13-Dec-2006
UK Government prepared to force Octogenarian out of her home
Why can the law be such an ass?
The law has caught up with evolving society to determine that gay couples that have gone through a civil ceremony akin to marriage will enjoy the same rights as a married couple with regard the right to transfer the family home.
Yet today (refer: Daily Mail) we hear that two elderly spinster sisters face the agony of selling the home they have shared for 40 years when one of them dies after judges ruled they are not entitled to the same rights as married or gay and lesbian couples.
Yesterday the European Court of Human Rights threw out their case, by a very close 4-3 verdict, landing them with a £10,000 legal bill and facing certain future heartbreak for the surviving sister who will be forced to sell the family home to pay the required Inheritance tax.
I am sickened by this result - if you don't have to pay capital gains tax on the basis of a property being your main residence (or at the very least obtain a tapered tax relief), then it is surely inequitable that you should pay an inheritance tax to continue to live in it.
At a minimum, the Government should be able to defer collection of Inheritance Tax until such times as a property is sold when the recipient has already been permanently resident; irrespective of the prevailing state of the economy and any budget deficits, I doubt that the Government is dependent upon collecting all these charges from octogenarians.
I should imagine that it would be very easy to modify legislation such that a charge or covenant (whatever the correct legalese is) could be placed on a property in respect of the Governments tax bill, payable when it is next sold (plus appropriate interest).
It can't be right for Government to evict an octogenarian when they will have done nothing wrong.
The appeal to Europe was lost on the slenderest of majorities - I hope that the case can be heard again and common sense prevails next time or that the UK Government can have a re-think.
Link
The law has caught up with evolving society to determine that gay couples that have gone through a civil ceremony akin to marriage will enjoy the same rights as a married couple with regard the right to transfer the family home.
Yet today (refer: Daily Mail) we hear that two elderly spinster sisters face the agony of selling the home they have shared for 40 years when one of them dies after judges ruled they are not entitled to the same rights as married or gay and lesbian couples.
Yesterday the European Court of Human Rights threw out their case, by a very close 4-3 verdict, landing them with a £10,000 legal bill and facing certain future heartbreak for the surviving sister who will be forced to sell the family home to pay the required Inheritance tax.
I am sickened by this result - if you don't have to pay capital gains tax on the basis of a property being your main residence (or at the very least obtain a tapered tax relief), then it is surely inequitable that you should pay an inheritance tax to continue to live in it.
At a minimum, the Government should be able to defer collection of Inheritance Tax until such times as a property is sold when the recipient has already been permanently resident; irrespective of the prevailing state of the economy and any budget deficits, I doubt that the Government is dependent upon collecting all these charges from octogenarians.
I should imagine that it would be very easy to modify legislation such that a charge or covenant (whatever the correct legalese is) could be placed on a property in respect of the Governments tax bill, payable when it is next sold (plus appropriate interest).
It can't be right for Government to evict an octogenarian when they will have done nothing wrong.
The appeal to Europe was lost on the slenderest of majorities - I hope that the case can be heard again and common sense prevails next time or that the UK Government can have a re-think.
Labels: inequality, Inheritance Tax, Octogenarian
Link
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]