With all respect, it is a crazy suggestion.
It would bring us back to the days when you had to work for 30 years in daddy's business or farm before you got to own it, and you had 60 year olds working in family firms with their lives on hold until their 85-90 year old parents passed away. You could call this the Prince Charles Syndrome.
It would also make it virtually impossible for any family business to ever afford to transfer its ownership within the family to the next generation, as most firms have their equity tied up in working capital or generally illiquid assets.
And that's before we even start thinking about how a 60% inheritance tax rate would work for homes and other inherited property, which would be in effect confiscated by the State on death. How many people have got the equivalent of 60% of the value of their parents' home in ready cash?
Yes, instead of confiscating it when they are alive through taxation.that's before we even start thinking about how a 60% inheritance tax rate would work for homes and other inherited property, which would be in effect confiscated by the State on death.
Sorry, if you're not sold on the idea yourself, its only a waste of time asking the rest of us to debate it
Why?
It sounds like a good idea to me but I haven't thought it through enough to say it's sound.
It does seem unfair that some people can live in comfort and riches because their parents, grandparents or great grandparents (etc) were clever/industrious/lucky/hardworking.
Why? I hate inheritance tax, absolutely hate it. If I choose to work hard all my life and want to then leave the fruits of my labour to my children why should the government of the day get a chunk of that? I earned it, I paid my tax along the way, it's mine now to pass on as I see fit as far as I'm concerned.
Why should your grandchildren start life well off because you worked hard?
I find that bizarre logic Purple. If I choose to give my grandchildren a headstart in life that is my choice. I would be paying tax as I earn so the money I save for my grandchildren is already nett of tax. Why should it be taxed a second time?Why should your grandchildren start life well off because you worked hard?
Absolutely not. We need new ideas. No one has a monopoly of ideas. When people put forward ideas, they should be open to discussion. The pros and the cons. I have come up with many ideas. After analysis, some of them have turned out not to be workable. Others have been good ideas and have worked. Often an idea which turns out to be impractical sparks a variation which turns out to be practical.Sorry, if you're not sold on the idea yourself, its only a waste of time asking the rest of us to debate it
Society is very unfair. It is not right that someone born in Foxrock should get a gift of a new car when they are 18 and a nice apartment when they are 21 while someone born in inner city Dublin will probably be in a low paid job all their life. Someone born in Foxrock is probably going to have a huge advantage in terms of education and job contacts anyway. Why should this advantage be furthered by them getting huge gifts and legacies?Many people have a problem with inequality in society. One of the major reasons that they cite it an uneven distribution of wealth.
These administrative difficulties should not prevent a good idea from being implemented.It would also make it virtually impossible for any family business to ever afford to transfer its ownership within the family to the next generation, as most firms have their equity tied up in working capital or generally illiquid assets.
I find that bizarre logic Purple. If I choose to give my grandchildren a headstart in life that is my choice. I would be paying tax as I earn so the money I save for my grandchildren is already nett of tax. Why should it be taxed a second time?
It is being taxed twice. If you earn money as a PAYE worker and save 100K that is after tax income. If you leave the 100K to your child you are proposing it be taxed so that's a second tax.
The idea is to remove the incentive to leave lots of money to your children or grandchildren. Instead the big benefit you could give them is a good education and skills. They would start off on a more even playing field and would retain a greater proportion of their own efforts during their lives. The net result would be a more productive and egalitarian society due to more equality of opportunity.What would be the incentive for people to save and do their best for their children or grandchildren's future?
I'm not proposing that it be taxed a second time. Read my first post again.
Yes you are Purple - unless you can suggest how current assets/savings (that have already been earned nett of current income tax rates) can be made exempt from an increase in inheritance tax!
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?