Diesel

http://money.independent.co.uk/perso...p?story=630122

This ****ey government are determined to kill the notion of the kids inheriting the family home [as happens fairly elsewhere worldwide…]. We are talking modest houses attracting such inheritance tax that you will have NO CHOICE but to sell the house to pay a tax bill. It is absurdly punitive and a good reason to think long and hard about how to vote on May 5th - it may cost you tens of thousands of pounds in later years.

Those of us that reticently brought up the tricky subject with parents and paid legal fees to establish trusts [so as their own blood rather than the government benefit from their parents lifelong hard work and taxpaying] are having that rug well and truly pulled from under their feet now. The greed is on their side not the families.

D

The article:

Tax shelters cave in on family homes
The Government is cracking down on people who have put their properties into trust to cut inheritance bills. Sam Dunn reports
With an election looming next month, no one is talking about raising income tax.

Yet tens of thousands of homeowners already face higher tax bills thanks to new rules that came into force on 6 April. Chancellor Gordon Brown is clamping down on those who have set up complex and expensive trusts to escape a hefty inheritance tax (IHT) charge on the value of their estate - currently 40 per cent on any sum above a £275,000 threshold.

During the past 20 years or so, these trusts have tended to be established to shelter a property from the taxman while the homeowner is allowed to carry on living there.

But while people who have set up these schemes were acting within the rules at the time, the Government has decided that they must now pay a charge known as the "pre-owned assets" tax. This has left many facing a difficult choice, each carrying a potentially heavy financial penalty.

The most likely option for those who want to continue living in their homes is to pay a new income tax charge based on the annual rental value of their property.

However, alternatives include paying a professional to dismantle their trust(s); selling the house; giving up the property altogether to live somewhere else; or simply letting it count towards IHT.

"New rules mean that many people who have given assets to their children face an additional income tax charge if they continue to use, or benefit from, what they give away," says Mary Hase of accountants Smith & Williamson.

The main arrangements under attack are the so-called "double trusts" and "Ingram" and "Eversden" schemes.

With a double trust, you sold your home to one trust in return for an IOU that was then "gifted" to a second trust for your children. You continued to live in your property.

Assuming you lived for seven years afterwards, this debt was then deducted from your estate and the children would face a tiny IHT bill.

Similarly, the Eversden scheme relied on your spouse living for seven years after the home passed via a trust to your children. Under the Ingram scheme, you gave away your freehold in return for a short lease, allowing you to live in your home rent-free for the rest of your life.

Those who set up such trusts must decide what to do - a decision requiring specialist tax planning, says Ms Hase.



"For example, the potential income tax charge will be based on the annual market rent of the house as at 6 April this year," she explains. "But if this rent is less than £5,000 a year, there's nothing to pay."

Many of the 30,000 or so homes set up in these trusts and schemes now have a rental value far in excess of this.
With an election looming next month, no one is talking about raising income tax.

Yet tens of thousands of homeowners already face higher tax bills thanks to new rules that came into force on 6 April. Chancellor Gordon Brown is clamping down on those who have set up complex and expensive trusts to escape a hefty inheritance tax (IHT) charge on the value of their estate - currently 40 per cent on any sum above a £275,000 threshold.

During the past 20 years or so, these trusts have tended to be established to shelter a property from the taxman while the homeowner is allowed to carry on living there.

But while people who have set up these schemes were acting within the rules at the time, the Government has decided that they must now pay a charge known as the "pre-owned assets" tax. This has left many facing a difficult choice, each carrying a potentially heavy financial penalty.

The most likely option for those who want to continue living in their homes is to pay a new income tax charge based on the annual rental value of their property.

However, alternatives include paying a professional to dismantle their trust(s); selling the house; giving up the property altogether to live somewhere else; or simply letting it count towards IHT.

"New rules mean that many people who have given assets to their children face an additional income tax charge if they continue to use, or benefit from, what they give away," says Mary Hase of accountants Smith & Williamson.

The main arrangements under attack are the so-called "double trusts" and "Ingram" and "Eversden" schemes.

With a double trust, you sold your home to one trust in return for an IOU that was then "gifted" to a second trust for your children. You continued to live in your property.

Assuming you lived for seven years afterwards, this debt was then deducted from your estate and the children would face a tiny IHT bill.

Similarly, the Eversden scheme relied on your spouse living for seven years after the home passed via a trust to your children. Under the Ingram scheme, you gave away your freehold in return for a short lease, allowing you to live in your home rent-free for the rest of your life.

