The focus of Britain's tax debate has shifted from whether taxes will rise to identifying which specific taxes may be increased, primarily due to economic constraints affecting existing spending commitments. The Chancellor and Prime Minister now accept that tax increases are likely, with proposed changes to the inheritance tax regime suggesting a reduction in reliefs, imposing a lifetime cap. Although effects on the general populace are minimal, inheritance tax remains unpopular due to public misconceptions and emotional views about fairness and double taxation.
Britain's tax debate has shifted from questioning if taxes will rise in the autumn budget to only considering which taxes may increase. Economic data suggests Rachel Reeves cannot fulfill spending pledges within current fiscal rules without raising revenue. The chancellor and prime minister acknowledge tax increases as a reasonable expectation. One proposed change is to alter the inheritance tax (IHT) regime, potentially introducing a lifetime cap on reliefs, impacting only a wealthy minority. Despite less than 5% of deaths incurring IHT, it remains unpopular due to misconceptions of its prevalence and perceptions of fairness.
The inheritance tax (IHT) regime could change by replacing the current reliefs with a lifetime cap, potentially bringing more high-value assets into its scope. While only a small percentage of deaths trigger IHT payments, concerns about investment disincentives do not apply to taxes on unearned, hereditary wealth. Utilitarian perspectives suggest targeting IHT would align with an enterprise-oriented government, yet public sentiment remains resistant. This tax is viewed through an emotional lens, seen as unfair double taxation due to the nature of the assets involved.
Collection
[
|
...
]