God Save The King

[The Brain]

One thing that Sweden does wrong IMHO when it comes to wealth transfer to the next generation is that you actually HAVE TO DO IT. Your kids are entitled to half of what an even split would be, regardless of what you write in your will. You can't fully disinherit your kids. Which is all kinds of bizarre. Especially these days when the typical Swede loses his parents when he is well into middle age, and typically already has his own functioning economy. I don't know why this law still exists.

[The Brain]

So I am a rich guy I put most of my assets into a company together with my children then on retirement I sell my share of it to the kids ona form of equity release where I get use of the properties and a stipend until I die. Should the whole company be taken away from the children on my death and if yes on what basis? That it was at some point in my life owned by me and it is now owned by blood relatives?

I admit this nationalisation would work much easier with poorer people who can't really afford fancy legal trickeries.

Yeah I don't really agree with inherited wealth and privilege in all its guises and it's no more virtuous in a business suit than it is a Ruritanian uniform. And how many generations do you go down before they are indistinguishable?

I don't have an issue with gifts - liquidate your assets and give money away. I don't mind people doing things like a sale - which would attract tax - within their life. As I say I object to trusts etc more.

You're fine with rich people on their deathbeds giving their wealth to their kids?

[Crazy_Ivan80]

What inherent right does the state has on my wealth that my heirs lack?

Pure devil's advocate argument: "What have your children contributed to your wealth? Meanwhile, hasn't the state provided the societal, legal, economic framework for you to be able to achieve your wealth in?"

That's why you pay taxes, and everything you own has already been taxed. No need to tax it a second time (or in case of Belgium: a second, third, fourth and fifth time)

[crazy canuck]

So how do trust fund kids fit into the picture exactly?

Not sure how it works in Sweden, but in Canada they are created by the funds flowing to them with little or no tax consequences.

[The Brain]

So how do trust fund kids fit into the picture exactly?

Not sure how it works in Sweden, but in Canada they are created by the funds flowing to them with little or no tax consequences.

And how do they have an impact on whether people in Sweden succeed on their own merits or not?

[crazy canuck]

What inherent right does the state has on my wealth that my heirs lack?

Pure devil's advocate argument: "What have your children contributed to your wealth? Meanwhile, hasn't the state provided the societal, legal, economic framework for you to be able to achieve your wealth in?"

That's why you pay taxes, and everything you own has already been taxed. No need to tax it a second time (or in case of Belgium: a second, third, fourth and fifth time)

That is the flaw in the argument of those opposing the tax.  It is from the perspective of someone who starts from nothing, builds wealth, and then passes it on.

Now take it from the perspective of that second generation.  Everything they own has not actually been taxed.  They received their wealth tax free. And so on and so on, through the generations - unless they screw up and invest everything in a Ponzi scheme.

[Sheilbh]

But you want to judge something universal (if we want to be even remotely close to OvB's idea) and want to judge it by its desired outcome on the most extreme of cases (the very rich), while it would affect (near-)absolutely everyone.

No while I'd have carve outs like OvB says and I'd have a threshold of let's say £100k (which is very high in my view), it's not about the very rich. I think the inherited wealth is wrong. My problem isn't that there's a few rich people with it - I couldn't care less about them and, honestly, I think the bigger problem there is trusts and tax avoidance while they're living (see the owner of the Telegraph).

That doesn't it gets nationalised. Either you have the ready money to pay the tax or you have to liquidate the assets so they're back on the market and circulating again.

You're fine with rich people on their deathbeds giving their wealth to their kids?

This is where I'd borrow the existing law where there's a clawback on gifts made in the seven years before death, which I think is fair.

[Syt]

Weird video from the CBS:

https://twitter.com/CBSNews/status/1569725148432834561

"I can't bear this bloody thing!": King Charles' signing ceremony at Northern Ireland's Hillsborough Castle made one thing clear – even royalty can't escape the frustration of an inadequate pen.

[crazy canuck]

So how do trust fund kids fit into the picture exactly?

Not sure how it works in Sweden, but in Canada they are created by the funds flowing to them with little or no tax consequences.

And how do they have an impact on whether people in Sweden succeed on their own merits or not?

In Sweden, does money not purchase access to better opportunities through education for them or their children etc.

In Canada, my experience was that a lot of my university classmates were from families that were fairly wealthy.  There were some of us who were from working class backgrounds, but I think that was the exception.  My experience today is that those differences have not diminished.

