|
|
Post by alec on Nov 22, 2024 7:49:04 GMT
neilj - I suspect you're right, but that it may depend on how everything else goes for the government. The protesting farmers will still protest, because they aren't and never have been Labour supporters, so this is the peg lots of people in that sector want to hang their hats on. If Labour are generally seen to have been successful in their mission, these kinds of issues wither away as pointless grumbles by vested interests. If Labour remain/become highly unpopular, it still has legs.
|
|
|
|
Post by lululemonmustdobetter on Nov 22, 2024 7:58:29 GMT
Indeed, Blair was a lawyer, so his strength seemed to be in things that involve the law, constitution, et cetera. Setting up supreme courts, devolution, Good Friday agreement, et cetera et cetera. It might be similar with Starmer now - that he’ll do more of the legal stuff, Reeves does more of the economics? I agree that Blair bought into some of the neoliberal orthodoxy, however there are key differences. In particular, he was much happier about supranational arrangements. In this he was more Third Way about things. Locking in the right-wing economic policy via international commitments. also, he would be happier spending money on hospitals and schools than your average neoliberal. But he would rather have the private sector delivering these hospitals and schools, et cetera. (which brings us back to the social democracy thing again. Those are typical differences between Social Democrats and neoliberals. Social Democrats are keener on public service expenditure and the supranational)
The other thing about Blair, he was all about the winning. The adopting of the right's economic stance had more to do with getting into power, and you never really got the feeling the likes of Blair were true believers. Also, at the time, the model seemed to be working with the country experiencing one of the most prolonged periods of growth it had seen in a while. The now obvious flaws in the economic system and approach, to many didn't seem apparent at the time.
Another interesting element is that it was Brown who was more in the Atlanticism camp, while Blair was more Europeanist leaning. It was Brown who kept out of the Euro etc. But both were politically were besotted with Clinton. |
|
|
|
Post by alec on Nov 22, 2024 7:59:52 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by lululemonmustdobetter on Nov 22, 2024 8:12:12 GMT
Further thoughts on farm inheritance tax I've written a lot about why it will only effect the largest farms and referenced independent expert analysis to support that However it's what happens in the real world that counts. My view it will be like the furore over the expansion of ULEZ. Alot was made of the fact that Labour narrowly failed to gain a safe tory seat because of the fear of ULEZ expansion. But when it came in the vast majority of people realised they weren't effected and it went away as an electoral election I think the same will happen re the farmers, when in 4 years time people realise '70,000' farms weren't needed to be sold to pay inheritance tax, infant it only effected a few hundred and they didn't need to be sold, the issue will lose it's signifance . I broadly agree with you, but do accept eor points re NI, which to my mind further illustrates how the rich/powerful can shift/avoid tax burdens and the challenges this govt has in getting tax revenue from these groups as opposed to 'normal people'.
I think its way too early to read too much from the recent polls, and as I and a number of others have commented, Labour's fortunes at the next GE will be driven by how successful Reeves' polices are in making sufficient number of voters feel better off come election time. Whether voting patterns reflect the last GE (support for respective positions roughly reflects what you see in other European democracies) or, as in '17 we see voters reacting to FPTP and a return to 'two party' politics only time will tell but a lot can happen in 4-5 years.
What's quite interesting, is for the moment the LDs are continuing the approach of not going after Labour. Will that informal truce continue? |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,512
|
Post by Danny on Nov 22, 2024 8:13:44 GMT
It's just that I fail to understand why the hard pressed British public should be expected to have any sympathy for a family with (relatively) vast assets who failed to properly sort out a smooth generational transition for a business that is allegedly a long standing family heirloom. It's just daft. You set me wondering what the real average value passed on to the next generation is. A short search suggests this is quite a complicated issue to determine, because obviously sensible people will pass on wealth before they die, wheras available statistics are only about measured estate values at death. If you help your kids to buy their first home, long before you die, thats also passing on wealth to the next generation. The million pounds or so allowance for a couple when they eventually die is really only the backstop for the wealth you need to keep to live comfortably in retirement. I see no official stats on how much wealth gets passed on well before death.
