|
|
Topic Originator: NMCmassive
Date: Sat 1 Aug 18:58
Jack Charlton’s son John has described facing a £200,000 inheritance tax issue related to his father’s 1966 World Cup winners’ medal. HMRC has apparently valued the memorabilia and said it’ll cost him £200,000 for the pleasure of keeping the medal. The medal has been handed back to his mother to avoid paying the inheritance tax until they can find a resolution.
My resolution is that inheritance tax goes in the bin. I find it all round disgusting.
COYP
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBP
Date: Sat 1 Aug 19:14
That’s outrageous
I’m with you in Inheritance tax, if something is mine, I should be able to give it to whomever I like without the government sticking their nose in and trying to somehow take some of it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Dave_1885
Date: Sat 1 Aug 19:16
Thought inheritance tax was on anything over £300k?
Does that mean they are valuing the medal at £1.3m?
Bit steep…..
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: NMCmassive
Date: Sat 1 Aug 19:24
Quote:
Dave_1885, Sat 1 Aug 19:16
Thought inheritance tax was on anything over £300k?
Does that mean they are valuing the medal at £1.3m?
Bit steep…..
That’s what I thought so I actually checked how they value it which has lead me to more questions but I’ve not had the time to dig deeper.
So they’ve got to the £200,000 by using what it would be valued at on the open market and the open market valuation come from pervious sales inflation and a percentage of variability.
Alan Balls medal sold in 2022 for £200,000 at the hammer but that’s £252,000ish incl commissions/fees etc.
Nobby Stiles sold for £160,000 at the hammer.
So maybe an overall value of £200,000 is about right but I’m wondering why he’s paying £200,000. I know different items get different classifications so I don’t know if they want the full value of somethings and not other things or how it all works. Thankfully not had to deal with any of it yet.
COYP
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Sat 1 Aug 20:09
Would imagine that the value would be added to the total estate ie house, contents etc.
A friend of mine has recently paid HMRC £90K on his great uncle`s estate!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Sat 1 Aug 20:23
You`re allowed £500k assuming you leave your home to your kids. £1m if you`re a married couple.
The problem with something like a medal is that it`s both priceless and worthless. Unfortunately, it does have a value on the open market but his son would never wish to sell it. Jack Charlton should have gifted it to him many years ago even unofficially to avoid this.
Rules is rules and loads of people get caught out. We have an aging population and someone`s got to pay the care bills.
ETA - his mum can gift it to her son and hope she clings on long enough for it to be exempt. Alternatively, claim it was misplaced. Amazing how these things can get lost...
Post Edited (Sat 01 Aug 20:25)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Sat 1 Aug 20:44
Yes I`m sure his son would never wish to sell it.....
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: hurricane_jimmy
Date: Sat 1 Aug 21:17
That`s why you sign it over to your kids before you kick the bucket...be smart and consult your solicitors!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Sat 1 Aug 22:55
What legislation is this under? I`m not aware of any current inheritance tax mechanism that would tax £200k inheritance.
“The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.”
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Sat 1 Aug 23:47
Quote:
Wotsit, Sat 1 Aug 22:55
What legislation is this under? I`m not aware of any current inheritance tax mechanism that would tax £200k inheritance.
Assuming his dad left him the medal in his will, it must be worth close to £1m, resulting in a tax of £200k on this "windfall". If it`s gone to his mum, she should gift it to her son now. The amount of tax due reduces for each year it`s his and becomes £0 after 7 years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: ipswichpar
Date: Sun 2 Aug 07:07
Well I hope he lives for at least 7 years or he has created another tax risk..... and his mum (and not just for tax reasons, obviosuly).
The reporting on this story can`t be correct, and the wording on his statement is ambiguous.... I`ll leave you to determine if you think that`s intention or not.
This always strikes me as being unfair in that those with less can`t perhaps afford the advice they need and, even if it was given and followed, we`ll just see more stories of "I gifted money to my family but then they just stopped talking to me because they were only in it for the money".
This isn`t a problem that`s going to be easy to solve. But if they can send out health reminders to 50 year olds, it would sensible to do something similar with tax to avoid being accused of not happily taking folks` money without making them fully aware of stuff.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: NMCmassive
Date: Sun 2 Aug 09:40
Irrespective of how HMRC work out what he’s to pay or how much or how little someone has to pay I genuinely believe 100% death tax need to be abolished. I think it’s so disgusting that we’re discussing the value of a medal so that HMRC can get their own wee bit.
They literally tax us from birth into the afterlife.
