Connect with us

Published

on

With political party conference season upon us and the Tories scrambling for ways to appeal to voters and lessen Labour’s lead in the polls, abolishing inheritance tax has again been floated as the next government giveaway.

So, how many people are paying inheritance tax and how much are they paying: will abolition allow grieving loved ones to save thousands or is this a boon to the homeowning Tory base?

Or is this just a sensible policy measure benefitting both groups, given house prices are still more expensive than they were before the pandemic and inflation stood for months in double digit territory?

With widespread dislike of inheritance tax, the incorrect belief among taxpayers that they’ll fork out because of the toll, calls for abolition and reform coming from all corners, yet only small percentages of assets being affected by the charge, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak may have landed on a policy that few would miss in its current form.

It is after all what Tories call the “most hated tax”.

While only a small percent pay inheritance tax, new data from the Institute for economic research, Fiscal Studies (IFS) says the sums could be significant to some: if all non-spousal inheritances transferred next year were equally shared between all 25 years olds, each would receive around £120,000.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

The prime minister refused to comment on inheritance tax “speculation”.

How many are paying?

More on Tax

Latest available figures from the tax man, His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (HMRC), show 27,000 estates paid inheritance tax in the year 2020 to 2021. An estate encompasses a person’s assets: their house, any jewellery or other valuables they might own. Though inheritance tax isn’t paid on pension and insurance money.

For context, more than half a million (577,160) people died in England and Wales in 2022.

Essentially, less than 4% (3.73%) of estates paid inheritance tax in the 2020 to 2021 year.

And the number of estates paying inheritance tax is up by 4,000 people since the previous tax year, 2019 to 2020, as the numbers of people who died increased during the COVID-19 pandemic.

What are they paying?

At present, inheritance tax is charged at 40% and applies to estates worth more than £325,000. There are, however, allowances that can mean its only paid on more valuable estates.

If a main residence is being passed to children or grandchildren a £175,000 allowance is added, meaning only amounts of £500,000 are subject to inheritance tax. Married couples can share that allowance, doubling it and allowing a £1m estate to be passed on to children tax free.

Sunak is said to be looking at reducing the levy in the budget in March, working towards an eventual abolition.

Official HMRC statistics show £5.76bn of inheritance tax liabilities were racked up in the 2020 to 2021 tax year. This was higher than usual – to the tune of £800m, a 16% increase – as COVID-19 caused a greater number of deaths that year.

This year more than £3bn has been generated in just four months, provisional HMRC figures showed, and June broke the monthly record.

While new highs of inheritance tax are coming in, other forms of wealth tax, like capital gains tax (CGT) – the levy on things like income from a second property or shares – are also reaching new highs, greater than inheritance tax.

CGT added £16.7bn to the public purse in the 2021 to 2022 tax year and came from 94,000 taxpayers, HMRC said.

Meanwhile the inheritance tax take from April to August this year was £3.2bn, £300m higher than in the same period a year earlier as asset values have increased and rate rises meaning more interest is charged on late payments to HMRC.

It is worth noting that tax receipts are up across the board. This is not unique to inheritance tax.

A combination of higher wages and more expensive goods (again, due to inflation) meant income tax, national insurance and capital gains tax yields were up. Overall HMRC said £19.8bn more was taken in from April to August this year than last, adding up to a total of £331.1bn.

The cost of abolition is £7bn, according to analysis from the IFS.

Who’s paying?

Notionally people passing on estates worth more than £500,000 would pay, but the figures demonstrate only a smaller number of people, in practise, do.

In theory, rich people’s estates should be inheritance taxed but there are ways around paying. People with legal or tax advisers can limit their liability.

For example, gifts of up to £3,000 in value can be given tax free. This may be possible for (and benefit) a wealthier person giving away collectors items but not a middle income earner passing on the family home.

But commentators say the exchequer could get even more from inheritance tax soon.

Research from investment service provider, Wealth Club, says the number of people paying inheritance could rise by 50% in a decade and £9bn could be yielded by 2029.

“The combination of rising house prices and inflation will push up both the number of families paying inheritance tax and the amount they pay”, said Nicholas Hyett, Investment Manager at Wealth Club.

The IFS goes one further in its new analysis and says around £15bn could be gathered from inheritance tax in a decade’s time.

Who would benefit from inheritance tax cuts?

People who may not think of themselves as wealthy, have come in scope of inheritance tax. These people could benefit as house prices have grown and the recent inflation cycle brought prices up.