Demos has an analysis of assets passed on, where they reckon estates reported to HMRC on death account for £100bn passed on each year. Plus another 25% which bypasses this because it is wealth placed in certain trusts, which HMRC dropped from calculations in 2005. They say this sum inherited is approximately equal to 10% of the nations disposable income. About half of it is residential buildings. The real value of inheritances is expected to double by 2040 (from 2020) , but then peak in 2046. They suggest the real value of land increased x5 between 1995 and 2016. In 1900 they reckoned inherited wealth was approximately 22% of national income, reaching a minimum of just 5% in 1978, since when it has been rising again. I wonder whether thats because of changes in the capital wealth of society, or because the 1970s were the peak of wealth redistribution in growing wages for the least well off in society, which has since reversed.
They suggest a household led by people born in the 1960s can (on average) expect to inherit the equivalent of 4 years income, whereas one born a generation later in the 1980s can expect to inherit 8 years worth of income, or £250,000 in 2018/19 prices. Considering the 1980s household, they reckon the poorest (bottom 20%) will inherit a sum 5% of their lifetime income, whereas those in the top 20% of wealth will inherit an additional 30% of their lifetime income. Which sounds to me like a massive wealth inequality accumulating through inheritance. (nb of the bottom 20%, the bottom half below 10% of the wealth distribution seem likely to inherit nothing)
A graduate will inherit twice as much as a non graduate. Someone living in SE England will inherit 3.5x as much as someone living in the NE. 2016-18 someone white on average inherited (or was gifted) £3000 a year while someone coloured on average received nothing. (im thinking thats WHITE family farms being inherited). In 2018, considering 20-35 year olds, 35 % of those whose parents owned property also did so, whereas only 10% of those whose parents did not own property did so themselves.
1/3 of private school fees are paid by grandparents. 3/4 of grandparents give support to grandchildren at university, averaging £146 per month (2018). The implication is those with richest grandparents will not have to take part time jobs while at university, and thus are likely to get better grades.
This summary of quite a lot of linked research says it takes into account lifetime gifts, but doesnt explain how it calculates this and considers it small compared to inheritance on death. Not convinced that really answered my question. Above they use top and bottom 20% as examples, but the bottom 10% is actually inheriting nothing. I suspect a similar top loading in reverse is happening to the top 10%.
|
|
|
|
Post by colin on Nov 22, 2024 8:53:14 GMT
"Borrowing – the difference between public sector spending and income – was £17.4 billion in October 2024, £1.6 billion more than in October 2023 and the second highest October borrowing since monthly records began in January 1993.
Central government debt interest payable was £9.1 billion in October 2024, £0.5 billion more than in October 2023 and the highest October figure since monthly records began in January 1997."
From
Public sector finances, UK: October 2024
ONS
|
|
|
|
Post by colin on Nov 22, 2024 9:01:30 GMT
"“The ICC issuance of arrest warrants against Israeli leaders is outrageous,” President Joe Biden said in a statement."
"Senator Lindsey Graham, an ally of President-elect Donald Trump, said it is time for the US government to sanction the ICC for its warrants against Netanyahu and Gallant."
" EU Foreign policy chief Josep Borrell said the ICC warrants were not political and should be respected and implemented."
"Britain respects the independence of the ICC, a spokesperson for Prime Minister Keir Starmer said without confirming whether Britain would uphold the warrants."
Al Jazeera
|
|
|
|
Post by colin on Nov 22, 2024 9:08:12 GMT
"New inheritance tax rules for farmers could be changed to make it easier for those 80 and over to hand down their farm without it incurring the tax, in what would be a partial climbdown by the government after a bruising row with farmers and a huge protest march in Westminster on Tuesday.
The Treasury is understood to be assessing the impact of changes, including amending gifting rules for over-80s so they can pass on their farm to their family without having to live for seven years after making the gift.
Officials are also understood to be assessing the impact of changes announced in the budget in October on active small- and medium-sized farms compared with smallholdings."
"Labour has tried to target the policy at wealthy investors buying land to avoid IHT, who have been blamed for driving up land prices. However, many farmers complain that while they may be asset rich, they are cash poor, because farm incomes have plummeted because of cost inflation, poor harvests and fierce competition among retailers. They say many farmers take home less than the minimum wage.
Many farmers also point out that they have not paid into a private pension as they intend to live in the farmhouse and take an income from the farm – which they cannot do if they gift it to their children.
