if they scrap the tax they will have to raise taxation elsewhere or cut back on services

i meant for meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

Of course they won't abolish it - any more than they will fit rubber wheels to commuter trains!

Inheritance Tax has, surely, to be one of the most pernicious and deceitful "stealth" taxes ever activated by Gordon Brown (and his predecessor). They always knew full well a) that the "average" person would never even notice it (because "average" people were never in the past affected by it), and b) that by trapping more and more ordinary folk every year into paying it they would continue to receive the windfall.


In view of present trends, this statement may need some cynical revision!

Baz

Reform Act 1832 - extended voting rights to adult males who rented propertied land of a certain value, so allowing 1 in 7 males in the UK voting rights

Reform Act 1867 - enfranchised all male householders, so increasing male suffrage to the United Kingdom
Representation of the People Act 1884 - amended the Reform Act of 1867 so that it would apply equally to the countryside; this brought the voting population to 5,500,000, although 40% of males were still disenfranchised, whilst women could not vote

Between 1885-1918 moves were made by the suffragette movement to ensure votes for women. However the duration of the First World War stopped this reform movement. See also The Parliamentary Franchise in the United Kingdom 1885-1918.

Representation of the People Act 1918 - the consequences of World War I convinced the government to expand the right to vote, not only for the many men who fought in the war who were disenfranchised, but also for the women who helped in the factories and elsewhere as part of the war effort. Property restrictions for voting were lifted for men, who could vote at 21; however women's votes were given with these property restrictions, and were limited to those over 30 years old. This raised the electorate from 7.7 million to 21.4 million with women making up 40% of the electorate. Seven percent of the electorate had more than one vote. The first election with this system was the United Kingdom general election, 1918

Representation of the People Act 1928 - this made women's voting rights equal with men, with voting possible at 21 with no property restrictions


Representation of the Tories Acti 2015 - removed the vote from anyone whose house was worth less than 3 million.

You are behind the times m'Lord. They have ALWAYS taxed the rich more than the poor: a) because the rich had more taxable income (generating therefore more tax revenue), and b) because much more of their income could be taxed in the higher band.

The issue here, however (re IT) is that more and more less-than-rich people are being taxed as if (instead of being less-than-rich) they were rich.

Baz

That's a bit simplistic. It all depends on how you measure it and which taxes you're talking about. Many taxes, such as VAT, are the same for everyone, however rich or poor, and so for the poor that represents a greater part of their money and in that sense they are taxed more than the rich.

And who is rich? I would say that anyone who owns a house worth more than £300,000 and another house that he will have to pay 40% tax on if he sells it is doing quite nicely. If we're going to have sympathy for people and the money they have, there must be more deserving causes we could begin with.

As Lord B says, scrap IT by all means, but you'll have to say which services you want to cut or else which taxes you would want to increase.

Hence my "wink", Tommo!

I may look stupid but I'm not that stupid ...

Pleased to see that you`ve got your vowels back in working order, tinners.