Wealth tax and the rich

[1nvest]

only thing they need to get rid of is inheritance tax

RR sees it more as allowances are a cost, lost tax revenues. Personal Allowance, Primary Home Allowance, IHT allowance, CGT ...etc. etc. are all Tax Avoidance and where that is being talked as though they were the same as Tax Evasion. Hundreds more tax investigators to close down the tax avoiders.

[kempiejon]

thing they need to get rid of is inheritance

[1nvest]

thing they need to get rid of is inheritance

as in they (Labour) will get rid of inheritance, anything anyone leaves after they pass will become the states?

[kempiejon]

They - the estate holders need to get rid of their assets. Avoid inheritance tax not by dying but by passing assets before death.

[1nvest]

They - the estate holders need to get rid of their assets. Avoid inheritance tax not by dying but by passing assets before death.

That will be one of the first loopholes that Labour will close, and they plan to recruit another battalion of tax inspectors to better enforce/capture that.

[1nvest]

With a Labour dictatorship ... 100% gift tax, 100% inheritance tax, allowances removed. Council taxes increased to £10K/year average, water rates increased to £2000/year. i.e. fundamentally the confiscation of all (most) private homes of which there are around 20 million x 300K average recent value, £6Tn of other peoples money that Labour can spend on support of allowing multiple million more/year to enter the country (illegals quickly given legal status and permitted to bring across relatives/dependents and a return to EU free movement policies).

Didn't increase VAT nor income taxes for 'workers' (those that work but have no assets/savings). Council tax increases pushed through on the need to cover increased care home costs for a aging population. Water rates increased in reflection of the current mess of that utility/service. Pushes grannies out of their three bed house as the Council/Water costs otherwise amount to more than their income/pension to free up that larger home for perhaps occupancy by 10 migrants. A transition to a socialist state (that owns/controls all). A downside of that is when one is working purely for the state/benefit of others there's little incentive, productivity along with GDP/capita are inclined to dive.

[stevensfo]

They - the estate holders need to get rid of their assets. Avoid inheritance tax not by dying but by passing assets before death.

That will be one of the first loopholes that Labour will close, and they plan to recruit another battalion of tax inspectors to better enforce/capture that.

Measures against tax evasion and corruption I will support, though I'd like them to put investigation of some of all those fast-tracked PPE companies at the top of the list, as well as much tougher punishments for bank/company hierarchy when guilty of criminal acts!!

But telling parents what they can and can't pass on to their own kids would be a dangerous move, IMHO. It's about as far from human nature as you can get!


Steve

[1nvest]

That will be one of the first loopholes that Labour will close, and they plan to recruit another battalion of tax inspectors to better enforce/capture that.

Measures against tax evasion and corruption I will support, though I'd like them to put investigation of some of all those fast-tracked PPE companies at the top of the list, as well as much tougher punishments for bank/company hierarchy when guilty of criminal acts!!

But telling parents what they can and can't pass on to their own kids would be a dangerous move, IMHO. It's about as far from human nature as you can get!


Steve

Already even under the Tories the elderly are expected to sell their home to fund late life care costs, just have to define a elderly individual as having 'dementia' - easily proven via simple tests such as recalling a sequence of numbers/items that even those of sound mind might fail. Those care/nursing costs are already high and likely to advance well ahead of inflation. For those that avoid such costs, heart attacks/whatever end of life where they leave assets Labour will be looking to seize that capital for redistribution purposes and may argue that such policies still sees the persons children benefit from such policies (even though to a far less extent than had they inherited directly themselves).

With a million migrants, who are then rapidly awarded legal stay and the right to bring across dependents, already high congestion would increase, as would state spending. 5 million/year+ more comes at a high cost to the existing system/infrastructure. Such policies have to be funded somehow. Pre election the Labour dictatorship wont broadcast any of that detail as that would be inclined to reduce the might of that dictatorship.

[stevensfo]

Measures against tax evasion and corruption I will support, though I'd like them to put investigation of some of all those fast-tracked PPE companies at the top of the list, as well as much tougher punishments for bank/company hierarchy when guilty of criminal acts!!

But telling parents what they can and can't pass on to their own kids would be a dangerous move, IMHO. It's about as far from human nature as you can get!


Steve

Already even under the Tories the elderly are expected to sell their home to fund late life care costs, just have to define a elderly individual as having 'dementia' - easily proven via simple tests such as recalling a sequence of numbers/items that even those of sound mind might fail. Those care/nursing costs are already high and likely to advance well ahead of inflation. For those that avoid such costs, heart attacks/whatever end of life where they leave assets Labour will be looking to seize that capital for redistribution purposes and may argue that such policies still sees the persons children benefit from such policies (even though to a far less extent than had they inherited directly themselves).

With a million migrants, who are then rapidly awarded legal stay and the right to bring across dependents, already high congestion would increase, as would state spending. 5 million/year+ more comes at a high cost to the existing system/infrastructure. Such policies have to be funded somehow. Pre election the Labour dictatorship wont broadcast any of that detail as that would be inclined to reduce the might of that dictatorship.

I wasn't commenting on care costs, and that is an entirely different subject. It is rather UK-centric in that in most countries, the children and relatives look after their elders, whereas in the UK, everyone expects someone else to do it. Then for free??

Re. immigrants, well, the UK has had at least 40 years to follow the other European countries and update their social security rules. Try moving to Italy and asking for money and a flat! Haha! Yet the tabloids have blamed a lot of this on the EU, while ignoring the fact that the UK is a soft touch and the rules have nothing to do with the EU.