On a personal level it can have huge impacts on someone’s life (see poster above - £90k) while it raises not a lot on a national scale.
It raises £8billion ish a year
The UK raises around £800-900billion a year in total.
broader UK public-sector receipts including non-HMRC sources such as council tax, business rates, and other income are higher around £1.1–1.2 trillion.
Yeah but let’s take away people’s opportunities to help their or receive help from their loved ones for arguably less than 1% of tax income.
COYP
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: ipswichpar
Date: Sun 2 Aug 09:42
Sorry...... where is the 100% death tax?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: NMCmassive
Date: Sun 2 Aug 10:00
Quote:
ipswichpar, Sun 2 Aug 09:42
Sorry...... where is the 100% death tax?
“I genuinely believe 100%, death tax needs to be abolished”
Not “100% death tax”
I really should have put a comma in there
COYP
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: ipswichpar
Date: Sun 2 Aug 10:43
Sorry, I should have been a bit smarter about what you obviously meant!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: NMCmassive
Date: Sun 2 Aug 10:44
My fault 🤦🏻♂️😂
COYP
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Sun 2 Aug 11:27
What is the ideological argument in favour of mollycoddling the offspring of some people because they happened to have competent parents?
Doesn`t inherited wealth create weak people who don`t know the value of hard work because they know they`ll be handed everything on a plate through the work of others?
“The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.”
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: NMCmassive
Date: Sun 2 Aug 11:35
Quote:
Wotsit, Sun 2 Aug 11:27
What is the ideological argument in favour of mollycoddling the offspring of some people because they happened to have competent parents?
Doesn`t inherited wealth create weak people who don`t know the value of hard work because they know they`ll be handed everything on a plate through the work of others?
I wonder what you’d say if you couldn’t inherit from your family unless you paid £200,000.
It probably wouldn’t be that ☝🏻
It’s not about mollycoddling the rich. It’s about families being able to build up assets and capital to pass on to their kids so that can continue to grow the assets and capital to pass onto their kids. It creates inter-generational wealth that could raise a families financial status.
Instead an inheritance tax creates further obstacles and keeps the rich, rich and the poor with less opportunities.
COYP
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: ipswichpar
Date: Sun 2 Aug 11:49
Quote:
Wotsit, Sun 2 Aug 11:27
What is the ideological argument in favour of mollycoddling the offspring of some people because they happened to have competent parents?
Doesn`t inherited wealth create weak people who don`t know the value of hard work because they know they`ll be handed everything on a plate through the work of others?
Similarly, but in the opposite direction, how many people would think "Jack that, the state will take everything anyway so what`s the point?".
One of my biggest drivers is working hard to leave something decent for my kids.
It hasn`t stopped either of my kids working very hard to follow their own dreams.
It simply feels like jealousy to me.... many folk are much richer than me...good for them. Some people won the lottery this week, I didnt..... good for them.
Folk get taxed when the money comes in. I think there should be an element of tax on the way out to ensure that there`s funded quality social care when people need it. But to take everything off everyone is absolutely bonkers..... and good luck trying to get elected on that one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Sun 2 Aug 14:31
Thought inheritance tax kicked in at £325K?🤔
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: hurricane_jimmy
Date: Sun 2 Aug 14:35
Just crazy that HMRC are desperate to get their cut on something like a medal.
I`m quite lucky in that I`m a dual national and Sweden has no inheritance tax, so I can take advantage of that. Dad and Sister are both lawyers and the best way to avoid is to place things in trusts or gift them to your children before death.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: ipswichpar
Date: Sun 2 Aug 16:33
Quote:
LochgellyAlbert, Sun 2 Aug 14:31
Thought inheritance tax kicked in at £325K?🤔
Technically it does, but if you leave your house to kids or grandkids, there is a nil-rate applied to the next £175k per part of a couple which means it is tax free for the first 500k for a single person or 1m for a married couple.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Sun 2 Aug 18:13
Quote:
ipswichpar, Sun 2 Aug 16:33
Quote:
LochgellyAlbert, Sun 2 Aug 14:31
Thought inheritance tax kicked in at £325K?🤔
Technically it does, but if you leave your house to kids or grandkids, there is a nil-rate applied to the next £175k per part of a couple which means it is tax free for the first 500k for a single person or 1m for a married couple.
Is that after your Care Home fees are deducted?😡
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: ipswichpar
Date: Sun 2 Aug 22:17
At this point we seem to get into a daft circular argument.