Inheritance tax bands have been frozen since 2009 and they’re not due to be revised until 2028 even though most prices haven’t stayed at 2009 levels.

Those who didn’t have a spouse to share tax credits with or who do not wish to pass their estate to a child or grandchild, missing out on the exemptions in the process, are the kinds of people in line to benefit.

Research by the IFS says around half (47%) of the benefit of banning inheritance tax would go to those with estates of £2.1m or more, who represent the top 1% of estates.

That group would benefit from an average tax cut of around £1.1m, IFS figures show. The vast majority (roughly 90%) of estates not paying inheritance tax would not be directly affected by the ban.

Who would not benefit, according to the IFS, are people without assets. By the time inheritances arrive, the think tanks says, wealth inequalities are already well entrenched and hard to undo.

In other words, unless you already have rich parents, inheritance tax isn’t much good to you.

The question of whether binning this policy is designed to benefit people like Rishi Sunak, who are wealthy, depends on what the tax is replaced with, or not.

Why might it be in line for the scrap heap?

Inheritance tax is widely disliked.

Despite the data showing less than 4% of estates end up paying the levy, the public believe they’ll be affected, according to YouGov polling done for The Times.

Nearly a third (31%) of survey participants thought their assets will be valuable enough to pay inheritance tax and 15% thought they themselves would have to pay the tax on things they inherit.

Just 5% said the threshold for inheritance tax was £1m.

That’s not to mention the objections of politicians. It’s not the first time the Conservatives have tried to scrap the toll. Not three months have passed since the last time Tories flew this particular policy kite.

Labour in recent days have been staunch in their opposition to getting rid of inheritance tax but only because it is an unfunded tax cut.

Even left leaning think tank, the Resolution Foundation, and the IFS, want the tax gone.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

What’s happening with inheritance tax?

Alternatives

Both the Resolution Foundation and the IFS have ideas about what should fill its place.

For its part the Resolution Foundation proposes a lifetime allowance for everyone. Each person can inherit up to £125,000 over the course of their life and after that you should pay a tax rate of 20% on what you get for anything up to £500,000, for anything higher than half a million received after the £125,000 cut off, a tax rate of 30% should be applied.

Gifts and assets transferred between spouses should be exempt, the foundation proposes.

The financial benefits would better than inheritance tax as it currently stands, according to analysis the think tank has done: £5bn more could be collected a year, compared to the amount gathered in the 2020 to 2021 year. That would equate to tax revenues of £11bn.

Another positive, the Resolution Foundation says, is everyone has a lifetime benefit and so wealth is more likely to be spread around, among families for instance.

A further option, proposed by the Wealth Club, is to keep the tax as is but just raise the points at which you’re taxed in line with inflation.

Either way, voters are unlikely to hear an announcement on the tax future until Sunak’s Tory Party conference speech in early October or the government’s autumn statement in November.

Sources have told Sky News that, despite reports, no changes will be made this year.

Continue Reading

Business

Sharp inflation slowdown leaves door to interest rate cut wide open

Published

on

By

Sharp inflation slowdown leaves door to interest rate cut wide open

The rate of inflation hit a much lower than expected 3.2% last month, according to official figures which should lock in an interest rate cut by the Bank of England on Thursday.

The Office for National Statistics (ONS) reported an easing in the pace of the main consumer prices index measure from the 3.6% annual rate seen in October.

The main downwards pressure came from food costs amid a supermarket price war to secure custom ahead of the core Christmas season.

Money latest: What the fall in inflation means for you

ONS chief economist Grant Fitzner noted decreases in the prices paid for cakes, biscuits and breakfast cereals in particular.

“Tobacco prices also helped pull the rate down, with prices easing slightly this month after a large rise a year ago”, he wrote.

“The fall in the price of women’s clothing was another downward driver.

More from Money

“The increase in the cost of goods leaving factories slowed, driven by lower food inflation, while the annual cost of raw materials for businesses continued to rise.”


The great chocolate price rise explained

The data marked further downwards progress for the headline rate after a spike this year which economists have partly attributed to higher employment costs, imposed after the government’s first budget, being passed on to consumers.

This price wave has muddied the waters over the pace of interest rate reductions by the Bank, which has wanted to see more evidence that inflation is not being further stoked by factors including strong wage growth.

It will be encouraged by better than expected slowdowns in other closely-watched inflation measures which strip out volatile elements, such as food and energy, as well as services inflation.

Recent data has also shown intensifying weakness in the labour market, with the unemployment rate surging by a percentage point to 5.1% since Labour took office.


