If you don't believe in the rights of others, want extreme authoritarian rule, lack of personal freedoms and have a unhinged paranoia of any race, religion or creed other than your own, then no it's not so bad What makes me laugh is the 'freedom fighters and truthers' on social media all crying about the authorities taking away their freedoms, when in fact it's the people they hold up as their heroes who would enact the most draconian rules pon them.
Got some sympathy for generational farmers ... ... but Take my own situation - grew up on the Saffron Lane in Leicester (not the most salubrious) - first of my family to go to University - worked from 1984 and still working - done well enough to buy 2 homes (ex-wife got the first as part of the divorce) - one we live in now will be subject to Inheritance tax after the later of me or the missus pop our clogs - with a 40% IHT rate the kids would likely need to sell the house to meet the IHT bill - so why should farmers be treated differently - escape the IHT burden? Well - because many don't actually make huge profits (despite being asset rich) and the country needs food - so I do believe some concessions need to be made - but these need to be targeted to generational farmers and not the many already rich ****s who 'invested' in agricultural land purposefully to dodge IHT ... So here is the simple solution - if the agricultural land has been in your family for over 45 years then you get a 0% IHT bill on passing the farm on to your kids... provided the intention is that farming will continue... Why 45 years? - because you then catch all the rich ****s that were able to dodge IHT by deliberately putting their money into agricultural land after Thatcher brought in this loophole for the benefit of rich Tories ... For those that took advantage of Thatcher's loophole there should be a sliding scale of IHT depending on whether what they bought is still being farmed on to the same or a bigger scale than when they bought it ... if so you get more favourable IHT rates - if this is done sensibly then 'tenant farmers' livelihood could also be safeguarded ... but you'd also catch the ****s that have solely bought the agricultural property to dodge the IHT they would otherwise have had to pay when dying - just like the rest of us have to ... Vote Fosse at the next GE!!!
**** em they never tuck in when they find themselves hogging a country lane keep the ****s busy and away with their protests Vote Spurlock
If you're in the party, probably not at first, but once they find you smoke the reefer, you'll be in the ****.
Am I the only one who thinks inheritance tax full stop is a scam? Work all your life to leave something for your descendents. The money you earned was taxed, the things you bought with it were taxed, and then it has to be taxed again? Always thought it was a load of bollocks.
Not my comment, but this below …. Total farce. The removal of APR won't harm farmers. APR was implemented in 1992 with the stated aim being to "bolster food security and keep people on the land", but what it actually did was create a tax avoidance loophole through which, by investing in land, you could avoid tax on generational wealth. This in turn put a significant upward pressure on land value, passing much of the ownership of land away from farmers towards a wealthy elite, and making it attractive to speculators buying land up for future development (but never actually developing on it). The Agricultural Tenancies Act (ATA) and farm business tenancies (FBTs) made land even more attractive to investors. By closing this loophole, but giving all farmers the chance to avoid IHT through succession planning, land value will start to fall as the major landowners seek to sell on their liabilities. More land will become owned by farmers, freeing up productive land once owned by speculators and investors, and development plots will finally be developed as we reach (or even pass) peak land value - reducing the cost of new developments for people who need homes. The eventual reduction in land value will also mean fewer farms will be subject to IHT as time goes on. By removing APR, closing the tax avoidance loopholes used by the super-rich (most of whom couldn't give a toss about farming) and working towards levelling the playing field regards tax is the right way to go. But funny isn't it that the right-wing press, owned by wealthy land-owning press barons, are kicking up a hissy fit and telling you otherwise?
Yeah it’s a **** tax. Being taxed on money you’ve already been taxed on. But if we’re gonna have IHT, then this tax loophole is something that definitely needs closing
You could apply that logic to various things though that affect far more people. Fuel tax, for example. ***s, alcohol etc. No tax is ever going to be popular but we have little in the way of wealth tax. IHT is a sensible middle ground between the sort of wealth tax Corbynite drips demand and nothing IMO.
I think the threshold should be raised at least. Seems way out compative to property prices. Has the threshold even changed at all in last decade or two?
I’d argue it’s fair because of property prices. People in their 80s dying in a million pound house they bought for 36p and a carrot so their 50-something offspring become asset millionaires for doing nothing. Not saying it’s perfect- the deal farmers have to pay it over a decade is fairer IMO.
If everybody liable to Inheritance Tax had inherited from people that had legitimately worked to earn their fortunes, you'd have a point...