Those who set up such trusts must decide what to do - a decision requiring specialist tax planning, says Ms Hase.


However, it could be cheaper for those living in the homes to pay the income tax for the remaining years of their life, rather than try to dismantle the trust or "elect" the property back into their estate, where it will be considered for IHT, she adds.

"If you are elderly or ailing and the annual income tax for the [estimated] rest of your life is likely to be less than the IHT had you not made the gift in the first place, it is probably best to leave matters alone and pay the tax."

The other option - selling up and moving - may not appeal to families whose homes are full of memories and are located near loved ones and friends.

As well as targeting these complex trusts, Mr Brown's new rules are catching many who did not set out deliberately to avoid IHT.

For example, suppose a father had given his daughter a portfolio of shares, and years later she sold them and bought the property in which he now lives. The father will now face an income tax charge, says Ms Hase.

There had been fears that those who have used equity-release schemes to free up cash from the value of their home - as many elderly homeowners have - would also be caught in the new tax dragnet.

However, days before this year's Budget, the Paymaster General, Dawn Primarolo, announced that these people would, in most cases, be exempt.

For millions of families, IHT has become one of their most serious financial concerns. Soaring house price rises during the past 10 years have pushed many over the threshold at which IHT is payable. This has sparked worries that "property-rich, cash-poor" pensioners will no longer be able to pass wealth on to their children.

But there are still steps you can take to protect your home. A "discretionary will" trust can enable a married couple to put the family home in trust on the death of the second spouse. But seek specialist advice before taking up this option.

Dracoro

Tax and Spend(i.e.Waste). That is what Labour is all about.

I suppose one day, they'll start taxing presents you give your kids at christmas an birthdays.

Anyway, this'll hit the poorest worst.

ian_sadler

That could **** me up good & propper

MattW

Bad show making retrospective changes to tax legislation, imagine the uproar if he increased the base rate of tax backdated to 2000!!! At the very least this should only affect trusts set up from 6th April onwards.

Luminous

iTrader: (3)

They already do. Officially the last 7 years presents should be added into the death estate and then a tax charge made on them.

Luminous

iTrader: (3)

They really need to be voted out.....

At least locally there is a real attempt to make Tony Blair lose his seat in Sedgefield. That will be really amusing if we manage to pull that one off.

Chris L

That really sucks - as if it isn't enough to have been paying tax all your life....

There are other ways to maximise your IHT allowances though. I know this won't work for everyone, but what my parents have done is split the ownership of their house 50:50. Each person has an IHT allowance. When one partner dies, 50% of the house is transferred into a trust fund. When the other partner dies, the remaining 50% of the house is transferred into the trust. By splitting the value of the house, neither half will breech the IHT allowance. This allows the remaining partner to live in the house without facing a massive IHT demand. Obviously, if your parents have a seriously big house, then this only has a limited appeal. However, for many people living in house valued at around 3-400K (i.e. a good proportion of the South East), then this scheme does have some benefits - and it's not affected by Labour's plans.

PCatWork

Not really true, in fact:

Italy seems to be the most notable exception to having to pay inheritance tax.

DAVE-W

What if your parents just put the house into your name before they die?

Tiggs

its a gift, wont work.


the pre-owned asset rules are interesting. i sold plenty of these trusts in 2003/4 before the rule change and there is some interesting rumours between london solicitors that they may yet excape the income tax charge.

so if you have one......get advice before acting (although it shouldnt effect many as we didnt bother with homes under £800k and i doubt many others did either)


also...that article is about as misleading as your avarage SN post! about 50% of it is relevant!

chaos.

and i was planning on a cushy future as well

a farrari even

but tony can buy himself one, on my behalf

SJ_Skyline

This does beg the question - Has our grubby little chancellor orchestrated the house price rises we have seen over recent years whereby the average UK property price has risen from c.£63K to over c.£120K over the last 10 years.

This coupled with stamp duty is definitely a "nice little earner" Gordon.

Tiggs

This - and variations on it- is our biggest earner. Staggered how mant people dont know about it prior to seeing us, yet if everyone did it IHT would prob be scrapped as it would cost more to collect than it makes! (or they would just raise it )

Freak

what about joint ownership? parents AND children all as owners? Assuming this was done at least 7 years before the worst would that work?

