Funds Insider - Opening the door to funds

Welcome to the Citywire Funds Insider Forums, where members share investment ideas and discuss everything to do with their money.

You'll need to log in or set up an account to start new discussions or reply to existing ones. See you inside!

Notification

Icon
Error

SIPP INHERITED NOW TAXED???
Rookie Investor
Posted: 01 November 2024 13:01:00(UTC)
#79

Joined: 09/12/2020(UTC)
Posts: 2,087

D Bergman;324202 wrote:
Rookie Investor;324199 wrote:
D Bergman;324137 wrote:
Keith Cobby;324133 wrote:
Firstly, I would abolish IHT, but in the absence of this would abolish these discretionary (family) trusts and give everyone the same IHT cliff edge on death. A payment of 6% each decade affords the very wealthy the planning opportunity denied to the rest of us, or increase the 6% to 10%+. As usual this budget has affected the middle class most adversely.


Let me suggest a solution:

Buy life insurance which can be written in trust (so outside your estate for IHT purposes), to cover expected IHT.

I assumed a single male, aged 34, with assets of £1.2 million.

It took me 5 minutes to check 2 of the main UK insurance companies, and for example, I based it on a 34 year old male, insurance of £350K (which is the IHT for the £1.2 million estate) and valid for 40 years.

The cost was about £35 per month, or say £420 per year.

Obviously this would cost more the older you are: a 25-year policy at the age of 64 would cost £5,000 per year (Legal & General online would only offer cover up to the age of 89).

Even for the 64 year old, 10 years' payment would be £50,000, while the Duke of Westminster's 6% payment on the same £1.2 million estate would work out at £72,000!

I am sure you could find an insurance policy better suited to your situation, with whole-of-life cover, but I have other things to do tonight.

So what are you complaining about?


But presumably the duke of westminister pays the 6% at the end of the 10 years, whereas your insurance is paid annually? So the difference, on a PV basis considering opportunity costs would be less than [72k - 50k] - depending on the interest rate.

On your example of taking out the life insurance (350k value, 5k annual premium), it doesn't seem a good deal as you might think (in terms of overall benefit) if life expectancy is reached.

Indeed assuming a 5% interest rate (roughly the yield on a 25 year gilt) and assuming a time till death of 25 years, the PV of the value of the payout is £100k, whereas the PV of the premiums paid out is £70k. A net benefit of only £30k - or £60k if you adjust for the iht you would otherwise have to pay if you did not out the policy). Better than the alternative of taking out no insurance, sure. But good to keep in mind that there is a real significant cost to taking out the insurance, depending on how long you live.

Lower the time of death, the value for you as an insurance holding obviously increases, as does lower interest rate used in the calculation. (the reason why insurance companies tend to do well in rising rate environments - one of the main reasons why i started buying Berkshire in 2021/22).


My post was somewhat tongue in cheek.

I was replying regarding posts that brought up the slightly tiresome (to me!) point about the large estates in the UK not paying IHT.
They effectively do pay IHT, but on a rolling basis.
I was trying to show that many "ordinary" people could figure out ways of inheritance planning that would help with the IHT issue.

For example, we are looking at gifting our children all the tax-free cash from our SIPPs - about £250K.
Even at our ages (75) I can buy a 7-year term life insurance policy, costing about £10K over the 7 years till the gift is outside our estate for IHT. (the policy would be for £100K = 40% of £250K).

So in effect, our children would get £250K free of tax at a cost to me of £10K.
The alternative would be 40% IHT and then marginal income tax, which would be a total cost of between £130K and £167K (depending on if they take the money as income over time or as capital).

I am aware (as another poster mentioned) that not everyone can get affordable insurance easily, but this is just an example..


Yes life insurance seems to be much more useful to cover unexpected early death and facing the situation that your gifts will be liable to IHT. So expected to be a negative in terms of profitability, but at least it hedges you against the cliff edge scenario of having to pay out large amounts on taxes.
Dexi
Posted: 01 November 2024 16:04:53(UTC)
#86

Joined: 03/04/2018(UTC)
Posts: 1,751

Neminem Laedit;324159 wrote:
To the adenoidal speak-your-weight machine, Reeves, and ALL politicians...


