Inheritance

<html><body>
The world’s wealthiest people will transfer US$15.4 trillion in assets to their heirs in the next decade, according to a recent report.
Published by specialist data analysts Wealth-X, the report focused on the richest 0.1% (those with net assets worth over US$5 million), but it’s a similar story for the more modestly wealthy baby boomers.
With New Zealand’s average national <a href="https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/117903021/house-prices-shoot-ahead-again-as-majority-of-kiwis-say-ownership-unachievable" target="_blank">house price</a> now over $700,000, the heirs of home-owning boomers (as well as people born before 1945 whose significant wealth is often overlooked) will receive a currently untaxed bonanza.
Ignoring this unprecedented transfer of wealth from people who no longer need it to people who haven’t earned it would be absurd. But equitable tax policy must first overcome political timidity and rhetoric.
As New Zealand’s election approaches, forward-thinking politicians should take heart from Sinn Féin winning a majority in the 2019 Irish election on the promise of making the country’s tax system <a href="https://www.sinnfein.ie/a-fair-tax-system" target="_blank">radically more equitable</a>.
While a capital gains tax (CGT) is <a href="https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/government-will-not-implement-capital-gains-tax" target="_blank">off the table</a> for now, tax arrangements are never set in stone and voters can be open to change.
<h2>Taxing inheritance is nothing new</h2>
New Zealand first taxed inter-generational capital transfers in 1866. However, the rate of estate duty was reduced to zero in 1993 and gift duty was scrapped in 2011. <a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2439053" target="_blank">According</a> to tax law specialist Michael Littlewood:
These taxes for many years enjoyed broad political support. Indeed, it was widely regarded as obvious that a significant part – perhaps as much as 50% or so – of every large estate ought to go to the state.
Taxing a person’s wealth when they no longer need it, provided a reasonable exemption is made to support dependants, has been usual since Roman times. In the modern era, inter-generational wealth was seen as eminently taxable, too. Indeed, progressive tax rates were applied to estate taxes before they were first used for income taxes.
In 1979 Australia became the first developed country to abolish estate duty (at both state and federal levels). As analysts Sam Reinhardt and Lee Steel <a href="https://treasury.gov.au/publication/economic-roundup-winter-2006/a-brief-history-of-australias-tax-system" target="_blank">pointed out</a>, support for estate taxes had declined despite “various tax review committees recommending refinements to improve the equity, efficiency and simplicity of the tax”.
<h2>Politics gets in the way</h2>
In New Zealand, Te Herenga Waka—Victoria University’s 2010 <a href="https://www.wgtn.ac.nz/sacl/centres-and-institutes/cagtr/pdf/tax-report-website.pdf" target="_blank">tax working group</a> didn’t consider reintroducing an estate tax or retaining the gift duty then in force. It argued that reforms in the late 1980s had “improved the efficiency and equity of the tax system”.
Certainly, stamp duty is an unlamented tax – although many jurisdictions try to use it to cool overheated housing markets. But it’s not clear why the working group considered estate taxes inefficient or inequitable.
Unfortunately, the <a href="https://taxworkinggroup.govt.nz/resources/terms-reference-tax-working-group" target="_blank">terms of reference</a> of the next tax working group, established by the Labour-led government after the 2017 election, specifically excluded an inheritance tax. While there were good theoretical reasons for such a tax, group member Geof Nightingale <a href="https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/106050956/inheritance-tax-good-economics-and-the-politics-may-be-better-than-they-seem" target="_blank">said</a>, it “breaks down at the politics”:
Inheritance taxes are intensely disliked, so if you haven’t got one it’s very hard to put one in.
The arguments against estate taxes are well rehearsed – usually accompanied by emotive references to “death taxes”. But, in the long term, the current ideological opposition to taxing inter-generational wealth transfers may prove to be an anomaly.
One simple reason for reviving the debate about such a tax is demographic: baby boomers, the wealthiest generation that has ever lived, will increasingly start dying during the 2020s.
Tax policymakers cannot ignore the opportunity – arguably the moral imperative – of taxing and redistributing those transfers.
<h2>Millennials and Gen X will be the winners</h2>
There remain three challenges to achieving a fairer tax based on inter-generational wealth.
First, the application of tax needs to shift from the deceased to the living. In other words, we need to focus on the recipient of the wealth transfer. Ireland’s <a href="https://www.revenue.ie/en/tax-professionals/tdm/capital-acquisitions-tax/cat-collector-general-district-guidelines.pdf" target="_blank">capital acquisitions tax</a> (CAT) applies a flat rate of 33% to accumulated gifts and inheritances over the relevant threshold.
Unlike a CGT, which can be perceived as penalising business owners, a CAT targets unearned windfalls from an accident of birth. This should make a CAT more politically acceptable than a CGT.
Second, the younger generations most critical of baby boomers’ “unfair” acquisition of wealth (Gen X and millennials) must accept that taxing this unprecedented transfer of wealth will promote both inter- and intra-generational fairness.
If we don’t tax and redistribute these transfers, wealth inequalities will be exacerbated and entrenched among future generations.
And finally, arguments in favour of a more equitable system have to overcome the rhetoric of “death taxes”. As far back as the 1960s, Canada’s Royal Commission on Taxation did this by popularising the idea that “<a href="https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/royal-commission-on-taxation" target="_blank">a buck is a buck</a>”, no matter how it is earned.
In other words, if you have the money you can pay tax, whether that money comes from labour, investment or inheritance.
So far, only the Greens are proposing any <a href="https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300044327/the-crucial-feature-of-the-greens-wealth-tax-that-would-exempt-most-family-homes" target="_blank">tax on wealth</a> as part of their election policy offering. But with the generational clock ticking, it’s maybe time for New Zealand to think about getting a CAT.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/143604/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important;">
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/jonathan-barrett-129387" target="_blank">Jonathan Barrett</a>, Lecturer, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/te-herenga-waka-victoria-university-of-wellington-1200" target="_blank">Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington</a>
This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/forget-a-capital-gains-tax-what-new-zealand-needs-is-a-tax-on-inherited-wealth-143604" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