[Sheilbh]

Weird video from the CBS:

https://twitter.com/CBSNews/status/1569725148432834561

"I can't bear this bloody thing!": King Charles' signing ceremony at Northern Ireland's Hillsborough Castle made one thing clear – even royalty can't escape the frustration of an inadequate pen.

On the one hand - I can understand that as I hate fountain pens for that reason. On the other - Charles has a reputation for petulance and he'll get a pass when it's within a week of his mum dying, but he needs to really control it or people will turn.

[Tamas]

So I have actually checked out one of the crap random posts Facebook recommended me, because it was some obscure radio station asking people to turn on their headlights when driving, to show respect for "Lizzie". I just had to  see if this was a joke. I have brought over from Hungary the custom of always having them headlights on (its mandatory there) so I thought this might be a joke hinting that people should be doing this.

But no I think it was serious, and browsing through the hundreds of comments one lady suggesting she does that anyways got absolutely flooded with insults and mockery. The Internet can be a vile place.

But, more importantly, there were several mentions of the "10 kidnapped Canadian children" related to the Queen, and one comment seemed to be saying she was one of them? What's up with that?

[Barrister]

But, more importantly, there were several mentions of the "10 kidnapped Canadian children" related to the Queen, and one comment seemed to be saying she was one of them? What's up with that?

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/jul/23/facebook-posts/queen-elizabeth-did-not-kidnap-10-children-canadia/

[The Brain]

So how do trust fund kids fit into the picture exactly?

Not sure how it works in Sweden, but in Canada they are created by the funds flowing to them with little or no tax consequences.

And how do they have an impact on whether people in Sweden succeed on their own merits or not?

In Sweden, does money not purchase access to better opportunities through education for them or their children etc.

In Canada, my experience was that a lot of my university classmates were from families that were fairly wealthy.  There were some of us who were from working class backgrounds, but I think that was the exception.  My experience today is that those differences have not diminished.

Like I mentioned earlier, in Sweden education is tax-funded. Rich or poor, people get accepted to universities on their personal academic achievements. And the system of school vouchers makes choosing good primary education possible even for the poorest families. The poor student who lacks the money to get the university education he wants doesn't exist* in Sweden.

*I'm sure you can find people who blame poverty for their lack of academic achievement.

[mongers]

I think social mobility needs to improve. Study after study after study shows that a lot of one's life's path depends very much on one's own financial and social background. Do you inherit property, money, or other valuables upon death of your forbears? Are your parents academics? Etc. In Germany, the most common way, by far, to come into property or money is through inheritance. So there's room for improvement there to create equal chances for everyone. Speaking from experience, even figuring out how to navigate higher education systems, or financial matters, or how to start saving money is kind of difficult when you come from a family where nobody has any idea of any of those items and who upon their demise leave you nothing but debts (so you have to formally decline the inheritance or be on the hook, in my case, for ca. 200k in debts from a botched attempt at building a house 30+ years prior - also because my Mom was too proud - or unwilling to learn how to - go through the private bankruptcy process ... ). That I got where I am today is despite my background, and quite frankly, if my parents had gone to university, or left me some money that I could have used to buy a little place for myself, my life would likely have gone very, very differently; it would have been almost certainly materially a lot better and less stressful. And I'm likely luckier than most, because my parents at least valued education and book learning. A lot of families in the lower income strata may not hold it in as high of an esteem, and being "the nerd" is rather something that's frowned upon and being good in school or doing an office job might be actively discouraged (again, grew up among many such people; when I see some of those people's Facebook pages it's quite depressing - to me, anyways; they're probably quite happy, which is good; but upward mobility it is not).

That being said. Leaving a legacy, or at least material security for one's children is a natural instinct and desire, and starting from 0 for everyone might look good on paper, but would also quite inhumane to ask of people. I'd rather see measures to level the playing field in different ways, by providing more opportunities, support, and guidance to create more social mobility. Education is one thing, but it must be attractive, attainable, and affordable. But there's also soft skills that I, having lived on welfare for much of my childhood/teen years had to figure out when interacting with people whose parents owned a big house, where everyone in the family owned a car and traveled for vacation at least twice a year. Stuff like, "How to eat at a restaurant", "How to behave in a pub", "How to not stand out in conversation as the one who has a very different life experience from the others I'm meeting" etc.

Thank you Syt, a very interesting read.

[mongers]

Same here.  And so I find it difficult to understand your reasoning.

So how do trust fund kids fit into the picture exactly?

This is how it's done.