If we want a national care service that`s equivalent to the health service. It is going to cost money to provide. So the model can charge folk for a weekly usage. Some people will have lower cost if they don`t need it or if they die relatively early. Or everybody can pay into a pot either as part of general taxation or as a tax on estate after death.
Frankly, it is bonkers to expect that everything will be free without it having to be paid for. The same people would be complaining if they didn`t have a triple lock pension, they weren`t getting nice new disability cars and free NHS health care. This money doesn`t grow on trees, and the younger generation that have got poorer pensions and can`t afford a place to live will be paying to cover care for generally asset rich folk which is clearly not right.
The sooner we have this national debate and folk take the time to actually understand the economics the better.
There are of course options to a fully free and fully funded care service (which will cost many tens of billions per annum) which are cheaper, for example charging until the value of an individuals assets but to a higher cut off at which point it gets cheaper or becomes free.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Mon 3 Aug 08:17
We`re not getting a national care service in Scotland. Some guy called Anas Sarwar and his party objected to it. Not sure what happened to that guy...
The problem with IHT is it typically hits the middle. The people with less don`t hit the threshold, the people with most find loopholes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Andrew283
Date: Mon 3 Aug 08:38
Quote:
LochgellyAlbert, Sun 2 Aug 18:13
Quote:
ipswichpar, Sun 2 Aug 16:33
Quote:
LochgellyAlbert, Sun 2 Aug 14:31
Thought inheritance tax kicked in at £325K?🤔
Technically it does, but if you leave your house to kids or grandkids, there is a nil-rate applied to the next £175k per part of a couple which means it is tax free for the first 500k for a single person or 1m for a married couple.
Is that after your Care Home fees are deducted?😡
Sorry, but I refuse to pay for a wealthy pensioner to be cared for.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Mon 3 Aug 10:31
What about a wealthy middle aged person who has cancer or has difficulty living without a degree of care after a stroke?
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Mon 3 Aug 13:38
Quote:
Andrew283, Mon 3 Aug 08:38
Quote:
LochgellyAlbert, Sun 2 Aug 18:13
Quote:
ipswichpar, Sun 2 Aug 16:33
Quote:
LochgellyAlbert, Sun 2 Aug 14:31
Thought inheritance tax kicked in at £325K?🤔
Technically it does, but if you leave your house to kids or grandkids, there is a nil-rate applied to the next £175k per part of a couple which means it is tax free for the first 500k for a single person or 1m for a married couple.
Is that after your Care Home fees are deducted?😡
Sorry, but I refuse to pay for a wealthy pensioner to be cared for.
But you do (assuming you work). Because there are so many who have no or little money to fund their care as they get older, it falls to the taxpayer to cover it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: ipswichpar
Date: Mon 3 Aug 14:08
The older I get, the more appealing George Best`s financial advice sounds.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: NMCmassive
Date: Tue 4 Aug 23:27
I actually think it’s a fair point to “not pay for a wealthy pensioner”
The whole point of a welfare system is to help those that require help. It’ll feel harsh on those that are using the value of their house or savings but unless we say right we’re all going to pay more so nobody regardless of their finances has pay then there has to be a cut off somewhere.
BTW it’s not just people who would be considered wealthy, they’ll take a few grand if that’s what you’ve got.
COYP
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Dandy Warhol
Date: Wed 5 Aug 15:38
Quote:
Wotsit, Sun 2 Aug 11:27
What is the ideological argument in favour of mollycoddling the offspring of some people because they happened to have competent parents?
Doesn`t inherited wealth create weak people who don`t know the value of hard work because they know they`ll be handed everything on a plate through the work of others?
So Mr Contrary, why should i give my hard earned to ramdoms?
I don`t wanna go down like disco.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBP
Date: Wed 5 Aug 18:57
Wotsit
What is the ideological argument in favour of mollycoddling the offspring of some people because they happened to have competent parents?
Doesn`t inherited wealth create weak people who don`t know the value of hard work because they know they`ll be handed everything on a plate through the work of others?
So if we’re making sweeping generalisations, I’ll say that everyone on benefits are feckless, lazy wasters who could all go out to work if they so wished… but then what’s the incentive if they just get handouts from people who’ve actually done something?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: answer
Date: Wed 5 Aug 19:16
Quote:
DBP, Wed 5 Aug 18:57
Wotsit
What is the ideological argument in favour of mollycoddling the offspring of some people because they happened to have competent parents?
Doesn`t inherited wealth create weak people who don`t know the value of hard work because they know they`ll be handed everything on a plate through the work of others?