As if I'm going to pay 20%/40% income tax on my pension. Jog On...
5%, thank-you very much

As if I'm going to pay 18%/20% CGT. Jog On...
0%, thank-you very much

As if I'm going to pay 40% IHT. Jog On...
0%, thank-you very much

CYPRUS, or maybe Italy/Greece for similar benefits.


Just moving abroad isn't enough to avoid IHT , you also have to change your domicile and sever all links
with the UK.
Hilda Ogden
Posted: 01 November 2024 16:14:46(UTC)
#87

Joined: 31/07/2023(UTC)
Posts: 890

Thanks: 747 times
Was thanked: 1750 time(s) in 635 post(s)
Dexi;324227 wrote:
Neminem Laedit;324159 wrote:
To the adenoidal speak-your-weight machine, Reeves, and ALL politicians...


As if I'm going to pay 20%/40% income tax on my pension. Jog On...
5%, thank-you very much

As if I'm going to pay 18%/20% CGT. Jog On...
0%, thank-you very much

As if I'm going to pay 40% IHT. Jog On...
0%, thank-you very much

CYPRUS, or maybe Italy/Greece for similar benefits.


Just moving abroad isn't enough to avoid IHT , you also have to change your domicile and sever all links
with the UK.

I understand the concept of domicile within the UK tax system is being abolished. Since non dom status will not exist after April 2025, it naturally follows that domicile won't be a thing any more. What will count is residence. I am not a lawyer but I think the landscape is changing to the extent that what has gone before is no longer going to be the case after next April.

Shooting in the semi-dark, I would think in future the five year rule for non residence is what is likely to determine IHT liability. I don't think it is yet fully clear though. The devil will reside in the detail.
5 users thanked Hilda Ogden for this post.
Jay P on 01/11/2024(UTC), Tim D on 01/11/2024(UTC), Dexi on 02/11/2024(UTC), Kevin Crane on 02/11/2024(UTC), Mr TIPS on 04/11/2024(UTC)
D Bergman
Posted: 01 November 2024 16:38:42(UTC)
#80

Joined: 22/03/2018(UTC)
Posts: 1,308

Thanks: 1686 times
Was thanked: 3536 time(s) in 1035 post(s)
Rookie Investor;324211 wrote:
D Bergman;324202 wrote:


My post was somewhat tongue in cheek.

I was replying regarding posts that brought up the slightly tiresome (to me!) point about the large estates in the UK not paying IHT.
They effectively do pay IHT, but on a rolling basis.
I was trying to show that many "ordinary" people could figure out ways of inheritance planning that would help with the IHT issue.

For example, we are looking at gifting our children all the tax-free cash from our SIPPs - about £250K.
Even at our ages (75) I can buy a 7-year term life insurance policy, costing about £10K over the 7 years till the gift is outside our estate for IHT. (the policy would be for £100K = 40% of £250K).

So in effect, our children would get £250K free of tax at a cost to me of £10K.
The alternative would be 40% IHT and then marginal income tax, which would be a total cost of between £130K and £167K (depending on if they take the money as income over time or as capital).

I am aware (as another poster mentioned) that not everyone can get affordable insurance easily, but this is just an example..


Yes life insurance seems to be much more useful to cover unexpected early death and facing the situation that your gifts will be liable to IHT. So expected to be a negative in terms of profitability, but at least it hedges you against the cliff edge scenario of having to pay out large amounts on taxes.
[/quote]


Paying the life insurance shouldn't even be a negative in terms of profitability.
Assuming I live the 7 years after gifting, and assuming a modest increase in the value of the invested gift (say, 3% per year), the £250K should be worth over £300K. So the IHT the family would have had to pay would have increased by, say, 40% of £50K = £20K, plus the extra income tax.

In fact, I could take the £250K tax-free sum, gift the children £240K and use the remaining £10K to buy the insurance. So there will be no cost to me, and a much better result for the children than leaving the £250K in the SIPP to be inherited and taxed.

O what a tangled web the Treasury weaves!
7 users thanked D Bergman for this post.
Guest on 01/11/2024(UTC), Hilda Ogden on 01/11/2024(UTC), lenahan on 01/11/2024(UTC), Jay P on 01/11/2024(UTC), Dentmaster on 01/11/2024(UTC), Carl blue nose on 02/11/2024(UTC), Kevin Crane on 02/11/2024(UTC)
Hilda Ogden
Posted: 01 November 2024 16:53:58(UTC)
#81

Joined: 31/07/2023(UTC)
Posts: 890

Thanks: 747 times
Was thanked: 1750 time(s) in 635 post(s)
D Bergman;324231 wrote:
Rookie Investor;324211 wrote:
D Bergman;324202 wrote:


My post was somewhat tongue in cheek.