Treasury sources said the impact of changing gifting rules for those aged 80 and over was being examined, but added that the impact was difficult to determine as data on the farming population has generally put all those over 65 into one bracket.
Tom Bradshaw, president of the National Farmers’ Union, said this change would not go far enough: “The average age of death in the UK is around 80, so they should bring it down to 73 to allow them to use the seven-year gifting rule.
“If they are looking at how they create an exemption for the elderly members of the industry then the exemption should come in seven years before the average age of death. I would prefer an exemption before April 2026, when the rules come in, so you can make the transfer and don’t have to survive the seven years, but we have far better options on the table if they come out for consultation. We could come up with a policy that would answer the questions but be far better for the industry.”
Farmers have also argued that non-farmers are being treated generously, as people who have a country home and a paddock can currently claim APR as their asset is worth under £1m whereas those with a middle-sized farm are caught by the new tax.
Treasury sources confirmed that the impact of changes on active small- and medium-sized farms compared with smallholdings was also being assessed. This is because under the current regime people who buy a countryside home and do hobby farming avoid paying inheritance tax on their estates but many productive small-and medium-sized farms will be subject to the tax, as farming on small pieces of land is often unviable and productive farms need expensive machinery to function, which will now be caught under the new inheritance tax regime. The inheritance tax threshold for households which do not qualify for APR is £325,000."
From
G
|
|
|
|
Post by shevii on Nov 22, 2024 9:09:59 GMT
7h Litherland (Sefton) Council By-Election Result: 🌹 LAB: 43.7% (-30.3) 🌍 GRN: 34.0% (+27.1) ➡️ RFM: 12.4% (New) 🌳 CON: 4.2% (-0.6) ⚙️ WPB: 3.5% (New) 🧑🔧 TUSC: 2.2% (New) No IND (-12.1) or LDM (-2.3) as previous. Labour HOLD. Changes w/ 2024. 12% turnout!!! |
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,499
Member is Online
|
Post by neilj on Nov 22, 2024 9:11:54 GMT
Interesting comparison on farm inheritance tax
It's £1m untaxed, plus £325k of standard tax free inheritance.
You can double that if the farmer is married.
So farmers can hand down £2.65m tax free, and their kids pay 20% on everything else.
Tax on your job is 40% over £50k
Tax on working income is far higher than tax on capital. Reform of this obvious inequality is needed
|
|
|
|
Post by colin on Nov 22, 2024 9:13:00 GMT
"High Street job losses are "inevitable", prices will rise, and shops will close because of tax rises in the Budget and other rising costs, a group of the biggest retailers in the UK is warning.
Tesco, Amazon, Greggs, Next and dozens of other chains are urging the Treasury to reconsider some of the measures.
In a letter to Chancellor Rachel Reeves, external, they said the "cumulative burden" of the Budget changes and other policies already in the pipeline will add billions in costs to a sector with a 3% to 5% profit margin.
A Treasury spokesperson said it had had to "make difficult choices to fix the foundations of the country", while one union called the letter "pathetic".
Bank of England governor Andrew Bailey told the Treasury Committee on Tuesday he had seen the letter and it was "right" to say jobs could be affected.
He said the employer National Insurance (NI) tax rise from the Budget could mean higher inflation, lower wage growth, or higher unemployment, adding in written evidence to the committee the Bank will be "gradual" on interest rate cuts as a result."
BBC
|
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,499
Member is Online
|
Post by neilj on Nov 22, 2024 10:24:56 GMT
So Nigel Farage, who has repeatedly suggested that migration puts women's safety at risk, has been harbouring a senior colleague who was jailed for violently assaulting his own girlfriend I'm sure he'll be condemning this and withdrawing the whip from him...won't he |
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,499
Member is Online
|
Post by neilj on Nov 22, 2024 10:29:58 GMT
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,716
|
Post by steve on Nov 22, 2024 11:27:19 GMT
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,716
|
Post by steve on Nov 22, 2024 11:39:30 GMT
neilj I'm not in the habit of defending major corporations but your comment on Tescos seems a bit misplaced "April 28, 2024: Hourly pay: The new hourly rate will be £12.02, which is a 9.1% increase from the previous rate of £11.02. London Allowance area: Stores within the M25 will pay £13.15 per hour. Sunday premium: The Sunday premium will increase from £12.89 to £13.22 per hour. Annual Colleague Clubcard discount allowance: The annual Colleague Clubcard discount allowance will be £2,000. The pay rise is the result of a deal between Tesco and the retail trade union Usdaw. It's one of the largest investments in pay that Tesco has made in a single year, and it represents a nearly 26% increase in base pay over the last two years. The new pay rates exceed the national living wage and ensure that all staff are paid at or above the real Living Wage." In common with most major food retailers the profit margins are relatively small. Tescos £2.5 billion profit came on the basis of a turnover of nearly £70 billion.A profit margin of around 4% in a very good year. Compare this with merchant banking which routinely returns a profit margin of 25% and isn't renowned for large pay awards for those on modest income.
