4% of estates paid ANY inheritance tax in 2015-16. FOUR. Scrapping it costs around £5bn - 40% of which would go to just 1,700 estates worth over £2 million (who would get an AVERAGE tax cut of just over £1 million)
Where would benefits from scrapping inheritance tax? London and the South East. Levelling up it is not
"Fundamentally reform inheritance tax into a receipts tax with far fewer loopholes in part so we can fund bringing to an end the disgrace of underpaying our social care workforce" is obviously what they meant to say
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Here’s a short story about who wins and loses from the status quo of our inheritance tax rules - and about, what you might politely call ‘sub-optimal’ journalism🧵
On 19 November, the Times ran a ‘news’ piece on the demonstration in Westminster by farmers opposed to changes to inheritance tax. Obviously reporting the news is good, but reading such a one sided piece made me think it belonged in the comment pages thetimes.com/uk/environment…
In it they tell the story of John Kemp-Welch. Here’s how he’s described: “Kemp-Welch, 88, who owns 5,000 acres of "difficult hill farming land" in Perthshire where he and his children farm blackface sheep.”
So much misinformation around today on who will be affected by changes to inheritance tax - and lobbyists pretending the data isn't clear to obfuscate. We have detailed data on estates so the truth is in fact very clear if you care to look 🧵
If what you care about is just agricultural property, 84% of claims for relief are for less than £1.5m (which realistically is the minimum you'd have to have in assets including a farm before you start paying any tax). 96% are less than the £3m couples will still pass on tax free
Some farms include wider business assets - but even then 78% of claims are for less than £1.5m and 93% for less than £3m
Not news = those hugely benefitting from a tax exemption, despite never being the intended beneficiaries, are opposed to reform of that tax exemption
It takes a special kind of nonsense speak to claim the way to protect future generations of farmers is to provide a large tax incentive for non-farmers to buy up land, pricing actual would be farmers out. That is exactly what the status quo does
It's also totally untrue that a farm worth 'only £1m' will be affected. A couple passing on a farm + farmhouse worth £3m will remain entirely exempt from inheritance tax
Today @RachelReevesMP has swept away one of the biggest weaknesses in the UK’s macroeconomic framework: the bias against public investment. It’s a very big deal.
This means this government will avoid the huge falls in public sector investment planned by the last government, but it’s a bigger deal than just shaping next week’s Budget…
…because the new fiscal rules reshape the Treasury’s incentives - removing the short term incentive to cut investment to pay for tax cuts or fiscal shortfalls. Those pressures have driven our disastrously low and volatile levels of public investment for over 4 decades
Understandably lots of debate about child poverty this morning – something we as a country should spend much more time focusing on
The context here is the first Labour Kings Speech in 14yrs – implementing a manifesto just endorsed by the election result. No-one should be surprised that 98+% of Labour MPs voted for it/against amendments from other parties. That’s business as normal just days after an election
More importantly we shouldn’t confuse parliamentary procedure with what actually matters - reducing child poverty, something I’ve spent my life working on – in the last Labour government (which did exactly that) and ever since.
The case for @RachelReevesMP’s sweeping changes to the planning system announced today…
1. For 15yrs, we’ve been attempting to dig a tunnel under the Thames. No digging has taken place, but £800m has been spent & 9k pages of planning applications drafted. This is double what Norway spent actually building Lærdalstunnelen, the world’s longest road tunnel…
2. If we want net zero to happen, and to happen without higher costs, then things are going to have to be built. Things that not everyone loves. And they will also have to be built if we want our firms to be able to invest, grow and pay higher wages