"Childless couples are being discriminated against when it comes to CAT"

T

T McGibney

Registered User
Messages
7,844
Moderator's note. I have moved these posts from the longer thread on CAT as the issue seems to be getting aired again

torblednam said:
Only a small minority of, by definition, quite wealthy people will ever receive a gift or inheritance of a scale that will mean they have to pay the tax.
Click to expand...
Yet if you inherit from an uncle or aunt, your tax free bequest won't extend to the price of a new car.

Where is the justice and equity in that?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
T McGibney said:
Yet if you inherit from an uncle or aunt, your tax free bequest won't extend to the price of a new car.

Where is the justice and equity in that?
Click to expand...
If one accepts Inheritance tax as a concept, it’s perfectly fair and just.

The State is differentiating between close family units and uncles/nephews/etc.

There are even provisions in the Taxes Acts which allow non-parents to be treated like parents in certain circumstances.
 
It is fundamentally different as you are treating two people completely different one who has offspring and one who does not.
 
Hardly. One sibling inherits €300,000 from a parent. No tax.
Another inherits the same sum from an aunt. Loses nearly a third of it.
Crazy state of affairs.
 
The Horseman said:
It is fundamentally different as you are treating two people completely different one who has offspring and one who does not.
Click to expand...
Isn't there something on the constitution about promoting the family unit? Seems the CAT exemptions are doing just that.
 
It will absolutely need to change in the coming years as our demographics change...there will be less families with children and less children per family so people will demand change to a tax that assumes the same family types that were formed 30 years ago and before. And also to correct the requirement of legal marriage that allows tax free transfers between committed partners.
 
The Horseman said:
It is fundamentally different as you are treating two people completely different one who has offspring and one who does not.
Click to expand...
You’re making the fatal mistake again. CAT is levied on the receiver not the giver. The person dying pays 0 CAT…because they are dead

So your statement should read, you are discriminating against people who don’t have parents vs those who do…fringe cases I expect
 
I am well aware how the tax is charged. Every child has a parent. Not every person is a parent. But every person is someone's child.
 
T McGibney said:
Hardly. One sibling inherits €300,000 from a parent. No tax.
Another inherits the same sum from an aunt. Loses nearly a third of it.
Crazy state of affairs.
Click to expand...
It’s pretty clearly about the relationship the recipient had to the donor. And the immediate family unit versus people outside of that. It makes perfect sense. Money given to my daughter is different to money given to my niece.
 
Gordon Gekko said:
It’s a tax on beneficiaries. So there is no child of someone who can’t have children who’s being discriminated against.
Click to expand...
It is discriminatory on the receiptent and the donor. A neice/nephew can be seen as a child of a childless couple. But because they are not their biological child they are discriminated against in terms of threshold limits.
 
It is very simple. Whether somebody has children or does not have children has ZERO impact on the CAT they pay. They are not being discriminated against.

There is no child to avail of the CAT threshold…but they don’t exist…so how can they be discriminated against.

You can’t break the link in your own head between CAT and the provider of the inheritance which is what’s leading you to your incorrect conclusion.

The only people discriminated against by inheritance tax are those without wealthy relatives. Nobody else.
 
The Horseman said:
Biologically they are and as such they are your child irrespective if you have no relationship with them.
Click to expand...
Are you suggesting that it is unfair for a child whose relationship with one or both parents has broken down to be liable for inheritance tax on the inheritance they won't get?
 
Leo said:
Are you suggesting that it is unfair for a child whose relationship with one or both parents has broken down to be liable for inheritance tax on the inheritance they won't get?
Click to expand...
How did you get that from my post? A child who does not have a relationship with their biological parent are legally entitled to a share of an estate if the person dies intestate and can also legally challenge a will all because they are a biological child of the deceased.
 
Brendan Burgess said:
The interviewer mentioned some campaign group sounding like "Edit"?
Click to expand...

Independent ministers seek changes to inheritance tax system for adults with no children

Campaign group argues tax thresholds applying to beneficiaries of estates of childless adults are ‘discriminatory’
www.irishtimes.com
A campaign group known as Edit (End Discrimination in Inheritance Tax) has been contacting politicians as part of efforts to bring about reforms to the capital acquisitions tax (CAT) regime, which it says is “grossly unfair”.
Click to expand...
I can't seem to find any website or Facebook page for them though.

Edit: some more info...

Childless Irish citizens face discriminatory inheritance tax legislation, campaigners say

EDIT campaigners have warned that inheritance tax laws in Ireland are discriminating against childless citizens, including LGBTQ+ folk.
gcn.ie

Instagram

www.instagram.com
See the comments - they don't seem to have a website or Facebook page - just an email address.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register