UK economy shrinks again – was budget build-up to blame?

Separate ONS figures have also found that the economy contracted for two consecutive months in the run-up to Rachel Reeves’s second budget.

London Stock Exchange Group Data shows more than 90% of financial market participants are expecting the Bank to agree a rate cut to 3.75% – the lowest level in almost three years – from 4%.

The inflation data will come as a relief to the chancellor after a tough few months for her politically given the wider economic data and backlash over the Treasury’s handling of the lead up to the budget.

Ms Reeves said: “I know families across Britain who are worried about bills will welcome this fall in inflation.

“Getting bills down is my top priority. That is why I froze rail fares and prescription fees and cut £150 off average energy bills at the budget this year.

“The Bank of England agree this will help cut prices and expect inflation to fall faster next year as a result.”

Continue Reading

Business

Christmas cheer for Britain’s biggest chemical plant, but there are two distinct problems

Published

on

By

Christmas cheer for Britain's biggest chemical plant, but there are two distinct problems

You’ve doubtless heard of the National Grid, the network of pylons and electricity infrastructure ensuring the country is supplied with power. You’re probably aware that there is a similar national network of gas pipelines sending methane into millions of our boilers.

But far fewer people, even among the infrastructure cognoscenti, are even faintly familiar with the UK Ethylene Pipeline System. Yet this pipeline network, obscure as it might be, is one of the critical parts of Britain’s industrial infrastructure. And it’s also a useful clue to help explain why the government has just announced it’s spending more than £120m to bail out the chemical plant at Grangemouth in Scotland.

Ethylene is one of those precursor chemicals essential for the manufacture of all sorts of everyday products. React it with terephthalic acid and you end up with polyester. Combine it with chlorine and you end up with PVC. And when you polymerise ethylene itself you end up with polyethylene – the most important plastic in the world.

Why Grangemouth matters

Ethylene is, in short, a very big deal. Hence, why, many years ago, a pipeline was built to ensure Britain’s various chemical plants would have a reliable supply of the stuff. The pipes connected the key nodes in Britain’s chemicals infrastructure: the plants in the north of Cheshire, which derived chemicals from salt, the vast Wilton petrochemical plant in Teesside and, up in Scotland, the most important point in the network – Grangemouth.

The refinery would suck in oil and gas from the North Sea and turn it into ethane, which it would then “crack”, an energy-hungry process that involves heating it up to phenomenally high temperatures. Some of that ethylene would be used on site, but large volumes would also be sent down the pipeline. It would be pumped down to Runcorn, where the old ICI chlor-alkali plant, now owned by INEOS, would use it to make PVC. It would be sent to Wilton, where it would be turned into polyethylene and polyester.

Read more from Ed Conway:
The reality of Trump’s trade war
The reason for Trump’s Venezuela exploits

That’s the first important thing to grasp about this network – it is essential for the operation of a whole series of plants, many of them run by entirely different companies.

The second key thing to note is that, after the closure of the cracker at Wilton (now owned by Saudi company Sabic) and the ExxonMobil plant at Mossmorran in Fife, Grangemouth is the last plant standing. While the refinery no longer uses North Sea oil and gas, instead shipping in ethane from the US, it still makes its own ethylene.

So when INEOS began consulting on plans to close that ethylene cracker, officials down south in Westminster began to panic. The problem wasn’t just the 500 or so jobs that might have been lost in Grangemouth. It was the domino effect that would feed throughout the sector. All of a sudden, all those plants at the other ends of the pipeline would be affected too. In practice, the closure might have eventuated in more than a thousand job losses – maybe more.

What’s happening now?

All of which helps explain the news today – that the Department for Business and Trade is putting more than £120m of taxpayer money into the site. The bailout (it’s hard to see it as anything but) is not the first. The government has also put hundreds of millions of pounds of taxpayer money into British Steel, which it quasi-nationalised earlier this year, not to mention extra cash into Tata Steel at Port Talbot and loan guarantees to help Jaguar Land Rover after it faced an unprecedented cyber attack.

Work ground to a halt at JLR's Wolverhampton factory after a cyber attack. Pic: PA
Image:
Work ground to a halt at JLR’s Wolverhampton factory after a cyber attack. Pic: PA

But while this package will undoubtedly provide Christmas cheer here in Grangemouth today, the government is left facing two distinct problems.