Need to find a way round this- looking at one whopping chunk of cash going to the b@stards otherwise. Quite frankly i would rather burn it than give it to them.

Tiggs

if the kids own half the house and the folks have 100% use then they have retained a benifit in the share they have "gifted"........reservation of benifit- therefore TAXED

various ways round it...get an IFA that knows his stuff.

T

Leslie

Its pretty obvious that despite all their claims for the masterly handling of the economy, the country is now deeply in hock to the IMF for all the borrowing that has been done by the Exchequer. They will realise of course that it will not be long before the Chickens come home to roost and they will have to find the cash from somewhere to service the debts.

I shudder to think of the coming stealth taxes to pay for the grossly top heavy administration they have built up over the years which will increase in size if they continue to mismanage the country's finances in the future.

Public services will continue to become less and less efficient and more costly of course.

Les

OllyK

And then will begin the strikes and the next winter of discontent

Chris L

Nice to know they done the right thing Tiggs

Chip

Lets go for it

Chip

ajm

My parents no longer live in the UK.... Gordon can whistle for it!

Mungo

You don't pay IHT on your spouse's estate. I think the aim of this scheme is for the trust to avoid paying IHT, and then for the trust to be able to dispose of the estate's assets at a later stage. Any proper tax advisors out there?

Chris L

No, but if and when the spouse dies, the house will then be owned by the beneficiaries of the will (i.e. my sister and I) - we're liable for IHT. By splitting the ownership of the house and transfering 50% of the house into the trust, as and when one partner dies, you avoid this. My sister and I are the beneficiaries of the trust.

Tiggs

There are two VERY different things here:

WILL PLANNING

Mum dead...half house goes to trust via her Will...dad has his half.

Dad dead, his half of the house goes to kids (who then also get the mums half from the trust)

INSTEAD of mum dead....dad has all the house....dad dead...big tax bill.

grossly over simplified (but you lot need it like that )

DOUBLE TRUST

Mum and dad sell house to trust A- trust A owned by kids, mum and dad can benifit from trust A.........trust A has no cash so it gives mum and dad an IOU...they give it to trust B...owned by kids (only kids benifit from trust B)

mum and dad dead.....own no house but revenue tax them on trust A because they have an interest in it......but trust A owes trust B the value of the hosue at the time it got it....so trust A isnt worth much. Trust B has all the wonga when the IOU is repaid. Volia!

This is now caught under pre-owned asset tax though.....even if you did pay £20k to get it set up!


just to cover all basis.....

also effected are Eversden type schemes:

Dad puts £1m in trust for wife, wife gives up her interest in the trust to the the other benerficiers of it (thats a seven year gift) Dad and mum can still access £1m but the money is out of mums estate after 7 years- it left dads when he gave it to wife via spouse excemption.........now void since finance act 2004.....sort of void, you can still do it but you get caught for income tax instead.

...again....grossly simplified but its Friday afternoon and i aint getting paid for it!

Vegescoob

It's all to pay for "Chavworld".
Imho, of course.

pslewis

Why should you rely on Mummy and Daddy??

FFS we are in a world where the young don't want to do anything but get everything in return!

Its your Mum and Dads profit ... NOT YOURS!! Its as much yours as the Governments!!

It takes NO skill whatsoever in seeing an increase in property values - its about time the sproggs paid their way!

Pete

IMHO of course!!

Dracoro

You leaving your kids nothing then Pete?

Vegescoob

No, pslewis we are in a country where, unlike for us, young professionals and skilled tradespeople starting out cannot afford reasonable housing.
The "sproggs" cannot pay their way.
House price inflation out of kilter with wages is absurd.
A bubble which will burst as it has done before.

pslewis

I am going to spend my last £ an my last £ drink!!

And any sprogg that don't want their parents to enjoy their wealth and spend it are selfish beyond comprehension!

I say, give all you have back to the government ..... thats where it all comes from in the first place!!

Get the spoilt sproggs to earn their loaf!

Pete

pslewis

House Price Inflation is being driven by Inherited money being used for Buy-To-Lets!!

Ban inheritance ...... pay what you can afford, without Mummy and Daddy helping!

THEN we shall see a properly funded housing stock at sensible prices!

Pete

Vegescoob

Pslewis,
Yields on many BTLs not good at moment.
In some way I do agree on ban inheritance, if that meant all, from the Royal Family and the Aristocracy down. Break up the large estates.
The major problem in this country is stupid planning laws and NIMBYism.