|
|
|
|
Post by colin on Nov 22, 2024 11:40:52 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by wb61 on Nov 22, 2024 11:56:13 GMT
colinThis is a genuine question. For many years now I have seen that you post links and make comments which are generally pessimistic about the world and the UK, you have done this in respect of the Conservative Government before doing so under the current Government so is not limited to cheering on your own team. You also seem to have a very poor view of humanity as species (not quite misanthropy but close). My question is whether that is something you do just here or whether you are, in real life as it were, just as relentlessly downbeat. Personally speaking without my general optimism towards life and my fellow human beings I don't think I could survive well.
|
|
|
|
Post by alec on Nov 22, 2024 12:03:35 GMT
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,716
|
Post by steve on Nov 22, 2024 12:06:09 GMT
JCPENNEY announces its new 2025 fashion range.  |
|
|
|
Post by pete on Nov 22, 2024 12:09:33 GMT
Hiya everyone! So observing what has been going on, looks like wealthy people and big business really don't like being taxed! But then again who does. The difference is, unlike the groups that were hit by austerity, they have a lot of friends in the media and get a largely sympathetic coverage.
Most of the people/groups Labour are targeting don't by and large vote Labour.
Hiya lululemonmustdobetter ! I agree with a lot of what you wrote, but I think the exception to it is the NIC increase - by disproportionately targeting businesses that employ a lot of low-paid and/or part-time staff they are putting a much larger number of people in the frame than with niche areas like farming or private schools. There are going to be a significant number of Labour voters who have struggled with austerity and particularly with the cost of living increases in recent years, and who are now being told by their managers that next year's pay review is cancelled because the government took all the money for it, and in many cases that will be entirely accurate and honest. Of course you're right that pretty much every group or interest would rather that other groups or interests got any extra taxes that are needed. But I think you've also probably strayed onto why they're making this huge misjudgement - I suspect their focus groups told them that people overwhelmingly agree that any tax increases should be paid by "business" rather than "workers", and then they've looked at what are the quickest, most direct and least avoidable ways of getting more money from "business" and have come up with this. I suspect what they're going to find is that when people said they wanted "business" to pay, they meant "big business" as you phrased it, and in the sense of companies that make huge profits or employ lots of rich staff. Whereas for this the more rich staff you have the less it hurts you, and whether you make a large profit or indeed any profit at all is irrelevant to the bill you get. And unlike the farmers and private schoolers with their ready advocates in the media, it's actually taken quite a while for the sense of how regressive this really is to start to build. But I think it's going to keep building, especially as it starts to impact people's pay. Or Labour have gambled and decided bosses will take the rap for poor pay increases. Its hard telling your workforce there's no money in the till if you live in a big house, drive a big car and still take 2/3 holidays a year. Those that really struggle? are they viable business models? |
|
|
|
Post by colin on Nov 22, 2024 12:09:42 GMT
colin This is a genuine question. For many years now I have seen that you post links and make comments which are generally pessimistic about the world and the UK, you have done this in respect of the Conservative Government before doing so under the current Government so is not limited to cheering on your own team. You also seem to have a very poor view of humanity as species (not quite misanthropy but close). My question is whether that is something you do just here or whether you are, in real life as it were, just as relentlessly downbeat. Personally speaking without my general optimism towards life and my fellow human beings I don't think I could survive well. No -i'm not "relentlessly downbeat "in "real life" Perhaps your own implied distinction between real life and life on UKPR2 provides a marker. The forum is peopled by many political activists and party members. And mostly Labour Party ones.In light of the last GE election result i would expect them to be upbeat and i suppose any posts from me which jar against that will seem "downbeat" to you. As far as humanity in general is concerned , that would be a long explanation of my outlook. And i'm not even sure i could be certain about it  In general I quite like the search for "realism" . But its not always easy to establish ! |
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,138
|
Post by domjg on Nov 22, 2024 12:11:48 GMT
alec I suspect and would hope that the DM seriously overestimates how much the even it's readers identify with or care a toss about farmers.