Reactive rather than strategic

The first is that for all that the chancellor and business secretary (who are themselves planning to visit Grangemouth today) are keen to pitch this latest move as a coherent part of their industrial strategy, it’s hard not to see it as something else. Far from appearing strategic, instead they seem reactive. To the extent that they have a coherent industrial strategy, it mostly seems to involve forking out public money when a given plant is close to closure. If they weren’t already, Britain’s industrialists will today be wondering to themselves: what would it take to get ourselves some of this money in future?

The crisis continues

The second issue is that the Grangemouth bailout is very unlikely to end the crisis spreading across Britain’s chemicals sector. A series of plants – some prominent, others less so – have closed in the past few years. The chemicals sector – once one of the most important in the economy – has seen its economic output drop by more than 20% in the past three years alone.

This is not just a UK-specific story. Something similar is happening across much of Europe. But for many chemicals companies, it simply doesn’t add up to invest and build in the UK any more – a product in part of regulations and in part of high energy costs. In short, this story isn’t over yet. There will be more twists and turns to come.

Continue Reading

Business

Whitakers’ real-life Willy Wonka on shrinkflation and the rise of chocolate-flavour bars

Published

on

By

Whitakers' real-life Willy Wonka on shrinkflation and the rise of chocolate-flavour bars

Britain loves chocolate.

We’re estimated to consume 8.2kg each every year, a good chunk of it at Christmas, but the cost of that everyday luxury habit has been rising fast.

Whitakers have been making chocolate in Skipton in north Yorkshire for 135 years, but they have never experienced price pressures as extreme as those in the last five.

“We buy liquid chocolate and since 2023, the price of our chocolate has doubled,” explains William Whitaker, the real-life Willy Wonka and the fourth generation of the family to run the business.

William Whitaker, managing director of the company
Image:
William Whitaker, managing director of the company

“It could have been worse. If we hadn’t been contracted [with a supplier], it would have trebled.

“That represents a £5,000 per-tonne increase, and we use a thousand tonnes a year. And we only sell £12-£13m of product, so it’s a massive effect.”

Whitakers makes 10 million pieces of chocolate a week in a factory on the much-expanded site of the original bakery where the business began.

Automated production lines snake through the site moulding, cutting, cooling, coating and wrapping a relentless procession of fondants, cremes, crisps and pure chocolate products for customers, including own-brand retail, supermarkets, and the catering trade.

Mmmmm....
Image:
Mmmmm….

Steepest inflation in the business

All of them have faced price increases as Whitakers has grappled with some of the steepest inflation in the food business.

Cocoa prices have soared in the last two years, largely because of a succession of poor cocoa harvests in West Africa, where Ghana and the Ivory Coast produce around two-thirds of global supply.

A combination of drought and crop disease cut global output by around 14% last year, pushing consumer prices in the other direction, with chocolate inflation passing 17% in the UK in October.

...chocolate....
Image:
…chocolate….

Skimpflation and shrinkflation

Some major brands have responded by cutting the chocolate content of products – “skimpflation” – or charging more for less – “shrinkflation”.

Household-name brands including Penguin and Club have cut the cocoa and milk solid content so far they can no longer be classified as chocolate, and are marketed instead as “chocolate-flavour”.

Whitakers have stuck to their recipes and product sizes, choosing to pass price increases on to customers while adapting products to the new market conditions.

“Not only are major brands putting up prices over 20%, sometimes 40%, they’ve also reduced the size of their pieces and sometimes the ingredients,” says William Whitaker.

“We haven’t done any of that. We knew that long-term, the market will fall again, and that happier days will return.

“We’ve introduced new products where we’ve used chocolate as a coating rather than a solid chocolate because the centre, which is sugar-based, is cheaper than the chocolate.

“We’ve got a big product range of fondant creams, and others like gingers and Brazil nuts, where we’re using that chocolate as a coating.”

The costs are adding up
Image:
The costs are adding up

A deluge of price rises

Brazil nuts have enjoyed their own spike in price, more than doubling to £15,000 a tonne at one stage.

On top of commodity prices determined by markets beyond their control, Whitakers face the same inflationary pressures as other UK businesses.

“We’ve had the minimum wage increasing every year, we had the national insurance rise last year, and sort of hidden a little bit in this budget is a business rate increase.

“This is a small business, we turn over £12m, but our rates will go up nearly £100,000 next year before any other costs.

“If you add up all the cocoa and all the other cost increases in 2024 and 2025, it’s nearly £3m of cost increases we’ve had to bear. Some of that is returning to a little normality. It does test the relevance of what you do.”

Continue Reading

Trending