Yes, it's there already

[Moo]

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/ihtcrusade/

I'm not sure I agree with the detail of the submission, but I've signed anyway.

Apart from the ridiculously low threshold, what really sticks in my craw is the way the goalposts were changed retrospectively.

 

[Flyfisher]

Me too (and I do agree with the detailed submission)

 

[Moo]

Yesterday's papers announced that the average house is now worth more than £200,000, which must mean that a lot more people are going to be caught in the inheritance tax net. I wonder how many potential signatures to the petition this means.

I suspect that if they all signed up, it would make the road-pricing one seem very small beer indeed.

And when all their houses flood on to the market when the tax has to be paid, it could have a dramatic effect on house prices - more accessible to first-time buyers, for one thing. But the downside would be an enormous number of heartbreaking repossessions as well, which would make yet more people dependent on the state, which could use up all the money raised by IHT.......

 

[Penners]

Moo - you can't expect the Government to understand complicated concepts like your small print. It involves far too much thinking, and concerns a scenario that could happen after the next General Election.

Keep it simple, short-term and use very small words. Or - if it's going to involve John Prescott - include lots of pictures (preferably the kind he can colour in).

 

[Moo]

ok, Penners. How's this for starters :

Count all the people who own houses.
Add all the people who expect to inherit money from them.
How many of them are in marginal constituencies?
Can you afford to lose all those votes?

 

[biffvernon]

So where should the government raise money? Or what cuts would you like to see?

 

[Nemesis]

You don't have to pay Inheritance Tax on sums given to charity either.

 

[Penners]

Can you afford to lose all those votes?

Ah - "votes". That's a nice, monosyllabic word that any politican will understand.

 

[NT]

So where should the government raise money?

Seems to be raising rather a lot already

Or what cuts would you like to see?

We need more spend on the serious things, like NHS, and less on the numerous trivial time wasting space wasting trivia that the govt loves to spend on, like new art galleries in places that already have art galleries etc


NT

 

[biffvernon]

We need more spend on the serious things, like NHS, and less on the numerous trivial time wasting space wasting trivia that the govt loves to spend on, like new art galleries in places that already have art galleries etc

The NHS costs a lot, 'trivia' like new art galleries cost very little.
And I'd like to see the government spend more on the arts, even if that means higher taxation.

 

[Moo]

The answer to every problem seems to be to throw more and more (taxpayers') money at it.

There are families who live well on modest incomes and there are others who can barely scrape by on twice as much. So much depends on the quality of the housekeeping.

 

[skier-hughes]

housekeeping.

I remember somebody, maybe the Lord Chancellor, spending £900 per roll of wallpaper for his office. That is some housekeeping budget......

 

[Gervase]

Ah, but that depends on education - and that's a good use of our taxes.

 

[Nemesis]

The wallpaper was actually by Pugin - it was a restoration of the offices or official residence of the Lord Chancellor or whoever listed I think Grade I. It had to be reprinted by hand from the original blocks. I suspect it won't be ripped off in a couple of years and replaced either.

Personally I'm quite happy that high quality work such as this happens at times, I'm not sure a roll of B and Q woodchip would have done the job really.

 

[skier-hughes]

I'd have been happier with something "close" to original than totally hand made being as I'm paying for it.

I don't recall saying B&Q woodchip would be a good alternative.

If it was my house that's what I'd have done, not gone round to all my neighbours and got them to cough up for the cost!!

So you expect £900 a roll wallpapaer to stay on say 36 times longer than a good wallpaper at £25 a roll? Our £10 a roll wllpaper at our old house went on and stayed on for at least 8 years, may still be there, so this paper will still be there in 288 years time to make it good value for money?

Or lets look at it another way, how many rolls did he use, lets say 15 per room, I can't remember how many rooms were done, but at just one thats £13,500, less £500 for normal paper....... how far would £13k go in helping one of the many houses/buildings you keep telling us is in need of a bit of help

 

[Nemesis]

I'm very happy indeed with all the beautiful restoration/repair work carried out on behalf of the nation, there are some buildings where in the overall scheme of things it has to be done properly.

Not sure when you were last in the Houses of Parliament but it's all looking good.

If you aren't - tough.

I think it was three hundred quid a roll though.

http://business.guardian.co.uk/story/0,,2002845,00.html

 

[skier-hughes]

I see their best selling paper was in the £25-£29 range, that says something and I didn't write my post before seeing that!!!!!!!

Strangely enough

The group produces a similar handblock print wallpaper for £100 to £150 a roll which it sells mainly to Americans.

Which would have reduced the cost by up to 2/3. A saving I'd have been prepared for him to take, but spending other people's money is oh so much easier!!!!

Sorry Moo your inheritance tax has to go up to pay for the expensive Pugin designed wallpaper :lol: :lol:

 

[Nemesis]

Actually he wasn't spending it - it was all part of the ongoing refurb of the Houses of P. It's not his personal property. Running costs are met by the House of Lords and not the Government. It's used for official business too.

I'd rather it had the real Pugin as designed for the place, but if you prefer ersatz...

There's similar stuff in other rooms too. If you go for Commons Select Committee meetings you would see.

 

[Me!]

Unfortunately even at £900 per roll, that is small change compared to the wasted money every day in the government.