14-03-2020, 09:00 PM
41
Re: Lisa Nandy on taxing wealth
Originally Posted by Muddy
->
As a life long labour supporter I would rather give it to the dogs home and I may well do so rather than a penny to those who would take it from my children .
As you are clearly aware there is also the 7 year rule - I'm sure you'll be around for much longer
try to take advantage of that. Unfortunately I won't be so the tax people will try to benefit by taxing my will even 'tho everything goes to my wife. That's the mind set of tax people 
15-03-2020, 01:48 AM
43
Re: Lisa Nandy on taxing wealth
Originally Posted by Losos
->
Muddy - could I suggest that you decide now which dogs home you want to donate to and then ring them and get their official charity registration number. This is important because the number must be quoted in your will and it shows that they are a gennuine charity.As you are clearly aware there is also the 7 year rule - I'm sure you'll be around for much longer
try to take advantage of that. Unfortunately I won't be so the tax people will try to benefit by taxing my will even 'tho everything goes to my wife. That's the mind set of tax people
Thank you losos that is useful to know .
Re seven years - well who knows what with the C Virus
The thing is most people’s main asset is their house .
They can give it to their children and hopefully live seven years but they must pay rent at the market rate .
How many people can afford do this ?
Also councils can dispute this even after seven years if the house is needed to be sold for nursing home fees .
This is called deliberate deprivation of assets .
If everything is left to your wife there is no tax to pay ( there is no IHT between spouses .) Any tax is paid on the second death .
15-03-2020, 10:46 AM
44
Re: Lisa Nandy on taxing wealth
Originally Posted by Donkeyman
->
That is contradictary Todgy isnt it?Earnt and accrual are polar opposites!!
Accrual definition is according to my lore, if f you fall in the shyte,
Some shyte will stick to you? 😁😁😁
Donkeyman!
There are many different ways to earn though. For example investing in stocks and shares or playing the various exchanges is just as much earning as shoveling coal in a mine.
15-03-2020, 10:51 AM
45
Re: Lisa Nandy on taxing wealth
Originally Posted by Muddy
->
Thank you losos that is useful to know .Re seven years - well who knows what with the C Virus
The thing is most people’s main asset is their house .
They can give it to their children and hopefully live seven years but they must pay rent at the market rate .
How many people can afford do this ?
Also councils can dispute this even after seven years if the house is needed to be sold for nursing home fees .
This is called deliberate deprivation of assets .
If everything is left to your wife there is no tax to pay ( there is no IHT between spouses .) Any tax is paid on the second death .
The first requirement is a really good accountant and the second a willingness to treat the law as an obstacle to be got around rather than a brick wall.
15-03-2020, 12:28 PM
46
Re: Lisa Nandy on taxing wealth
Originally Posted by The Artful Todger
->
Not in the least bit contradictory, one can only accrue what one has earned.There are many different ways to earn though. For example investing in stocks and shares or playing the various exchanges is just as much earning as shoveling coal in a mine.
I believe l have seen posts from you that contradict that?
Like l say, if you roll in shyte, some of it sticks, that is not earning
in my book as it only profits you and nobody else!
Donkeyman!
15-03-2020, 12:54 PM
47
Re: Lisa Nandy on taxing wealth
Originally Posted by Donkeyman
->
So you believe in the royalty then Todgy?I believe l have seen posts from you that contradict that?
Like l say, if you roll in shyte, some of it sticks, that is not earning
in my book as it only profits you and nobody else!
Donkeyman!
But how about the money someone earns from working the world markets? Or in the financial sector?
As for rolling in sh-muck - that's just as much work and earning as anything else.
15-03-2020, 03:34 PM
48
Re: Lisa Nandy on taxing wealth
Originally Posted by The Artful Todger
->
As I wrote, inherited wealth in the case of the Windsors is wrong on so many levels. In their case it is totally unearned But how about the money someone earns from working the world markets? Or in the financial sector?
As for rolling in sh-muck - that's just as much work and earning as anything else.
What do you think the Windsors do with their inherited wealth?
They do the same as you apparently do, and play the markets,
the operative word being ( PLAY )!
The only problem l have with the Windsors is that they need or seem
to need taxpayer assistance and that they are exempt from taxation?
Oh, and the fact that they breed like rats!
Donkeyman!
15-03-2020, 04:25 PM
49
Re: Lisa Nandy on taxing wealth
Originally Posted by Donkeyman
->
The only problem l have with the Windsors is that they need or seem to need taxpayer assistance and that they are exempt from taxation?Donkeyman!
15-03-2020, 07:16 PM
50
Re: Lisa Nandy on taxing wealth
They don’t pay Inheritance Tax like the ordinary joe .The Queen Mother left 50 million all IHT a free to her daughter the Queen .
The queen avoided IHT which would have been at 40 % ie 20 million pounds
By exercising an obscure "sovereign to sovereign" clause in a 1993 deal with the Conservative government, the Queen, the main recipient, avoided paying any tax at all.
|
|
