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

It is becoming more of an issue because wealth for many is in their house and the relatives see €€€€ when they die.

Even 40 years ago houses were not valued that much compared to income so most felt inheriting an old house from a relative was a bit of a headache. Many in the countryside just fell into disuse. But nowadays they keep going up in value and for those who inherits them it can have a life changing impact on their lives.

Families are getting smaller. So a €500K house sold and split between 5 siblings was a small wave, helping pay down a mortgage or similar, but when the current young adult inherit it will be 1 or 2 siblings so they inherit a greater amount and it will generate a greater wave in their lives.

And people are living longer, and non familial bonds develop and grow. Nieces and nephews do spend many years helping care for older aunts and uncles, checking on them, meals, hospital appointments, the whole 9 yards. In most cases a relative steps into help. And if they inherit why are they penalised 33% on a house inheritance compared to if they were a child.

Plus many countries have no inheritance tax. I think revenue say not many people are impacted by inheritance tax in Ireland in any given year, so is it a big deal?

And I would think some parents would like to give a greater tax free inheritance to grandchildren than children. If people are living into their 80’s on average the children are in their 50’s and 60’s and are probably well established in their own houses and careers whereas their kids in their 20’s and 30’s may find a tax free inheritance just what they need for education, housing, family needs.

There is the favoured nephew/niece scheme in agriculture, but other than that no indication that family now is very different from family in the past.
 
I think revenue say not many people are impacted by inheritance tax in Ireland in any given year, so is it a big deal?

I think that the Exchequer took in €850 million last year.

It would be a lot more if we got rid of the exemptions, so yes, it's a big deal.

A big enough deal for politicians to argue that childless couples are being discriminated against.
 
Say two people, one with children and wealth accumulated largely through increased property prices, wealth accumulation that has never been taxed, and this wealth can be passed almost tax free to younger generation the while another with no children and wealth accumulated through taxed work but this wealth will be further heavily taxed when passed to anyone. There is no equality of treatment in this.
 
There is no equality of treatment in this.
Neither person will pay any inheritance tax. It is one of the most bizarre logical flaws that pervades society that CAT is at all an issue for a person who doesn’t pay it. Do you get extremely exercised by the marginal income tax rate of a shop owner when you buy something?

My wife’s parents are seperated. Both will leave her > €400k. The first will to die will ‘get to’ leave €400k tax free. The second will leave €0 tax free. Is the second to die being discriminated against?
No because they won’t have a clue about the status of my wifes CAT A allowance (they will also be dead…)
 
Last edited:
Exchequer took in €850 million last year.
Beyond the financial side. There is also the ‘equality’ side. Is it desirable in society for some people to receive large untaxed sums for no reason. When people have to compete with their peers for finite resources (eg housing). I’d see it as highly undesirable for society.
 
That’s a great argument for wealth tax (AKA property tax) but a lousy argument against changing inheritance tax.
 
Is it desirable in society for some people to receive large untaxed sums for no reason.

Not sure that they are receiving it for no reason.

But I would not introduce a tax which does not raise much money just for equality.

In theory, I would favour a wealth tax, but in practice, it would raise so little and would cost so much to administer and would result in assets being moved abroad, that I would not favour it.
 
I’m going to benefit from inheritances from by parents, as will my partner from her father. It will be life changing amounts of money. I think it would be appalling if it wasn’t taxed.

I want to live in a country and a society which places equality of opportunity at the heart of our values. Taxing wealth people accumulate through work more than that which they gain through inheritance is as far away from that principle as you can get.
 
Not sure that they are receiving it for no reason.
I’d have thought the number of children who meaningfully contribute to the wealth of their parents is tiny. If they have (through family business etc.) they should be appropriately compensated through income or equity.
But I would not introduce a tax which does not raise much money just for equality.
A fair personal preference. I value a meritocracy in society extremely highly but that’s subjective.
 
The only people who seem to care about CAT are older people (who won’t pay it). I’ve never heard a person under 40 even mention it.
Maybe we should just tell people on their death beds that inheritance tax has been abolished.
They can pass away happy and not like they’ll ever know.
 
I’m going to benefit from inheritances from by parents, as will my partner from her father. It will be life changing amounts of money. I think it would be appalling if it wasn’t taxed.

Just like your parents are going to pass some wealth to you, possibly tax free, why should a non-parent not be allowed give a gift or leave an inheritance to someone of their choice, with the same tax consequences ?
 
The tax consequences are the same for parent and non-parent, that has been pointed out on a number of occasions in this thread already.

if a parent wishes to give their child a present of a house deposit of say €400K, the parent gives a present of €400K

If a non-parent wishes to give someone a present of house deposit of €400K, they will have to give them almost €600K to achieve the same result
 

And if a parent wants to give someone else's child a present of a house deposit of €400K, they will have to give them almost €600K, exactly the same as the non-parent.
 
And if a parent wants to give someone else's child a present of a house deposit of €400K, they will have to give them almost €600K, exactly the same as the non-parent.

Surely the logical solution here is for that parent to adopt that particular child before giving him or her that €400K?

Or am I missing something?
 
It never ceases to amaze me when others want to force on people what they think should happen.

If people are against levelling the playing field between those who do and don't have children. Then level the playing field and then if you either give or receive a tax free inheritance then pay the equivalent of the tax figure as if the donor or recipient was part of category B rather than A rather than forcing others who are unfairly penalised for being childless for whatever reason.