T McGibney
Registered User
- Messages
- 7,846
There is a school.of thought on this platform that the CAT reliefs are somehow inequitable and should be scrapped.
I disagree profoundly with this view, for the reasons I've set out above.
There is a school.of thought on this platform that the CAT reliefs are somehow inequitable and should be scrapped.CGT retirement relief is substantial and can eradicate liability in a lot of cases (mom & pop, €750k each = 1.5m if selling up or transferring to the eponymous niece/nephew, and the numbers go up to €10m each on a transfer to their kids).
Likewise, CAT relief reduces the taxable value to 10% of the actual value.
... barring horrendous tax planning, can be easily mitigated so that the army can be called off, no militating necessary
I don't see what that's got to do with this thread of conversation.There is a school.of thought on this platform that the CAT reliefs are somehow inequitable and should be scrapped.
I disagree profoundly with this view, for the reasons I've set out above.
I was merely responding to earlier comments made this morning and yesterday.I've read back through your last few posts and they're lurching all over the place, down various avenues - we're talking about things as they are but now you seem to be suggesting you're actually engaged in an argument that AFAIK hasn't even come up on this thread - I've no idea what argument you're actually trying to have / make.
FWIW, I agree with you as regards the necessity of those reliefs, but that's off-topic.
Don't you want rid of Business Relief?I am still missing the point.
1) If a business can't be given away or sold then it has no value.
2) If the business has value and is given away, the beneficiary gets Business Relief from CAT
No. The obvious answer here is that State should stop wasting so much money.It would be great if much lower taxes were levied on both but as long as the State keeps wasting so much money we have to pay high taxes. For me those taxes should not fall so heavily on work and so lightly on wealth, particularly inherited wealth
So you argue on one hand for Business Relief and also for its effective scrapping?We have gone completely off topic, but yes, I have made it clear that Business Relief and Agricultural Relief should be CAT deferred.
Well then how is it equitable on families with one child versus families with three children?@The Horseman your post demonstrates aptly how the whole discourse gets skewed by the slanting of it as being in any way related to the disponer - it's a tax on the recipient!
Ah here!So you argue on one hand for Business Relief and also for its effective scrapping?
You really aren't getting it Horsey, it's a tax on INDIVIDUALS, on the things they receive.Well then how is it equitable on families with one child versus families with three children?
One child can inherit €400k whereas three children can inherit €1.2m.
A fairer mechanism is to say to the disposer you have a threshold of €400k for life to dispose of how you see fit. Not €400k per child but a lifetime limit of a tax free inheritance limit of the €400k any value over the €400k then goes into a standard threshold irrespective of who the inheriter is.
Which wasn't the case here, at all.acknowledging the existence of the relief for the purpose of a logical exercise,
Pot, kettle.desperately scrambling for anything, however obtuse, to fire back
I don't think anyone reading this thread will be confused by, or unclear about, what my position is in any of my posts.Pot, kettle.
A fairer mechanism is to say to the disposer you have a threshold of €400k for life
With the greatest respect it is you who is not willing to engage in a discussion on the merits of the existing tax regime.You really aren't getting it Horsey, it's a tax on INDIVIDUALS, on the things they receive.
That's fine for the will, but doesn't address inter vivos transfers at all, which is where business & farm successions are substantial issues.Effectively that is what they do in some countries by putting a tax on the estate and not on the beneficiary.
But yours is an interesting variation. A person can give or bequest in their will up to a total of €400k tax free. After that, their estate is taxed at 33%
That's fine for the will, but doesn't address inter vivos transfers at all,
And the value generated by the business is based on undocumented processes, many of which exist only in the subconscious of the owners.the sweat of the owner(s) and is simply not an attractive prospect for a third party.
‘Fairer’ here is clearly subjective. I don’t have any issue with the proposal personally but you would have absolute uproar as parents of larger families have their ability to provide for their children absolutely hammered by the changes relative to small families. They will clearly consider that horribly unfair.A fairer mechanism is to say to the disposer you have a threshold of €400k for life to dispose of how you see
I would've thought that it's more due to the changes in society since the days when family butchers were financially successful. People don't habitually do their food shopping in multiple businesses nowadaysAnd I think it's major factor why the family butcher for example is becoming an endangered species.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?