T McGibney
Registered User
- Messages
- 7,425
We don't know what his situation is but the mere fact that he has 500k in spare funds doesn't mean that he's rich by any meaningful standard. And however much wealth he has , he can hardly bring it with him when he passes away, so it's quite reasonable to prudent to gift or bequeath it to a relative. Had he gotten seriously sick or incapacitated in his retirement, that money could well have been needed to finance nursing care. The happy accident that he didn't means now that he's comfortable, but he's not rich.I agree, and that's about the extent of my own net wealth. But that's not the case here.
We are talking about a situation where someone is giving away the value of a middling Dublin house in cash.
The uncle presumably has a place to live and an income for himself still.
I doubt the so called rich uncle gained his fortune via PAYE, so your assertion re:50% tax is just that, - an assertion. However that is his business and more luck to him.This thread serves to underline just why CAT is a horribly unfair tax. The uncle, we must presume, has acquired his fortune lawfully and has paid - if he's living in Ireland - stunningly high taxes on it already. He is now in the unfortunate position that, having already suffered marginal tax rates in excess of 50%, Revenue will get a further 33% bite out of almost everything he leaves behind him. Why shouldn't he be allowed to bequeath his own after-tax property to a favourite niece?
And CAT of course, is a tax for the little people. The truly rich will employ effective tax avoidance strategies to - quite lawfully - reduce or eliminate their beneficiaries' liability. It is regular folk who are fortunate enough to inherit modest sums or properties who get clobbered.
There is absolutely nothing in the OP to suggest such a thing!I doubt the so called rich uncle gained his fortune via PAYE
It's not an assertion, it's a presumption. According to the now seemingly forgotten, but never retracted, Taxpayers Charter, all taxpayers are entitled to a presumption of honesty from Revenue. Surely they are entitled to no less from us here on askaboutmoney?I doubt the so called rich uncle gained his fortune via PAYE, so your assertion re:50% tax is just that, - an assertion.
Indeed.However that is his business and more luck to him.
The "right thing" eh? There's all sorts of "right", there's legally right, morally right, efficiently right and expediently right. When it comes to taxes, these versions of "right" can be quite different from each other.She should do what you are meant to do, pay the tax due and move on. It was a windfall , she is very lucky, and hence do the right thing.
I would think >95% of the world's population would consider a person having half a million euros to spare to be rich. And I think a majority of Irish people would think the same.We don't know what his situation is but the mere fact that he has 500k in spare funds doesn't mean that he's rich by any meaningful standard.
Agreed. Consider the stress that people with mica or pyrite issues hanging over them have to deal with. It could become very stressful worrying about revenue coming knocking on the door. This gift horse should not become a curse for the OP's sister. She should get things in order.Whatever OP's sister does she must not ignore the situation as this will definitely not go away of it's own accord.
In order to avoid costing herself more than the tax she is due to pay in additional interest and penalties; the right thing to do is to pay whatever tax she is legally required to pay. Discussions around the morality of a tax and how do tax authorities know what they know is all well and good, until a Revenue intervention.It's not an assertion, it's a presumption. According to the now seemingly forgotten, but never retracted, Taxpayers Charter, all taxpayers are entitled to a presumption of honesty from Revenue. Surely they are entitled to no less from us here on askaboutmoney?
Indeed.
The "right thing" eh? There's all sorts of "right", there's legally right, morally right, efficiently right and expediently right. When it comes to taxes, these versions of "right" can be quite different from each other.
To get back on topic. The gift is subject to the Group C threshold of €16,250 with the balance taxable at 33%. That's a very big liability.I discovered later that she had also let slip she paid no gift tax on the €500k. My other sis pointed out to her that she's liable for about €150,000 tax. Her response was "shure what about it, how'd the tax man ever find out?"
A good percentage of the world's population would consider a person as rich if they had two cattle.I would think >95% of the world's population would consider a person having half a million euros to spare to be rich. And I think a majority of Irish people would think the same.
I would love to know what a 'meaningful standard' is .... but as this is off topic let's leave it there.A good percentage of the world's population would consider a person as rich if they had two cattle.
And then there's argumentum ad populum.
+ 1This is clearly criminal behaviour and should be called out as such.
I discovered later that she had also let slip she paid no gift tax on the €500k. My other sis pointed out to her that she's liable for about €150,000 tax.
A line once uttered by everyone on this list, I'm sureHer response was "shure what about it, how'd the tax man ever find out?"
Hmmm.I discovered later that she had also let slip she paid no gift tax on the €500k. My other sis pointed out to her that she's liable for about €150,000 tax. Her response was "shure what about it, how'd the tax man ever find out?"
If she used part of the sale proceeds to discharge the outstanding tax liability (together with any interest and penalties), yes.Would selling the house wipe her slate clean in regards revenue??
I met up with some family members over the Easter break, and congratulated my sister (44) on finally buying a house... and what a house.
She rarely drinks, but had one glass of prosecco too many. It turns out our uncle gifted her €500,000, and she put that with her savings and bought the house. No mortgage. Alas, it's completely unfurnished.
Anyway, I'm not surprised (or jealous). She's always been his favourite, he's wealthy and has no family of his own. Like my other sister said, she was going to inherit everything from him anyway; now she's just getting half of it early.
I discovered later that she had also let slip she paid no gift tax on the €500k. My other sis pointed out to her that she's liable for about €150,000 tax. Her response was "shure what about it, how'd the tax man ever find out?"
It's a fair point she makes. We all love her to bits, we're not jealous types... we're not going to report her. Had she not had just one (and we're talking just one) too many, none of would be none the wiser. I've never seen her tipsy like this before, I can't imagine it happening again, and I can't imagine her letting it slip to someone that would squeal on her.
However, I'm concerned that if the taxman did find out, she's get a whopping bill, but hasn't a penny to her name apart from a house worth a shade over half a mil.
Should I be concerned for her? Or is it right when she says, "how'd the tax man ever find out?"
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?