I was replying regarding posts that brought up the slightly tiresome (to me!) point about the large estates in the UK not paying IHT.
They effectively do pay IHT, but on a rolling basis.
I was trying to show that many "ordinary" people could figure out ways of inheritance planning that would help with the IHT issue.

For example, we are looking at gifting our children all the tax-free cash from our SIPPs - about £250K.
Even at our ages (75) I can buy a 7-year term life insurance policy, costing about £10K over the 7 years till the gift is outside our estate for IHT. (the policy would be for £100K = 40% of £250K).

So in effect, our children would get £250K free of tax at a cost to me of £10K.
The alternative would be 40% IHT and then marginal income tax, which would be a total cost of between £130K and £167K (depending on if they take the money as income over time or as capital).

I am aware (as another poster mentioned) that not everyone can get affordable insurance easily, but this is just an example..


Yes life insurance seems to be much more useful to cover unexpected early death and facing the situation that your gifts will be liable to IHT. So expected to be a negative in terms of profitability, but at least it hedges you against the cliff edge scenario of having to pay out large amounts on taxes.



Paying the life insurance shouldn't even be a negative in terms of profitability.
Assuming I live the 7 years after gifting, and assuming a modest increase in the value of the invested gift (say, 3% per year), the £250K should be worth over £300K. So the IHT the family would have had to pay would have increased by, say, 40% of £50K = £20K, plus the extra income tax.

In fact, I could take the £250K tax-free sum, gift the children £240K and use the remaining £10K to buy the insurance. So there will be no cost to me, and a much better result for the children than leaving the £250K in the SIPP to be inherited and taxed.

O what a tangled web the Treasury weaves![/quote]

Food for thought certainly. Though a number of us will be uninsurable at any price.
1 user thanked Hilda Ogden for this post.
Dentmaster on 01/11/2024(UTC)
AlanT
Posted: 01 November 2024 18:07:11(UTC)
#49

Joined: 23/07/2010(UTC)
Posts: 113

Thanks: 938 times
Was thanked: 361 time(s) in 86 post(s)
Martin Stafford;324065 wrote:
Good afternoon

If anyone knows the precise way in which SIPP tax will be charged post 2027 I would be most grateful for clarification. The worst I have heard thus far is CGT first then IHT then tax at marginal rate for beneficiaries..

If I am not mistaken this should leave just about enough for a packet of fags and a round of drinks..


https://www.evelyn.com/i...t-your-personal-wealth/

See this at 16 minutes in.
3 users thanked AlanT for this post.
D Bergman on 01/11/2024(UTC), Martin Stafford on 01/11/2024(UTC), Carl blue nose on 02/11/2024(UTC)
Geoff Fitz
Posted: 01 November 2024 20:39:50(UTC)
#93

Joined: 21/02/2024(UTC)
Posts: 82

Thanks: 48 times
Was thanked: 119 time(s) in 43 post(s)
What is unclear to me is how the assets will be 'banked/maintained'.

I think this is a realistic scenario, I die post 75, all my pension assets are passed to my wife free of IHT. Where will these assets sits? Does the money form part of her total estate or is the pension money ring fenced somewhere? A few years later my wife dies and all the assets are left to children split equally. The pension assets which I had how may they be identified and processed given my children will take benefits but have the pension funds been ring fenced when my wife had them.

It's very unclear. Any thoughts?
1 user thanked Geoff Fitz for this post.
OmegaMale on 01/11/2024(UTC)
D Bergman
Posted: 01 November 2024 23:12:45(UTC)
#94

Joined: 22/03/2018(UTC)
Posts: 1,308

Thanks: 1686 times
Was thanked: 3536 time(s) in 1035 post(s)
Geoff Fitz;324249 wrote:
What is unclear to me is how the assets will be 'banked/maintained'.

