Times article claim that Waspi women are tone deaf and should read the room

Good point. Yes, I've seen that in my family. Ok, I'll retract my post and add in 'in many cases'. Apologies.

Doodledog, many divorced parents remarry. My husband's second wife will inherit, quite rightly, and she has indicated that her inheritance will go to her children, not his.

About what? The birthdates of my children? I wasn't correcting you with that - just saying, really.

As for the main point of my post - I think that's true isn't it? Each parent has an allowance, which their children can either inherit from one parent who outlives the other, or from both parents if they are unmarried. I may be wrong though.

Doodledog

Mine were 90s babies.

Chocolatelovinggran I think the £1m only applies to people leaving money to their own children, which will mean most will be either married or widowed (in which case the deceased partner's allowance is inherited). Not all, of course, but children of single people still have two parents, so can inherit twice, which comes to the same thing.

I stand corrected.

Mine were 90s babies.

Chocolatelovinggran I think the £1m only applies to people leaving money to their own children, which will mean most will be either married or widowed (in which case the deceased partner's allowance is inherited). Not all, of course, but children of single people still have two parents, so can inherit twice, which comes to the same thing.

M0nica

Norah The average number of children born per family has fallen from around 2.0 in 1990 to 1.4 in 2024.

I'm not certain that pertains to most here.

We had children in the 60s and 70s.

Posters on this topic perhaps had children prior to 1990.

I have pointed this out before; the much quoted one million pounds threshold applies only to couples. For single and divorced people it is £550, 000.

I think IHT is it's own unfair problem.

I agree, Norah
At the very least, it should be on a graduated scale like income tax, perhaps starting from £1 million.

The very wealthy seem to be able to avoid it.

Norah The average number of children born per family has fallen from around 2.0 in 1990 to 1.4 in 2024.

eazybee

The information was out and about for a long time, but I am realising with some of my friends and acquaintances that they never pick up a newspaper, rarely watch or listen to TV/radio news or take any interest in current affairs. Someone asked me the other day what' all the political stuff was on the television;' (it was Starmer delivering his make or break speech) and when I explained she said, oh I never listen to that sort of thing. She doesn't read emails either.
I find it astonishing.

So, you only ever associate with women you regard as 'thick'?

Much shame on you!

Allira

Cossy

Doodledog

IHT will impact on estates worth over a million pounds. Most of the population (96%?) don't have such a sum to pass down, so the impact will be relatively small.

👍👍👏👏👏

IHT is payable on estates worth over £325,000.

There is no IHT to pay if you leave everything to your spouse, civil partner or a charity or amateur sports club.
It increases to £500,000 if you leave your home to your children.

Your unused threshold can pass to your spouse or civil partner so theoretically could reach the £1 million.

Yes, this is what I meant. In most cases where people leave everything to their spouse or civil partner, who cascades it down to the children IHT only applies to estates worth over £1m.

I was responding to the idea that IHT would impact on the fact that up to 80% of people don't need care so will be in a position to pass on what they have at end of life. Most people don't have more than a million pounds so IHT will have a small impact.

M0nica

Norah IHT is not a care cost and IHT does not hit in unless the estate is worth over £325,000 or £500,000 if the family home is left to children or grandchildren.

Families are smaller these days, so this sum will usually be divided between only 1 or 2 children.

By definition if your estate value is higher then you pay IHT, but even with IHT you will still be leaving your family more than if your estate did not hit the IHT threshold.

I understand IHT is not a care cost. Of course not.

I understand the numbers, my point was home values.

I think IHT is it's own unfair problem.

I'm not sure families are smaller in my generation. Perhaps.

Chardy

No-one in the media ever asks why do other countries do it better than UK? With similar life expectancy, they retire earlier on better state pensions

Retirees and Pensioners in other countries . . .
In Germany, the standard retirement age to receive a full state pension is 67 for anyone born in or after 1964.
If you are receiving a statutory pension in Germany, you must also pay long-term care insurance contributions on your pension income.
Retirees currently pay the full 3.6% (or 4.2% if childless) rate themselves.Out-of-Pocket Costs for Nursing HomesWhile Long-Term Care Insurance covers part of your nursing expenses, it does not cover everything.
The remaining costs must be paid out-of-pocket by the individual or, if necessary, drawn from their savings and assets.

Norah IHT is not a care cost and IHT does not hit in unless the estate is worth over £325,000 or £500,000 if the family home is left to children or grandchildren.

Families are smaller these days, so this sum will usually be divided between only 1 or 2 children.

By definition if your estate value is higher then you pay IHT, but even with IHT you will still be leaving your family more than if your estate did not hit the IHT threshold.

Cossy

Doodledog

IHT will impact on estates worth over a million pounds. Most of the population (96%?) don't have such a sum to pass down, so the impact will be relatively small.

👍👍👏👏👏

IHT is payable on estates worth over £325,000.

There is no IHT to pay if you leave everything to your spouse, civil partner or a charity or amateur sports club.
It increases to £500,000 if you leave your home to your children.

Your unused threshold can pass to your spouse or civil partner so theoretically could reach the £1 million.

Doodledog

IHT will impact on estates worth over a million pounds. Most of the population (96%?) don't have such a sum to pass down, so the impact will be relatively small.

As I thought I understood.