|
|
|
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Nov 22, 2024 12:18:44 GMT
"Retail sales in Great Britain fell for the first time in three months in October, as uncertainty surrounding Labour first budget in 14 years and the lure of Black Friday bargains delayed consumer spending." it hasn’t delayed my spending. Have already started on one or two early Black Friday bargains in case they sell out… |
|
|
|
Post by wb61 on Nov 22, 2024 12:20:50 GMT
colin This is a genuine question. For many years now I have seen that you post links and make comments which are generally pessimistic about the world and the UK, you have done this in respect of the Conservative Government before doing so under the current Government so is not limited to cheering on your own team. You also seem to have a very poor view of humanity as species (not quite misanthropy but close). My question is whether that is something you do just here or whether you are, in real life as it were, just as relentlessly downbeat. Personally speaking without my general optimism towards life and my fellow human beings I don't think I could survive well. No -i'm not "relentlessly downbeat "in "real life" Perhaps your own implied distinction between real life and life on UKPR2 provides a marker. The forum is peopled by many political activists and party members. And mostly Labour Party ones.In light of the last GE election result i would expect them to be upbeat and i suppose any posts from me which jar against that will seem "downbeat" to you. As far as humanity in general is concerned , that would be a long explanation of my outlook. And i'm not even sure i could be certain about it In general I quite like the search for "realism" . But its not always easy to establish ! Thank you for answering, I am glad to hear that you are not downbeat. I have a close relative that has always been a pessimist and it has blighted her life, I remember as an 11 year old working out that pessimism was not good for a person's well being. I used to say to my relative, even then, if you are a pessimist you never get to enjoy the good things that happen because you are constantly asking "what's the catch!" As to being upbeat I have not been happy with certain aspects of the Governments approach, but in line with my optimistic approach what I hope is happening is that they are getting the bad news out of the way in early days in order to clear the decks to take proper progressive steps to rebalance economic prospects so that ordinary people, not just billionaires, can be much better off in years to come. |
|
|
|
Post by colin on Nov 22, 2024 12:21:48 GMT
"Retail sales in Great Britain fell for the first time in three months in October, as uncertainty surrounding Labour first budget in 14 years and the lure of Black Friday bargains delayed consumer spending." it hasn’t delayed my spending. Have already started on one or two early Black Friday bargains in case they sell out… Go for it. No good being middle class without using your middle class privilege  |
|
|
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Nov 22, 2024 12:24:37 GMT
Hiya lululemonmustdobetter ! I agree with a lot of what you wrote, but I think the exception to it is the NIC increase - by disproportionately targeting businesses that employ a lot of low-paid and/or part-time staff they are putting a much larger number of people in the frame than with niche areas like farming or private schools. There are going to be a significant number of Labour voters who have struggled with austerity and particularly with the cost of living increases in recent years, and who are now being told by their managers that next year's pay review is cancelled because the government took all the money for it, and in many cases that will be entirely accurate and honest. Of course you're right that pretty much every group or interest would rather that other groups or interests got any extra taxes that are needed. But I think you've also probably strayed onto why they're making this huge misjudgement - I suspect their focus groups told them that people overwhelmingly agree that any tax increases should be paid by "business" rather than "workers", and then they've looked at what are the quickest, most direct and least avoidable ways of getting more money from "business" and have come up with this. I suspect what they're going to find is that when people said they wanted "business" to pay, they meant "big business" as you phrased it, and in the sense of companies that make huge profits or employ lots of rich staff. Whereas for this the more rich staff you have the less it hurts you, and whether you make a large profit or indeed any profit at all is irrelevant to the bill you get. And unlike the farmers and private schoolers with their ready advocates in the media, it's actually taken quite a while for the sense of how regressive this really is to start to build. But I think it's going to keep building, especially as it starts to impact people's pay. Or Labour have gambled and decided bosses will take the rap for poor pay increases. Its hard telling your workforce there's no money in the till if you live in a big house, drive a big car and still take 2/3 holidays a year. Those that really struggle? are