I think this is a realistic scenario, I die post 75, all my pension assets are passed to my wife free of IHT. Where will these assets sits? Does the money form part of her total estate or is the pension money ring fenced somewhere? A few years later my wife dies and all the assets are left to children split equally. The pension assets which I had how may they be identified and processed given my children will take benefits but have the pension funds been ring fenced when my wife had them.

It's very unclear. Any thoughts?


As it stands, the regulations will not change with the imposition of IHT.

At the moment, when the SIPP is inherited, assets remain in the wrapper (and are ring fenced), and marginal income tax is charged only when they are removed from the SIPP.
The inherited SIPP wrapper would still need to have designated beneficiaries.

There are issues with the fact that SIPPs have trustees, so are different from GIAs or ISAs.
I suspect that is why there will be a very long consultation period, and the new regulations - whatever they will be - will only come into effect in April 2027.
1 user thanked D Bergman for this post.
Geoff Fitz on 02/11/2024(UTC)
MBA MBA
Posted: 02 November 2024 06:57:07(UTC)
#46

Joined: 16/12/2012(UTC)
Posts: 1,725

Thanks: 3475 times
Was thanked: 3599 time(s) in 1156 post(s)
Robert D;324047 wrote:

This move on inheritance is one of the best in the entire Budget. Pensions are a vehicle for funding life after retirement - they should not be not a way of giving your kids money free of inheritance tax. Taxes should ideally not distort behaviour and the IHT loophole for pensions was distorting behaviour both pre-retirement and post-retirement.


All taxes distort behaviour, just as subsidies do. That’s just a simple long standing accepted fact by economists.

I know someone who is the Green Party, calls himself a socialist, goes on Palestine marches, when Osborne started to increase the tax burden on BTL proprieties he decided to sell up. His behaviour was affected.

When the LTA and AA started to affect NHS doctors, they decided not to do extra shifts. Their behaviour was affected.

When a couple are sent the signal that if they save they wont get their housing benefit or qualify for ‘social’ housing, they dont save and instead they spend (I’d suggest you frequent the housing estates in London and look at the Mercs and BMWs in the car park). Hence a subsidy like housing benefit affects their behaviour.

When govt gives allowances to invest in capital and business people increase capital investment, that’s afffecteed their behaviour.

When the threat of VAT on private school fees was raised, we decided we couldn’t afford to go private and so we didnt and instead accepted the bog standard Komp and got a tutor. Even the threat of an extra 20% affected our behaviour.
5 users thanked MBA MBA for this post.
Blunt Instrument on 02/11/2024(UTC), stephen_s on 02/11/2024(UTC), SSJ on 02/11/2024(UTC), Jonathan7 on 03/11/2024(UTC), BM Shah on 04/11/2024(UTC)
MBA MBA
Posted: 02 November 2024 07:21:16(UTC)
#95

Joined: 16/12/2012(UTC)
Posts: 1,725

Thanks: 3475 times
Was thanked: 3599 time(s) in 1156 post(s)
Surely behavioural change will now increase if the IHT is going to be applied to pensions and more generally IHT, especially for anyone in London and the South with a £1+m house (which is fairly common, even for terraced houses and some flats).

- For me ironically the case for investing in private schooling is greater given we dont have a good option for our son (if he doesnt get into grammar, likely given the fierce competition)

- more holidays

- we drive a 14 year old hatchback so maybe a new car too

- more gifting of money early on

- Also your capacity to enjoy stuff, cars, holidays etc diminshies as you age, right? Especially say after poor health. So might as well not prioritise spending.

- If you do have a house worth over £1m there’s now a huge incentive to downsize and spend/gift away

- Better to pay for your kids university and help them avoid student loan penal interest than leave the money so they might get it when they are in their 40’s but face IHT and income tax

The risk to all the above is that you end up not having enough money if you live to your 70’s or 80’s or 90s. However, thankfully we live in a welfare state albeit one not as good as in some parts of Europe or even Australia. We know a woman from abroad who came to the UK in her 60’s. Not a word of English. Never had a job. Lived to 96 years until a few months ago. Spent the last 10 years in a care home costing £00,000’s pa. All paid for by the UK state.
3 users thanked MBA MBA for this post.
Carl blue nose on 02/11/2024(UTC), stephen_s on 02/11/2024(UTC), Paulafrancis on 03/11/2024(UTC)
20 Pages«Previous page7891011Next page»
+ Reply to discussion

Markets

Other markets