So if we’re making sweeping generalisations, I’ll say that everyone on benefits are feckless, lazy wasters who could all go out to work if they so wished… but then what’s the incentive if they just get handouts from people who’ve actually done something?
That is an interesting comparison.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Wed 5 Aug 23:00
The current set up is your chosen benefactor(s) inherit assets under £500k with no tax or £1m if it`s been a married couple. Anything above that is taxed at 40%. So for most people a house would need to be valued at over £650k before any IHT would be due. Nowadays it`s not unfeasible that some pretty average houses could be hitting that. However, you could be paying the property IHT with other assets if need be so the whole "got to sell the family home" but is a bit much. Plus what would you be doing with the house anyway given you`d be living elsewhere already in most cases.
The care home fees are different. People need to get out their head that care should be free. It`s not and costs around £2k per person, per week. If a family is concerned about losing all the money to care fees then they need to think ahead and transfer ownership of assets in good time, or choose to pay for care at home, which can work out cheaper. Alternatively, care for the loved one themselves. My understanding is care fees for council places only apply to those with more than £25k in the bank.
Inheritance is always an odd one. Most people in their life might inherit a few grand. Maybe a house if they`re lucky, but that`ll need split between siblings etc. I expect the issue many have is those who inherit enormous estates. I`m a bit divided on this as while I think people should make their own way in this world, it`s not that person`s fault that they got money and someone raised by a single parent in a council scheme didn`t. Having a "hard" start in life doesn`t make you a better person. It`s what you do with the hand you`re dealt, though I think the parents have a lot of sway there. I can see it within my own family where someone was given every opportunity to succeed but actually those safety nets have been a curse. It really comes down to individual circumstances rather than toffee nosed git only did well because of daddy`s money while poor boy done good is a superstar. What happens with the boy with the rich daddy loses the business or the children of the poor boy done good inherit his money? Role reversal?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: desparado
Date: Thu 20 Aug 16:44
No pockets in a shroud.
Andrew Carnegie himself said “ The man who dies rich dies disgraced “. He probably did mind you but at least he was a philanthropist.
Mega wealthy peoples estates… multi millionaires and the like should pay inheritance tax. It should all be ring fenced though and go into a pot for the greater good ie the NHS, not just frittered away by UK Gov as they see fit.
What an opportunity we missed in 2014.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: NMCmassive
Date: Fri 21 Aug 07:33
I kind of agree however it never stays at the mega wealthy. It always trickles down and ends up being everyone and the money right now will more than likely go to paying for the interest on the debt we owe- which is still growing.
We’re not handing our money to competent people
COYP
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Fri 21 Aug 10:13
Did I not read that our King🤣 gets a deceased person`s property/money in The Dutchy of Cornwall if they die "in testate"?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: McCaig`s Tower
Date: Fri 21 Aug 13:00
Did I not read that our King🤣 gets a deceased person`s property/money in The Dutchy of Cornwall if they die "in testate"?
You might have read that but it`s not true.
If someone dies intestate and there is no traceable kin the net estate will eventually (after a period of years allowing efforts to be made to trace relatives, or for them to come forward) revert to the Crown (other than deaths in Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly, when the assets go to the Duchy of Cornwall, and thence to charitable causes).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Fri 21 Aug 13:23
A distant cousin of mine died 10yrs ago without leaving a will, she was divorced and had no children. It has finally been settled 2 weeks ago and I was awarded a104th share of the estate!
This was due to her father having being 1 of 26 children, some of whom emigrated to Canada/USA.
Moral of the story is make a will!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Fri 21 Aug 13:45
1 of 26 children?!
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: ipswichpar
Date: Fri 21 Aug 14:14
Quote:
The One Who Knocks, Fri 21 Aug 13:45
1 of 26 children?!
I suspect it was with multiple partners TOWK.
Post Edited (Sat 22 Aug 11:58)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: McCaig`s Tower
Date: Fri 21 Aug 14:15
Moral of the story is make a will!
And if you are in a pension scheme ensure your Expression of Wish form is up-to-date so that any death benefits are more likely to go where intended. And consider marrying your long-term partner as sometimes bidie-ins (bidies-in??) are not entitled to spouse`s benefits.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Fri 21 Aug 14:56
Even so Ipswich, 26! Genghis Khan would tip his bortgon to him.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: buffy
Date: Sat 22 Aug 11:51
Could some of you please remember that there are younger supporters reading these message boards? The descriptions in the last few posts have gone OTT to the topic.
”Buffy’s Buns are the finest in Fife”, J. Spence 2019”
|
|
|
|
|
|