Also the wrinkle - home being worth far less than 500 pounds.

No-one in the media ever asks why do other countries do it better than UK? With similar life expectancy, they retire earlier on better state pensions

Doodledog

IHT will impact on estates worth over a million pounds. Most of the population (96%?) don't have such a sum to pass down, so the impact will be relatively small.

👍👍👏👏👏

I know this doesn’t apply to all, but out of our 5 children, 2 went to University, 2 went straight into work, 1 into banking, 1 into the CS.

There’s a big age gap between them all, 42, 40, 28, 25 & 23.

The two oldest have (mortgaged) houses, the other three still live at home, but the daughter at 28 and her wife just in process of purchasing their own house and should complete by the end of the summer, and daughter 25, has also started the process of buying her own flat alone.

The only one who worries us is son 23, he’s a professional musician with his own band and has been at home much less frequently this year as he plays around 4 gigs a month across the UK and is booked for festivals across the summer. He also produces and sells merch relating to the band. His current gf is their official photographer (her job role) so the likelyhood of them actually ever getting a mortgage so look slim. However, they are quite fortunate as gf parents own two houses and have stated that when they retire (maybe end of next year) they will rent their current home to them both.

All bar son 23, have occupational pensions in place. All have no intention of working til they are 80!

We worry about them all, this is natural as they are our children, but I genuinely don’t believe they face worse challenges than we did, but the challenges are different.

I’m probably amongst the youngest here, (maybe?) and had paid from age 13, starting full time work at 18, worked all the way through bringing up 4 children, with very scant maternity leave and at the end of my working life cared for both my elderly and infirm parents (only child) with lots of support from daughter 25!

Life is tough.

The one thing I have noticed is younger generations do seem to have much bigger expectations during their lives, (some) definitely seem to “want it all”, the nice house, the new car, holidays abroad, everything brand new.

I laugh when I look back to some of the places I rented and when I bought my first property, at 25, I had literally nothing in it, sold my car to buy white goods and took a second job for a year.

Our children and grandchildren will get by, just as we and our parents and grand parents did.

IHT will impact on estates worth over a million pounds. Most of the population (96%?) don't have such a sum to pass down, so the impact will be relatively small.

M0nica

Casdon

The bottom line is, as a generation, we having it good now. I asked AI whether this was the richest generation of pensioners.

‘Yes, current retirees in the UK are, on average, the richest generation in history when measured by accumulated wealth and post-tax income. This demographic has significantly benefited from surging house prices and lucrative defined-benefit pension schemes, though severe inequalities remain within the retired population.’
The response was linked to the Telegraph +4 as source material.

And the generations below us will also do well in old age because with longevity, children will be in their 50s and 60s before their parents die and they will be able to sell their parent's house and have a large lump sum to take into retirement.

Only 20-30% of old people will ever need residential care. That means 70-80% of the generation below will be able to inherit an estate that has not been depleted by care costs.

M0nica And the generations below us will also do well in old age because with longevity, children will be in their 50s and 60s before their parents die and they will be able to sell their parent's house and have a large lump sum to take into retirement.

Only 20-30% of old people will ever need residential care. That means 70-80% of the generation below will be able to inherit an estate that has not been depleted by care costs.

I'm not sure I agree, IHT will impact, please explain.

M0nica

I do not think it will ever be possible to have 70 as a fixed age for receiving the state pension. There will have to be a sliding scale based on health and occupation. A bit like ualifying for for a disablity pension.

But earlier this week there was a news report that said girls born in 2026 have a 1 in 5 chance of living to 100 and boys have a 1 in 8 chance. No nation can sustain a pension system where so many people will be dependent on pesnsion for their income for 20 plus years.

In 1950 average life expectancy was 70, now it is 82. In 1980 when most of us were in our early lives of contributing to pensions life expectancy was, on average, 74. People are now on average living 8 years longer than they did when we started our working and pension contributing lives.

Something has got to give. What do people suggest, taking into account that birth rates are falling and the number of people of working age working in companies and paying taxes to fund these pensions will be falling also.

I agree, falling birth rate and longer lives equals people must work longer allowing money to accumulate for state pensions.

My husband is well over 80 and still working, began work at 16.

I suspect our children will retire in their 80s.

Logan’s Run?

I do not think it will ever be possible to have 70 as a fixed age for receiving the state pension. There will have to be a sliding scale based on health and occupation. A bit like ualifying for for a disablity pension.

But earlier this week there was a news report that said girls born in 2026 have a 1 in 5 chance of living to 100 and boys have a 1 in 8 chance. No nation can sustain a pension system where so many people will be dependent on pesnsion for their income for 20 plus years.

In 1950 average life expectancy was 70, now it is 82. In 1980 when most of us were in our early lives of contributing to pensions life expectancy was, on average, 74. People are now on average living 8 years longer than they did when we started our working and pension contributing lives.

Something has got to give. What do people suggest, taking into account that birth rates are falling and the number of people of working age working in companies and paying taxes to fund these pensions will be falling also.

Physically, working until you are seventy is a daunting prospect. I’m not seventy yet, and I know I’d find it very hard going now, to be working full time. Young people have energy.
Of course not everybody will have to work until they are seventy, but it will be the ones with the least pension provision who are forced to do so, as it is now.