Dubstepforum.com

Fuck there are going to be a lot of bigups in this thread.

magma wrote:

Laszlo wrote:

dubunked wrote:IMO the motivation behind it is just to gain more tax revenue but it's kinda a good idea when you think about it because it hinders "old money" and family dynasties and people just getting rich from doing nothing but inheriting their parents money. so in other words it keeps money circulating and stops it from sitting in rich kid's bank accounts.

Like I say, the super rich get around it no problem.

People find ways round all sorts of things; that's no reason to just make them free-for-alls. In typically Internet-friendly hyperbole, people get away with rape every day. I'm not about to argue for saying "fuck it; if Saville can get away with it until he's dead, we might as well just scrap the whole thing."

But it is not just a fucked individual (in either case, actually) but a whole class of people, a class that is the supposed target of the tax scheme. But ultimately it comes down to consent. If you consent to be taxed in that manner, you are. If you do not want to be taxed thusly, you don't have to be. Only flaw is that you can give consent through your ignorance.

For the record I wasn't saying scrap the whole thing, I was saying 40% is a rinse. However, this opinion was based on the governments previous taxation policy and since scspkr99's revelation that "the 40% is the rate of tax you pay on what you inherit over the threshold" I am now fine with the situation. Carry on.