QA44 - Listener Questions, Episode 44 cover art

QA44 - Listener Questions, Episode 44

QA44 - Listener Questions, Episode 44

Listen for free

View show details

About this listen

 In this Meaningful Money Q&A episode, Pete Matthew and Roger Weeks answer six listener questions on UK personal finance, pensions and investing. We cover inheritance tax (IHT) and who actually pays it, a defined benefit pension "state pension deduction" before State Pension age, and whether salary sacrifice affects higher-rate tax relief. We also discuss whether global tracker funds are too concentrated in the US, how offshore investment bonds compare to a general investment account (GIA), and how IHT taper relief works for gifts and the nil-rate band. Shownotes: https://meaningfulmoney.tv/QA44 03:40 Question 1 Hi Pete and Roger, I have been really enjoying your podcast and have learned so much about finance, tax and investments that I did not know before. I enjoyed your episode on inheritance tax. I have a question regarding inheritance tax and what happens if beneficiaries are unable to afford to pay it. My parents are wealthy with three properties (mortgages all paid off) and a large private pension, my parents also had a limited company which they used to maximise their earnings by minimising tax. However, me and my brother are average in the financial sense, where we have "normal salaried jobs", as my father would say. We earn far less than him and hence have much less assets. I own a house but have most of the mortgage left to pay because I only bought it last year. I am also single and live alone on my single income. My brother rents a flat and spends most of what he earns and has no concept of saving/future plans or investments, he does not even have a pension. I am under the assumption that the IHT has to paid first before the inherence is released, rather than IHT simply being deducted from the actual inherence itself before distribution? When I look at the total of my parents assets, me and my brother have no where near enough money to be able to pay it, due to the large gap in wealth between us and my parents. I tried to discuss this with them a few times but was fobbed off. They don't have any plan in place, all they have is life insurance to cover each other should one party die, and a simple one page will including just each other and us, no extended family. My brother and mum have no clue about money, and my dad who is in charge of the finances has multiple health problems of late. I am anxious of the day when I will be asked to pay tons of IHT which I might not be able to able to afford, especially because I am single and have my own bills and mortgage, I can't afford another loan. Is there a way to get around this or reduce the burden? If I cannot afford to pay the tax, can I simple "run away" from the situation and decline being a beneficiary, hence shoving the responsibility of IHT onto other family members? I don't really understand the process of probate, and whether my parents life insurance would pay it, but it seems to be that it pays out to the spouse should the other die, so I assume this would be added to the total assets and hence increase the tax burden should the other die? My parents don't seem to be bothered and are reluctant to discuss this so I am unsure what to do. How do "average/mediocre" kids like me and my brother usually deal with the tax from being born into a wealthy family? Sorry if this is a silly question, but I would appreciate any words of financial wisdom. Many thanks, Lava 13:08 Question 2 Hi Pete and Roger, I hope this message finds you well. As an avid listener of your podcast for the past couple of years, I want to express my gratitude for the way you break down financial and pension topics that can often seem overwhelming. Your insights have been invaluable to me. I wanted to share a personal experience and seek your views on it. After dedicating 42 years working at M&S, I am now approaching 60 and preparing to take my pension later this year. While I am proud of my long service, I've encountered an unexpected surprise in my pension arrangement. I have a Defined Benefit (DB) pension valued at around £9,000. Per year. However, upon receiving my pension quotation, I discovered that the scheme is structured to pay me this amount only until I reach 65 years of age, after which it reduces by approximately £2,200, a 24% reduction. This reduction is based on the assumption that the State Pension will compensate for the difference. However, with the State Pension age being pushed back, I will experience a reduction in my income before the State Pension begins when I turn 67. This situation feels particularly unfair, especially given that at M&S, there are a significant number of women who are lower-paid workers. The unfairness is further accentuated by the fact that the reduction is a fixed sum, irrespective of one's earnings. This fixed sum reduction impacts lower-paid and part-time workers disproportionately. I would greatly appreciate any insights or advice you might have on how to navigate this issue. Thank you once again for the fantastic ...
No reviews yet