an asset just because a person dies.

Its origins in feudal law probably spring from the fact that the heir was vulnerable at the time of inheritance and needed the Kings support to succeed, so the King took advantage to extract a cut. We should be past this.

Any asset property or business should be taxed appropriately annually. A meaningful property tax each year and no sudden extra tax on he death of the owner. Similarly a business should pay tax appropriately each year and not be subject to a sudden one-off tax on death.

Tying yourself in knots to propose a better way of levying a tax which is inherently ridiculous is a waste of time.

Ah yes, the tax system should definitely be set up to facilitate the unfettered transfer of wealth intergenerationally. That won't have any negative consequences for society at all.
 

Purple

Registered User
Messages
13,094
Ah yes, the tax system should definitely be set up to facilitate the unfettered transfer of wealth intergenerationally. That won't have any negative consequences for society at all.
If there was a meaningful wealth tax, which accrued with interest and was paid from their estate upon their death if the person didn't have income to pay it, then there is an argument for no inheritance tax.
 

Brendan Burgess

Founder
Messages
48,379
Hi Purple

Most businesses are profitable in that they generate a profit in excess of market salaries paid to the owners. If they weren't, it would make sense for the owners to sell the assets, close the business and get a salary elsewhere.

A business is usually valued on the basis of a multiple of its profits. But the break-up basis may be higher.

Most business owners I know have taken profits from their companies on top of their salaries.

And I know other businesses which have substantial property which would be better off if they rented it out.

So if Daddy gives Sonny a business in a warehouse worth €3m, are you saying that there should be no CAT on it? He can sell it after 6 years for €3m and pay nothing?

It seems wrong to me.

Brendan
 

Brendan Burgess

Founder
Messages
48,379
Farming is a problematic business for most forms of taxation.

No one would go into farming as a business. I wouldn't pay €14,000 an acre for 100 acres in County Kildare. Stock it up and employ a farm manager to run it.

So based on a multiple of profits, it's probably worth nothing.

If I inherit a farm worth €1.4m I don't think I should get it free of CAT. Maybe defer the CAT indefinitely. When I sell it, I pay 33% of it in CAT. If I pass it on to my son, he pays no CAT until he sells it.

Brendan
 

Peanuts20

Registered User
Messages
719
Firstly, this is never going to happen, any rural TD who supports this would be booted out of office the next time around. And rightly so

It's spectacularly unfair on someone who may have worked in the business or farm all of their life, paid their taxes on their income and then to be suddenly hit with a 2% tax on the value of the assets in a business that they may have been involved in since childhood. Utter clueless nonsense is the only way to describe a proposal like this
 

Purple

Registered User
Messages
13,094
Hi Purple

Most businesses are profitable in that they generate a profit in excess of market salaries paid to the owners. If they weren't, it would make sense for the owners to sell the assets, close the business and get a salary elsewhere.

A business is usually valued on the basis of a multiple of its profits. But the break-up basis may be higher.

Most business owners I know have taken profits from their companies on top of their salaries.

And I know other businesses which have substantial property which would be better off if they rented it out.

So if Daddy gives Sonny a business in a warehouse worth €3m, are you saying that there should be no CAT on it? He can sell it after 6 years for €3m and pay nothing?

It seems wrong to me.

Brendan
If sonny has worked in the business for more than 5 years and will continue to do so, then the current Part 12 Business Relief should apply. Family members who do not work in the business should not get any relief. In other words the same rules should apply for family members that apply for non-family members (Section 12.5.2.2 of this).
 

Brendan Burgess

Founder
Messages
48,379
That is where we disagree.

I don't see why someone working in a business should be able to get a €3m gift free of tax.

Brendan
 

Baby boomer

Registered User
Messages
739
As someone who lives in a rural area I'm amazed how any farmer purchasing land today can manage to make a return on the cost of land.. The only way I believe that this is possible at all is that they are taking a very long investment perspective.. Generational and not just the next one..
Three ways to make a good return.
1. Intensive dairy on good land.
2. Harvest subsidies like single farm payment.
3. Harvest building sites.
 

cremeegg

Registered User
Messages
3,891
Farming is a problematic business for most forms of taxation.

No one would go into farming as a business. I wouldn't pay €14,000 an acre for 100 acres in County Kildare. Stock it up and employ a farm manager to run it.

So based on a multiple of profits, it's probably worth nothing.

If I inherit a farm worth €1.4m I don't think I should get it free of CAT. Maybe defer the CAT indefinitely. When I sell it, I pay 33% of it in CAT. If I pass it on to my son, he pays no CAT until he sells it.

Brendan
If you own a farm and cannot make a profit which represents a reasonable return on the value of the land and your work, you should sell it otherwise you are just hoarding land an depriving society of its potential contribution.
 

Zenith63

Registered User
Messages
1,097
Then most businesses would be sold after each generation to pay the tax.
It would be interesting to see how many 'real' businesses (excluding farms) are passed down a generation these days and how many are just tax planning structures. Transfers of 'real' businesses don't seem at all common any more. I'd be keen for this exemption to be restructured.

Having said that even basic estate planning would have you put the shares of any business you setup directly in your children's names from day one to side-step CAT entirely.
 
Last edited:

Purple

Registered User
Messages
13,094
It would be interesting to see how many 'real' businesses (excluding farms) are passed down a generation these days and how many are just tax planning structures. Transfers of 'real' businesses don't seem at all common any more. I'd be keen for this exemption to be restructured.
Good point.
Having said that even basic estate planning would have you put the shares of any business you setup directly in your children's names from day one to side-step CAT entirely.
Really?
 

