A miniscule minority.

The problem is, we as a society have encouraged victimhood. It's almost aspirational these days. And that's why we have the mental health crap, the gender bullshit....we hold no one accountable for anything now. We celebrate weakness and so we have to pay for it by stealing from everyone else.

And there are a million ISA holders who are not millionaires and within them I am pretty confident, there are more than 4,000 who invested the same capital amount in a manner same as the 4,000 but invested differently and their pot is not a million let alone 8. Such is life.

So they did everything the same apart from investing in the same stocks / funds / trades / costs etc. So should they also be bumped up to a million as life has not be fair to them ?

Or perhaps they can all get rid of it all and sing kumbaya.

If two kids from the same household (say twins) go to the same school, are in the same class but chose different routes, ending with differing grades and qualifications during which one choses to spend the next 25 years burying themselves in activities to prepare and build a better life whilst the other decides to live for the moment and experience life only taking on jobs to fund the weekend ahead.

Then later in life the playboy is all worn out single, and without a pot to piss in and angry that their sibling who has a significant asset base, high profile job with a 7 figure bonus each year, useful connections etc is unwilling to hand out the small amount (simply because they have it and the other has not) to help out and fund the upcoming weekends plans or share of their wealth as it is the humane thing to do and will make society more equal. Should the one who has the means feed the irrational portrayed as moral view of the individual who simply is unwilling to accept the reality that life is not fair and we need to strive to get ahead.

As someone once put it, you can only give out if you have any and to have any you need to take measures to acquire and built it.

IHT is payable on ISAs , so those wealthy pensioners will be doing their bit for the UK , helping with essential expenditure such as the House of Lords and keeping migrants in luxury seaside B+B s .

Why not? That's basically what the Lifetime Allowance on pensions was. (As for pensions, presumably there'd need to be some "fixed protection" provisions to placate the worst affected.)

The thing about ISAs is, they can only hold liquid assets. So they are very easy to value, and so they'd be a very easy target for a wealth tax. Suppose total ISA holdings above some threshold (possibly as low as £0, to save HMRC having to track an individual's multiple ISAs) were hit with an X%pa annual charge, for the privilege of being free of the tax complications of unsheltered assets. How big would X have to be before folks threw in the towel on ISAs and just held stuff (or at least, stuff above the threshold) unsheltered? 0.1%? 0.25%? 0.5%? 1%? (~0.5%pa would be an interesting number... because I imagine it'd be the final push for a lot of folks to dump their 0.7%OCF actively managed funds for 0.2%OCF passives)

In the past, the nation's total ISA assets were trifling compared with pensions, and pensions were the obvious target for sticky fingered chancellors. But googling around suggests ISA assets are now up to 0.75trillion compared with 2-3trillion for DB&DC pension assets, so... ripe for picking?

You are probably right but they could introduce a cap on how much you can have in an ISA in future. People who already had more than this amount would be able to keep the money in an ISA but it would reduce the scope of ISAs for people who currently have less than the cap in their ISA. There are also probably a few in-between possibilities.

Unlike the previous unrealistic suggestion of £200,000 I would have thought a more realistic cap would be a similar amount to the previous lifetime pensions allowance of c£1m although even this was probably too low so maybe c£1.5m to c£2.5m? £5m tops.

As I have said though rather than tax people and then offer a way to mitigate the tax personally I think the government should tax people less in the first place.