OV9

#prayforJobbo

So far the budget isn’t tallying up with the OBR. The £22 billion black hole seems questionable at best. Economic growth projected to remain pretty flat over the next 5 years. Making it easier for the government to borrow money.

I think things will generally be ok if the worldwide economic health is ok and we bob along but it seems to be riding a narrow line and each budget must surely raise taxes more to keep up with additional spending

Some of the case studies of the changes in pension IHT handling make for some pretty shocking reading. Hope the conservatives fight the next election on abolishing IHT altogether. They'd get the farmers vote too.

Apparently only a tiny few rich people will ever pay it so doubt it would get them more than a handful of votes….

The line used to be that 4% of estates paid IHT. Reeves in her opening salvo today claimed it was 6%. That number is going up fast!

Anyone pro killing iht is already a tory voter.

Jobbo wrote: Wed Oct 30, 2024 4:21 pm
@GG. I hope this does not affect any of your clients. I think (by good fortune) none of ours have been caught.

Nothing I’m working on directly. It is bad form (but typical for Labour and similar to the desperation to bring VAT on school fees in in the middle of a school year) - I pity the M&A team somewhere that just finalised a 5 page excel workbook with a deal fundsflow and now finds their numbers are all wrong after the payments have been wired.

Looping back, i wonder if the school fee vat coming in mid year is actually intentional? People are very unlikely to take a child out mid year, and maybe the assumption is that once they’ve paid a term, they’ll just carry on. i expect it’ll work too.

GG. wrote: Thu Oct 31, 2024 8:28 am

Jobbo wrote: Wed Oct 30, 2024 4:21 pm
@GG. I hope this does not affect any of your clients. I think (by good fortune) none of ours have been caught.

Nothing I’m working on directly. It is bad form (but typical for Labour and similar to the desperation to bring VAT on school fees in in the middle of a school year) - I pity the M&A team somewhere that just finalised a 5 page excel workbook with a deal fundsflow and now finds their numbers are all wrong after the payments have been wired.

There is another nastier trap in the small print - even where an unconditional contract for sale has been exchanged before 30 October, the date for CGT purposes will be the date of actual transfer of the asset. Retroactive and I think may catch one of our transactions.

We were all done on the 29th, bloody pleased with that!

Dave!

It's really shitty to set the effective date in that way. Stoopid.

Mito Man wrote: Wed Oct 30, 2024 7:27 pm So far the budget isn’t tallying up with the OBR. The £22 billion black hole seems questionable at best.

Labour says 22, OBR says 10. I believe the bulk of the difference is the public sector pay review. Tories started it with a loose commitment to abide by the review board recommendation, but the bill didn't arrive until Labour took power. Arguably it was a foreseeable cost, but it hadn't been formally factored into the figures Jeremy Hunt gave to the OBR, so it's kinda debatable either way whether is should be described as part of the "black hole".

As an aside - why is it a *black* hole? Surely, it's just a common or garden hole?

Black hole sounds scarier

It all strikes me as somewhat amateurish.. surely this is one of the reasons we have a civil service? Are they being unhelpful or is Labour not listening (as political appointees are known to do)?

ZedLeg wrote: Thu Oct 31, 2024 10:42 am Black hole sounds scarier

ZedLeg wrote: Thu Oct 31, 2024 10:42 am Black hole sounds scarier

If it was a working Black Hole we could throw all our rubbish in and pretend it was never an issue

Dave!

Its a "black hole" because no one in Labour is willing to explain what is inside it...

It’s also a black hole because whatever money you throw at it will disappear never to be seen again.

Mito Man wrote: Thu Oct 31, 2024 12:31 pm It’s also a black hole because whatever money you throw at it will disappear never to be seen again.

I'd suggest that particular hole is one mighty fuck of a lot bigger than £22bn

The scale of the pensions IHT grab is becoming apparent - if the pot is subject to 40% IHT and then the recipient pays the 45% rate on income from said pension, that's a total grab of 67% of the value of that pension.

So then ask the question - for someone who rented but saved into a pension instead - why should their children get much more harshly treated than someone who owned their home and passed that on instead? Seems totally counterintuitive for a labour government.