Contact Forum Editor

Send an email to our Forum Editor:

PLEASE NOTE: Your name is used only to let the Forum Editor know who sent the message. Both your name and email address will not be used for any other purpose.

Speakers Corner

It's free to register, to post a question or to start / join a discussion

View Forum Rules | Contact Forum Editor

 

Social Care and Inheritance Tax.

« previous 1 2 4

spider9
Resolved

Likes # 0

Posted February 10, 2013 at 2:48PM

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!

Social care

Like this post
spuds

Likes # 0

Posted February 11, 2013 at 2:03PM

spider9

The point I was possibly trying to make,and perhaps not making it very clear, was when funds, equity start to run out if not extremely well managed. And that is the key words 'well managed', because no matter what I thought previously, or was advised to do, its just isn't coming to form or near expectations.

No matter what I attempt now, it always seems to be a case of catch 22, or "you don't fit the criteria". And this just doesn't apply to me solely, because there are many others in the same trap or bewilderment.

Throughout my working life, I paid what was due, and a little more beside. Now it would appear in retirement, I am being told I have to possibly pay even more, to cover other peoples or government shortfalls?.

How many people who are due to retire, or have retired, have had to continue work, because they would not manage otherwise. These are people who have paid into the system, and are still having to. Because the system is no longer providing for their needs?.

The other point you raised, which I find rather confusing,"It wasn't, presumably, so that your kids (who, if they follow your attitude,would already be planning their retirement) could inherit your savings". Can you clarify this?.

Like this post
spider9

Likes # 0

Posted February 11, 2013 at 2:15PM

Quickbeam

The simple point I was making to you was that your 'if only I'd known' premise is daft - we would all be OK if everyone had such insight!

Like this post
spider9

Likes # 0

Posted February 11, 2013 at 2:19PM

Spuds

You had said your 'preparations' were so that you would not be a burden - not that you were intending to pass on to your kids - so you did just that.

No problem, you are where you intended to be, I presume?

Like this post
bumpkin

Likes # 0

Posted February 11, 2013 at 6:56PM

Consider a completely different way of imposing Inheritance Tax if we must have it at all. Instead of a blanket starting point figure for everyone £320k I think. Why not a percentage system i.e. first 60% (Example only) is tax free and tax is paid on the remainder. This would automatically account for the huge differences in property values throughout the country. Clearly it could not be that simple, just an idea to maybe create a fairer system.

Like this post

« previous 1 2 4

Reply to this topic

This thread has been locked.



Check out PC Advisor's other tech forums

Send to a friend

Email this article to a friend or colleague:

PLEASE NOTE: Your name is used only to let the recipient know who sent the story. Both your name and the recipient's name and address will not be used for any other purpose.