Burnham

[Psamathe]

£325k joint threshold would bring in almost anyone who owns even a modest house.

I don't see a problem with that or even getting rid of the threshold altogether.

The estate is money and assets owned by those in need of care. Why should they get to keep their money and assets and make high demands on the state just so they can give their wealth away.

For some/many more wealthy the issue of cash vs assets (eg house) arrises. So state taking more through IHT is in effect getting round the cash poor/asset rich quandary by delaying taking anything until after the holder/owner of those assets no longer has any use for them. Otherwise, in effect the beneficiaries are benefitting from the state where the recipient of the care can actually afford their own care.

 

[Milzy]

Andy is doing a Sterling job. It’s brilliant social care in this country. It’s going to get even better.

 

[Dorset Boy]

Psamathe - I'm confused by what you want to happen. You seem to imply that those with estates subject to Inheritance Tax don't pay for their care.
Under the current system they do pay for it.
The issue is around those at the bottom of the wealth league who don't have the assets and income to fund their care.
Maybe a surcharge on Inheritance Tax on larger estates might be a way to go to help fund those people's care needs.

There does need to be more of an acceptance that you should pay for your own care whilst you can.

However, it also needs either Local Authorities to start paying closer to the market rate for care, or to start building some local authority care homes. We also need 'halfway houses' as a stepping stone for those sat in hospital unnecssarily but unable to look after themselves independently whilst they recover.

 

[Psamathe]

Psamathe - I'm confused by what you want to happen. You seem to imply that those with estates subject to Inheritance Tax don't pay for their care.
Under the current system they do pay for it.
The issue is around those at the bottom of the wealth league who don't have the assets and income to fund their care.
Maybe a surcharge on Inheritance Tax on larger estates might be a way to go to help fund those people's care needs.

There does need to be more of an acceptance that you should pay for your own care whilst you can.

However, it also needs either Local Authorities to start paying closer to the market rate for care, or to start building some local authority care homes. We also need 'halfway houses' as a stepping stone for those sat in hospital unnecssarily but unable to look after themselves independently whilst they recover.

I was looking to the future not what happens now. Burnham is proposing universal free social care. So the wealthy would not be paying but drawing on an already stretched state and so they can pass a larger estate to their beneficiaries.

It's that that I see as wrong as they can afford their own care.

Many keep saying that funding it is the problem. So my points about potential changes to help fund this universal free care ie the wealthy get to keep their cash & assets and get their universal free care but when they die state takes a larger portion of their estate in effect delaying their contributing to their care provided free by the state.

 

[icowden]

£325k joint threshold would bring in almost anyone who owns even a modest house.

Thus speaketh a person who liveth not in Surrey or a London Borough. Happily if we leave the house to the kids, the IHT goes up to £500k which one of us can pass on to the other which does indeed cover our modest house.

 

[Pblakeney]

Psamathe - I'm confused by what you want to happen. You seem to imply that those with estates subject to Inheritance Tax don't pay for their care.
Under the current system they do pay for it.
The issue is around those at the bottom of the wealth league who don't have the assets and income to fund their care.
Maybe a surcharge on Inheritance Tax on larger estates might be a way to go to help fund those people's care needs.

There does need to be more of an acceptance that you should pay for your own care whilst you can.

However, it also needs either Local Authorities to start paying closer to the market rate for care, or to start building some local authority care homes. We also need 'halfway houses' as a stepping stone for those sat in hospital unnecssarily but unable to look after themselves independently whilst they recover.

I see care homes as being the next (if not current) boom market. The costs are only going to go up to the point where only the really wealthy, or subsidised, will be able to afford them. Which I suspect is part of the plan.

 

[Pblakeney]

Thus speaketh a person who liveth not in Surrey or a London Borough. Happily if we leave the house to the kids, the IHT goes up to £500k which one of us can pass on to the other which does indeed cover our modest house.

Only if neither of you have to go into a care home, in which case IHT is less of a concern.

 

[C R]

I see care homes as being the next (if not current) boom market. The costs are only going to go up to the point where only the really wealthy, or subsidised, will be able to afford them. Which I suspect is part of the plan.

You're late to the story. Private equity have been bleeding dry the councils social care budgets for a long time.

 

[icowden]

Only if neither of you have to go into a care home, in which case IHT is less of a concern.

Actually only if both of us have to go into a care home. If one spouse remains in the house, it can't be touched.

 

[Pblakeney]

You're late to the story. Private equity have been bleeding dry the councils social care budgets for a long time.

Fair.
The situation is going to escalate though, which was my point.

 

[Dorset Boy]

Actually only if both of us have to go into a care home. If one spouse remains in the house, it can't be touched.

Your estate should still get the Residence Nil Rate Band on top of the standard nil rate band even if you've gone into a care home and the property has been sold.
Yes, the property is disregared if there is a surviving spouse or financial dependent living there when calculating the ability to pay - but be careful if the house is then sold......

 

[Pblakeney]

Actually only if both of us have to go into a care home. If one spouse remains in the house, it can't be touched.

Hope your children really love you enough to fully take care of the last one standing. We are going through it with my Dad and there is only so much you can do without spending 24/7. His last standing friend's family currently have their father's house on the market for this very reason.

 

[briantrumpet]

You're late to the story. Private equity have been bleeding dry the councils social care budgets for a long time.

I see they are moving onto student accommodation now, but I can't help feeling they've been a bit slow on this, given that the government and vice chancellors are doing their best to shrink the sector rapidly.

 

[C R]

I see they are moving onto student accommodation now, but I can't help feeling they've been a bit slow on this, given that the government and vice chancellors are doing their best to shrink the sector rapidly.

They've been in student accommodation, at least in Manchester, since the early noughties, using models similar to PFI with the universities. Corporate welfare is nothing new.

 

[Dorset Boy]

I was looking to the future not what happens now. Burnham is proposing universal free social care. So the wealthy would not be paying but drawing on an already stretched state and so they can pass a larger estate to their beneficiaries.

It's that that I see as wrong as they can afford their own care.

Many keep saying that funding it is the problem. So my points about potential changes to help fund this universal free care ie the wealthy get to keep their cash & assets and get their universal free care but when they die state takes a larger portion of their estate in effect delaying their contributing to their care provided free by the state.

Ok, univeral free social care is a stupid idea as it is totally unaffordable for the state.
Modifying the current payment system and allowing a higher amount to be kept by the estate is all that needs adjusting on the current funding side for those who can afford to pay.