Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Why is it that the government prints out a nice glossy brochure and posts it to every new parent showing them how to fit a car seat properly, but for this piece of information you have to either read the Mail or access the Revenue's website?


Just saying the information 'is available' doesn't mean it gets there. And the ones who don't get it are probably the ones who really need to.

while i do agree that the information is out there (has anyone looked at the finance act 2006 for a bit of light reading? - apparently it changed trust law which offered a loop hold for IHT) would anyone disagree with the fact that the richer you are the more likely it is you can "buy" the required advice to avoid IHT?


We can all visit a number of websites which may give us an insight into how we can avoid this tax but unless you do it for a living, you probably are not going to know what is the most efficent way of avoiding IHT for your personal circumstance. I agree with *Bob* the people who could really do with legitimately avoiding this tax are hardly in a position to pay for the advice they need.


And while i dont disagree with paying taxes to run the country i live in, it would be nice, just for once for someone to show me that the money i pay in taxes is actually doing some good for this country....ok, that another thread altogether...

That would prevent IHT assuming they lived for 7 years after they gave you it but they have to pay a fair market rent to avoid it being classed as a 'gift with reservation of benefit' and then you have to pay income tax on that rent.


I doubt they'd go for it.


You should at least set up their wills so that when one of them dies they give their half to you and then when the next one dies you get the second half. Without a will it will automatically pass between spouses so the last one to go will leave you the whole house with only one nil band.


The other way you make full use of both their allowances. (ie only pay tax on amount over ?600k rather than amount over ?300k)


It's worth getting a solicitor involved as it will only cost you a couple of grand and could save thousands.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Bit nerdy. But the traditional form of England/Wales local government was based on committees with themehmbers in proportion to the respective political parties numbers.  Blair government introduced for councils that chose it cabinet structure where the majority hold roles covering each of  former committee would decide/confirm. Additionally a Blair option for a super council leader Mayoral role such as Lewisham rather than ceremonial mayoral role who chairs council Council Assemblies of all councils. A number of councils have since moved from exec Mayoral role to cabinet basis.  Without Councillors being elected via a Proportional Voting system I personally would prefer to see a return to committee decision making structure. It ensures all Councillors have to know what they're doing rather than the ruling party leaving it to a few cabinet members and the rest just voting at Council Assemblies how they/re told. Just a personal view. 
    • With the elections coming up soon, it's interesting to note that residents over the boundary in Lewisham have a different system of local government than Southwark. Lewisham has a directly elected Executive Mayor while Southwark has kept a traditional local authority structure. Nothing is perfect, but I think Lewisham made a mistake with the Executive Mayor in that it blurs the legislative branch and executive branch of governance, and makes serious scrutiny of decisions less likely to happen - especially in a Borough like Lewisham which is essentially a one-party state. None of the political parties are offering any major reforms of local government for London, which is very disappointing since it seems obvious that having 33 local authorities - all with their own internal administrations - is not a good way to run things, when most of them are struggling even to maintain basic services.
    • My  understanding is that all developments whatever size, have to have an element of social housing…affordable housing… council housing..No longer sure of percentage but clearly less than years ago.. The point is house builders clearly make a profit or they simply would not  continue building what I refer to as modern  boxes!  Putting housing condensed or what originally was one house with land attached.  Huge development going on in Beckenham - 200 social housing and rest open market.. sited over several houses now demolished… up the road from the park on way into town centre.. might even be completed by now.. haven’t been that way in last year… certainly can’t miss it.. So, for example, let’s say a developer builds houses and flats on a site… social housing I assume would be in a separate block to other flats and I assume house as well. Ie to put it bluntly, away from main site.. Nothing wrong in that at all.  Many years ago, near Borough a developer built flats divided into blocks. . Price range £300/400,000. Social housing was in a different block…. Can’t remember how many… so families , couples etc got a brand new flat with modern kitchen and bathrooms, flooring etc  and could not even keep common parts clean.. trash thrown out and left including out of windows etc..total disregard for community and certainly not  grateful for brand new property and a home.. I hasten to add, not every flat in the social housing sector but certainly a fair few behaved that way.      
    • Please name all of the shops.  
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...