Brendan Burgess

Founder
Messages
48,379
Having said that even basic estate planning would have you put the shares of any business you setup directly in your children's names from day one to side-step CAT entirely.

Hi Zenith

Most people setting up a business do so to earn a living for themselves. They are not thinking of their children. Even if they were thinking of their children, they would want to retain control of the business themselves, so they should not let the CAT wag the dog. They might not have children when they are setting up their business.

But is there a tax planning angle for a wealthy person to buy a business with money they don't need and gift it to their children (or friends.)?

What conditions would they need to comply with?
1) If it's a gift the donor would have had to own it for 5 years
2) The recipient must retain ownership for 6 years.

Neither the donor nor the recipient is required to work in the business.

So I could buy a building with a coffee shop in it. Employ someone to run it. Gift it to my son after 5 years. He can sell it after 6 years. No CAT.

Brendan
 

Zenith63

Registered User
Messages
1,097
Most people setting up a business do so to earn a living for themselves. They are not thinking of their children. Even if they were thinking of their children, they would want to retain control of the business themselves, so they should not let the CAT wag the dog. They might not have children when they are setting up their business.
I’m not saying most businesses are setup this way of course, but in my experience it is quite common.

The issue of control is easily resolved, but most people don’t think of their young child as ever being issue in controlling their small business. We’re not talking about the Sacklers here :).

As for the question of income, the salary is still paid to the parent and should the company be sold, a structure of child-to-parent loans and the Small Gift Exemption can be used such that the parent has use of the money in their lifetime with no CAT issues and acts has a handy tax planning tool at inheritance time. Nothing illegal or especially aggressive required.

Analysis of the RBO data would probably be interesting to see how widespread this is.
 
Last edited:

T McGibney

Registered User
Messages
4,579
So I could buy a building with a coffee shop in it. Employ someone to run it. Gift it to my son after 5 years. He can sell it after 6 years. No CAT.
This is only true (more accurately half-true) in theory Brendan. In practice it's massively risky. You'll end up not only tying up a large capital sum in an illiquid asset, but also running a complicated going concern business (with its own working capital requirements), for all of 11 years, just to save CAT.

The more I think about it, the crazier it appears. You would probably lose your shirt on it.
 

Brendan Burgess

Founder
Messages
48,379
Hi Tommy

Fair points.

Is it the coffee shop and property combination which is risky or the whole idea?

Do people acquire or set up businesses as part of Estate Planning or is it just impractical because of the long-term nature of it.

But if I had a son who wanted to set up a business. I could buy an existing business and hire him to work in it, and give it to him after 5 years.

Brendan
 

T McGibney

Registered User
Messages
4,579
Is it the coffee shop and property combination which is risky or the whole idea?
Hi Brendan

Both, but the whole idea basically. It makes no sense to run any business for 11 years to obtain a tax advantage, no matter how lucrative.
Do people acquire or set up businesses as part of Estate Planning or is it just impractical because of the long-term nature of it.
I suspect it's rare enough. Maybe some do in specific sectors where they already have industry expertise , but I'd guess that almost every long-term plan like this turns out to be impractical.
But if I had a son who wanted to set up a business. I could buy an existing business and hire him to work in it, and give it to him after 5 years.
You could in theory, but it would be far less risky and better for everyone to let him live his own life and make his own successes and mistakes. Nobody who wants to go into business in their own right would relish being stuck under a parent's thumb and subject to their whims for another 5 years. And a lot can happen in 5 years.
 

NoRegretsCoyote

Registered User
Messages
4,584
A business is usually valued on the basis of a multiple of its profits. But the break-up basis may be higher.
The issue is that farms attract EU and national subsidies of around €1.5 billion a year. They are to a large extent area-based payments, so once you can show that you have X hectares being farmed you get a direct payment. Non-dairy cattle farming is not very labour intensive and you can combine it quite easily with other work (dairy and tillage less so).

By now the majority of farms in Ireland are part time and in effect it is a very well subsidised hobby. You can look at CSO agricultural accounts. Farm output less non-labour inputs (net value added at basic prices) is in most years less than the income from subsidies. When you take out paid help farmers make about twice as much in subsidies as they do in profits on their farm activity.

In many ways farming is more passive than active income. The land is doing more work than the farmer is, mainly by attracting subsidies. If the subsidies disappeared a lot of land values outside dairy areas would collapse.

I can see a case for lower inheritance taxes on large, intensive farms that are essentially family businesses and worked intensively. For the hobbyists out there - and there are many - the inheritance tax regime is way too low.
 

T McGibney

Registered User
Messages
4,579
The issue is that farms attract EU and national subsidies of around €1.5 billion a year. They are to a large extent area-based payments, so once you can show that you have X hectares being farmed you get a direct payment. Non-dairy cattle farming is not very labour intensive and you can combine it quite easily with other work (dairy and tillage less so).

By now the majority of farms in Ireland are part time and in effect it is a very well subsidised hobby. You can look at CSO agricultural accounts. Farm output less non-labour inputs (net value added at basic prices) is in most years less than the income from subsidies. When you take out paid help farmers make about twice as much in subsidies as they do in profits on their farm activity.

In many ways farming is more passive than active income. The land is doing more work than the farmer is, mainly by attracting subsidies. If the subsidies disappeared a lot of land values outside dairy areas would collapse.

I can see a case for lower inheritance taxes on large, intensive farms that are essentially family businesses and worked intensively. For the hobbyists out there - and there are many - the inheritance tax regime is way too low.
Massive generalisations here, too many to list individually.

Try running your small part-time farm as you would a hobby in the true sense of the word and you'll soon find yourself in non-compliance with a full battery of regulations and therefore no longer eligible for your subsidy payment.
 
Top