Even when I was young in the 70s, I vaguely remember papers complaining about rich Arabs coming to London for free treatment on the NHS. It's 2024 and they're still at it.

So easy to change. As someone else pointed out, look at the German/French systems and improvise!


Steve

[1nvest]

Already even under the Tories the elderly are expected to sell their home to fund late life care costs, just have to define a elderly individual as having 'dementia' - easily proven via simple tests such as recalling a sequence of numbers/items that even those of sound mind might fail. Those care/nursing costs are already high and likely to advance well ahead of inflation. For those that avoid such costs, heart attacks/whatever end of life where they leave assets Labour will be looking to seize that capital for redistribution purposes and may argue that such policies still sees the persons children benefit from such policies (even though to a far less extent than had they inherited directly themselves).

With a million migrants, who are then rapidly awarded legal stay and the right to bring across dependents, already high congestion would increase, as would state spending. 5 million/year+ more comes at a high cost to the existing system/infrastructure. Such policies have to be funded somehow. Pre election the Labour dictatorship wont broadcast any of that detail as that would be inclined to reduce the might of that dictatorship.

I wasn't commenting on care costs, and that is an entirely different subject. It is rather UK-centric in that in most countries, the children and relatives look after their elders, whereas in the UK, everyone expects someone else to do it. Then for free??

Re. immigrants, well, the UK has had at least 40 years to follow the other European countries and update their social security rules. Try moving to Italy and asking for money and a flat! Haha! Yet the tabloids have blamed a lot of this on the EU, while ignoring the fact that the UK is a soft touch and the rules have nothing to do with the EU.

Even when I was young in the 70s, I vaguely remember papers complaining about rich Arabs coming to London for free treatment on the NHS. It's 2024 and they're still at it.

So easy to change. As someone else pointed out, look at the German/French systems and improvise!


Steve

More a case of British families having to have both parents working in order to live, pay for childcare and the care of their parents. Countries where one can stay at home and look after the kids/aged parents can get by with just the single parent working.

[stevensfo]

I wasn't commenting on care costs, and that is an entirely different subject. It is rather UK-centric in that in most countries, the children and relatives look after their elders, whereas in the UK, everyone expects someone else to do it. Then for free??

Re. immigrants, well, the UK has had at least 40 years to follow the other European countries and update their social security rules. Try moving to Italy and asking for money and a flat! Haha! Yet the tabloids have blamed a lot of this on the EU, while ignoring the fact that the UK is a soft touch and the rules have nothing to do with the EU.

Even when I was young in the 70s, I vaguely remember papers complaining about rich Arabs coming to London for free treatment on the NHS. It's 2024 and they're still at it.

So easy to change. As someone else pointed out, look at the German/French systems and improvise!


Steve

More a case of British families having to have both parents working in order to live, pay for childcare and the care of their parents. Countries where one can stay at home and look after the kids/aged parents can get by with just the single parent working.

So why is the UK so behind the other European countries?

Are you going to blame the EU for that as well?

Steve

[MuddyBoots]

More a case of British families having to have both parents working in order to live, pay for childcare and the care of their parents. Countries where one can stay at home and look after the kids/aged parents can get by with just the single parent working.

Also that arrangement means more couples having children when younger, as not postponing family life while waiting for both careers to take off. Therefore grandparents are also young enough to help with childcare, as used to be the case in the past. In fact, there's a theory in evolutionary biology that human lifespan is as long as it is because grandparents help with the childcare and longevity is selected.

[1nvest]

More a case of British families having to have both parents working in order to live, pay for childcare and the care of their parents. Countries where one can stay at home and look after the kids/aged parents can get by with just the single parent working.

So why is the UK so behind the other European countries?

Are you going to blame the EU for that as well?

Steve

Well 40 years of net contributing to the uplift of other European countries obviously was a drag factor. As was Gordon Brown selling a large chunk of UK gold to help start/prop up the Euro. As was paying the EU in order to leave it, despite all of those years of net contributions the UK had made. As was allowing free movement of people - drove the decline in training/developing our own youth to instead have them as a liability/idle (housing benefits ...etc.) so companies can pay less to EU migrant workers, make larger profits, that help subsidise EU owners others European based assets/investments (profits from UK rail/water ...etc. bills help lower the bills for German/French/etc rail/water utilities).

[1nvest]

More a case of British families having to have both parents working in order to live, pay for childcare and the care of their parents. Countries where one can stay at home and look after the kids/aged parents can get by with just the single parent working.

Also that arrangement means more couples having children when younger, as not postponing family life while waiting for both careers to take off. Therefore grandparents are also young enough to help with childcare, as used to be the case in the past. In fact, there's a theory in evolutionary biology that human lifespan is as long as it is because grandparents help with the childcare and longevity is selected.

The more children when young is more a Islamic/religious directed out-populate thing. For white/English the birth rate is later if at all (same sex marriages or simply cannot afford children). Other than the Karen's - single mums that have children for the house/benefits that yields - when grandma is barely out of her 20's.

[Steveam]

I'd be interested to see stats for other European countries as to the "who pays what" percentages - is the UK unique or is it actually broadly in line with what we see elsewhere?

Does this help? We are just above the OECD average but well below European comparators. There are always issues with these figures (different health care systems, care systems, etc) but the OECD make a fair stab to make the numbers comparable.

Best wishes, Steve