they viable business models?Interesting question Pete. Quite pertinent in an area of interest of mine, as a lot of recording studios have gone to the wall. Some of that is down to technological change - it’s easier to set up a studio at home nowadays - but other costs like rent, may also be a factor. The viability of the business model can depend somewhat on circumstances. Thatcher used to say she was “weeding out the chaff” or summat when she made her cuts and ramped up interest rates. But of course she got rid of a load of viable businesses as well, since they were already suffering from massive inflation, recession and several years of prior hardship, as well as extra competition from entry into the European community etc. Currently quite a lot of businesses are labouring under insane rents, insane energy prices, business rates, customers struggling with the cost of living etc., and there is another consideration. Some of the more viable businesses tend to sell stuff that is addictive for example - gambling, sweets, fast food etc. - but that doesn’t necessarily mean we would want to prefer them. We might want to prefer some businesses that are a bit less viable, but may be better for us? (we might also want to pull the ladder back down for business, reverting to sane rents and energy costs et cetera) |
|
|
|
Post by colin on Nov 22, 2024 12:26:15 GMT
No -i'm not "relentlessly downbeat "in "real life" Perhaps your own implied distinction between real life and life on UKPR2 provides a marker. The forum is peopled by many political activists and party members. And mostly Labour Party ones.In light of the last GE election result i would expect them to be upbeat and i suppose any posts from me which jar against that will seem "downbeat" to you. As far as humanity in general is concerned , that would be a long explanation of my outlook. And i'm not even sure i could be certain about it In general I quite like the search for "realism" . But its not always easy to establish ! Thank you for answering, I am glad to hear that you are not downbeat. I have a close relative that has always been a pessimist and it has blighted her life, I remember as an 11 year old working out that pessimism was not good for a person's well being. I used to say to my relative, even then, if you are a pessimist you never get to enjoy the good things that happen because you are constantly asking "what's the catch!" As to being upbeat I have not been happy with certain aspects of the Governments approach, but in line with my optimistic approach what I hope is happening is that they are getting the bad news out of the way in early days in order to clear the decks to take proper progressive steps to rebalance economic prospects so that ordinary people, not just billionaires, can be much better off in years to come. WE need to be careful about terminology, but my thought would be that either relentless downbeat OR relentless upbeat indicates a lack of critical thinking faculties. With regard to this government I note your "hope". Mine is that Reeves/Starmer know what they are doing. |
|
|
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Nov 22, 2024 12:28:40 GMT
it hasn’t delayed my spending. Have already started on one or two early Black Friday bargains in case they sell out… Go for it. No good being middle class without using your middle class privilege I am trying to make the most of it and have bought some nifty headphones from John Lewis for my music. (Your headphones might say a lot about what class you are in actually, but have to watch out for undue headphonism) |
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,499
Member is Online
|
Post by neilj on Nov 22, 2024 12:32:35 GMT
steveAs I'm sure you are aware large supermarkets have huge turnover and relatively smaller profits than some riskier businesses, namely because they have a more stable income base My point was Tesco's made their highest profit for 10 years, this year profits reached £2.83bn - up more than £300m from a year earlier, so around a 12% increase At the same time they claim going forward they will have to give lower wages and or cut staff going forward because of the NIC increase. Tesco staffing is already low, in fairness they've invested in self checkouts etc, so need minimal staff on check out Large numbers of staff are involved in home shopping, Tesos don't do that for any reason other than they make a profit on it I can't see how they will cut many staff without seriously eating in the bottom line I'm sure they will continue to invest in technology to reduce staff, but they'd do that anyway to increase their profits. They don't do these things for philanthropic reasons, they do it to make more money. Nothing wrong with that, but big firms like these complaining about increased costs reminds me of the Mandy Rice-Davies quote
|
|
|
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Nov 22, 2024 12:47:43 GMT
He subsequently said that tax wasn’t the real reason for getting the farm, the real reason was for shooting, but he didn’t feel he could say that, so he said inheritance tax instead. well, if you’re gonna make up another reason instead, Jezza, there are potentially better reasons for getting a farm you could have picked!… |
|
