iPhone 7 review: a range of small updates add up to an excellent phone
Good to see the Government tackling this issue, but if Inheritance tax is to be used to pay for the care in England, will that mean there will be a different tax policy for Scots - or will people living up here be subsidising (once again, some might say!!!) the poor Southern folk because their Inheritance tax will go up as well, yet only those in England will benefit?
Or will Westminster increase the grants to Scotland to cover this anomaly?
Or will Inheritance Tax threshold be held at the same level as it is now in Scotland, so only the English pay for their own improvements?
Oh, the complications!
Don't know if this is relevant or not. But I like it.
In church I heard a lady in the pew next to me saying a prayer. It was so sweet and sincere that I just had to share with you.
Dear Lord, This has been a tough two or three years. You have taken my favourite actor Patrick Swayze. My favourite musician Michael Jackson. My favourite Blues Singer Amy Winehouse. My favourite actress Elizabeth Taylor. And now my favourite singer Whitney Houston. I just wanted you to know that my favourite politicians are Ed Miliband, David Cameron, Nick Clegg and Ed Balls.
The rumour, and it is only that at present, is that there will be no future increases in inheritance tax exemption so that, over time, more estates will become taxable.
The cost of residential care is always portrayed as a burden on the elderly whereas, in a lot of cases, it simply reduces the inheritance of offspring who are already pretty well set up.
I think it is another example of the effect of the ridiculous hysteria about means testing. Because it is politically difficult to say, if you can afford it - pay, we seem to be heading for a situation where lower income families will be subsidising the better off.
If people in their 20's and 30's have to plan ahead for their care costs in the future then, in order to put aside savings for their old-age, the option of starting a family will be a 'non-starter'.[It costs thousands of pounds per year to raise a child].
So, I reckon compulsory sterilzation [for men and women aged 25+ ] would help to reduce the burden on the poorer sections of society, long-term ... and help the government 'balance the books', in no time at all.
But leaving the exemption as it is will still generate more tax income - this presumably meant to subsidise England care costs- so my question re. the unfairness to Scots taxpayers is still relevant, unless there is to be increases in the funds given to Scotland.
George O. must have had a dramatic change of mind from his position when he was wanting to announce that Inheritance tax would only start at a million pounds (pre-election, naturally!).
"where lower income families will be subsidising the better off."
Indeed there will be many contributors on here who would welcome that - "Let all those single mothers pay more", I can hear the cries already!!
Aitchbee you have it all wrong, you should have said that unless you have money saved for your old age then it should be compulsory euthanasia. We have it too good in this country, spend all your life working and unless you have the money to pay for care you should just be put down.
Why waste money it on care homes after you become too frail to work.
Think of the benefits, no pensions to pay out, you could even get the state to pay for the euthanasia and cremation instead of pension.
And as fourm member has said why should your offspring get any money from your hard work, money grabbing kids should fend for themselves.
Sorry just remembered fourm member doesn't have children.
How about £75,000.00 for walking through the door marked Soylent Green!
'money grabbing kids should fend for themselves.'
The point is those 'money-grabbing kids' have fended for themselves. Increasingly, children are reaching close to retirement age before their parents die.
They've made their way in the world and funded their children's education. Meanwhile, their parents are sitting on a property worth £500k plus.
Now, if those parents need residential care, how do you say the cost should be met?
I don't know how many families are in this situation but my point was that the fear of means testing, because it is seen as an attack on the poor, prevents us finding out.
fourm member I do not know where you live but there is not many people sitting on 500K, and as for children and wanting to leave money to them they are the reason I have worked and saved all these years.
I did not envisage that I would work, forgo holidays, scrimp, save, pay tax all my life so that at the one time in my life I may need help from the state I am told sod off no help for you.
I may as well mortgage the house up to the hilt, spend every thing on either the kids the wife or myself and have no capital left.
Then the state will have to keep me the same as it would do for some one who hasn't saved a penny all their life and just spent every penny they were given.
Perhaps a better solution might just be to do away with the Inheritance Tax Allowance altogether.
That way everybody, on their demise, would have the necessary tax taken directly from whatever they leave, be it ten quid or ten million.
That would simplify the tax system considerably, which is what the government says it wants to do.
This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.