j.ballantyne1990-6AQqhLzZaK

Forget a capital gains tax – what New Zealand needs is a tax on inherited wealth

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION 
Inheritances can have an enormous impact on finances and lives.
Yet in Australia we know surprisingly little about who gets them and how big they are.
New <a href="https://grattan.edu.au/report/generation-gap/" target="_blank">Grattan Institute research</a> provides some answers.
Inheritances are big and growing
A sample of estates from Victoria’s probate office suggests the median estate in Victoria is worth around A$500,000. That’s likely to be close to what it is Australia-wide.
But many are much larger. About 20% are worth more than A$1 million, and 7% are more than A$2 million. Property is the largest component, accounting for about half of the average value.
The main beneficiaries of “final” estates (estates without a surviving spouse) are children, who receive about three-quarters of all inheritance money.
Other family members, such as nieces, nephews and grandchildren, receive about 20%. Friends get about 4%, and charities 2%.
Average inheritances are growing about two percentage points faster than inflation each year, which is a good deal faster than wages or gross domestic product.
There are reasons to believe they will soon grow even faster.
Net wealth has grown strongly among older households. Households headed by people aged over 75 now have an average of A$1 million in assets, up from A$400,000 for a household headed by a person of the same age in 1994.
And most retirees <a href="https://grattan.edu.au/report/money-in-retirement/" target="_blank">don’t draw down</a> on their savings.
Indeed, many are net savers through much of their retirement, meaning there’s only one place their accumulated property and superannuation wealth can go: into bequests.
Inheritances are going to the already old…
These days, inheritances generally don’t arrive when people are saving for a house or trying to raise a young family.
More than 80% of money passed down from parents goes to people aged 50 and over.
The most common age bracket in which people to receive an inheritance from parents is 55-59.
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2019/8/20/INHERTANCE%201.png" target="_blank">Click here</a> to enlarge: 
<img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2019/8/20/INHERTANCE%201.png" alt="">
It’s the result of good news – parents are living longer.
But as life expectancy grows still further, it will mean inheritances increasingly supplement the retirement savings of middle-aged Australians rather than help young people get into housing.
…and the already wealthy
The wealthiest 20% of Australians get 38% of inheritance money; the poorest 20% get only 8%.
It means the growing wealth of Baby Boomers is likely to end up concentrated in the hands of a select group relatively well-off Generation Xers and Millennials rather than being widely spread.
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2019/8/20/INHERITANCE%202.png" target="_blank">Click here</a> to enlarge: 
<img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2019/8/20/INHERITANCE%202.png" alt="">
It will reinforce the advantages already enjoyed by people with well-off parents, including better schooling, better connections, and a greater ability to take financial risks because of a parental safety net.
If (as is possible) inheritances end up becoming the dominant route to wealth in Australia surpassing lifetime earnings, there will be less incentive for ordinary Australians to attempt to get ahead through individual endeavour.
We will have entered what French economist Thomas Piketty calls a “<a href="https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/how-pikettys-inequality-theory-explains-mr-darcys-wealth" target="_blank">Jane Austen world</a>”.
We don’t tax inheritances…
Calm debate on policy setting around inheritances is <a href="https://insidestory.org.au/death-and-taxes/" target="_blank">hard to come by</a> in Australia.
Inheritances and gifts have been tax-free since the 1970s.
Australia is one of only <a href="https://stats.oecd.org/index.aspx?DataSetCode=REV" target="_blank">seven</a> OECD countries without any inheritance, estate, or gift taxes. Despite the economic arguments for inheritance taxes, there seems to be little appetite to bring them back.
…if anything, we subsidise them
Not taxing inheritances is one thing, but actively subsidising them is another.
Superannuation tax breaks were intended to encourage people to save for their retirement and to take pressure off the age pension system.
But given that many retired Australians <a href="https://grattan.edu.au/report/money-in-retirement/" target="_blank">do not draw down on their capital</a>, a large part of the super tax concessions simply boosts the size of bequests.
Super death benefits tax is intended to claw back the superannuation tax breaks when the money is passed on, in order to ensure that the government doesn’t subsidise inheritances.
But, at 15%, the rate is too low to capture the value of the accumulated tax breaks. And it can easily be avoided by retirees withdrawing funds tax-free and then contributing them back as a post-tax contribution, which is tax-free when passed on.
The special treatment of the family home in the age pension means test also acts to boost inheritances at taxpayers’ expense. Without it there would less to pass on.
It’s time to claw some of them back
There is little justification for taxpayers subsidising inheritances. Policy changes could help.
We recommend a higher tax on super bequests paid to non-dependents to better capture the value of the super tax breaks that are passed on rather than used for retirement. The cap on post-tax super contributions should also be lowered, to limit the re-contribution strategies.
The age pension assets test should include part of the value of the family home, perhaps the part above A$500,000. Seniors with higher-value properties should be allowed to borrow against their home using the Pension Loans Scheme.
This would give them the ability to stay in their home but would mean that some of the wealth that would otherwise be passed to heirs (most likely in their 50s) would instead be used to fund them, taking pressure off the pension.
Owain Emslie, Associate, Grattan Institute 
Danielle Wood, Program Director, Budget Policy and Institutional Reform, Grattan Institute.
This article is republished from <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/rethink-inheritances-these-days-they-no-longer-help-the-young-they-go-to-the-already-middle-aged-122029" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

Inheritance

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Inheritance

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News