We want LI to be one of the friendliest places on the internet, where lawyers and law students help each other with their career related queries and occasionally discuss other stuff that might affect their lives too. In other words:
1. Be kind, respectful and helpful to each other.
2. Be bona fide, truthful, genuine and curious.
3. Assume the best intention of others.
Therefore, in using the site, you must agree to do your best to uphold these community guidelines.
Note that what you find here is written and moderated by anonymous people on the internet.
Therefore everything you read here is very likely unverified, rumour, speculation and/or downright false.
In continuing to read anything here, you must therefore agree not to take anything you read here as factual and that you will exercise due caution, diligence and common sense before acting on any information you may come across here.
You also agree to report any inaccurate or malicious comments with the buttons. Moderators take action within 24 hours, as required and appropriate under law.
Our full terms and conditions apply too.
Do you solemnly agree to all of the above?
Anyway, as per the standard definition of "merit", you don't deserve anything you did not work for. The same logic should apply to your parent's property.
Inheritance tax does not prevent people from liquidating their properties or doing anything with it during their life time.
The root if this was from the industrial revolution during which Europe was seized with a heady mix of conflicting influences from the church, the governments and the capitalists during which the labor was cheap because of the general population was largely poor, less educated and looking for opportunities to getting the economic benefits of industrial revolution. Capitalists colluded with the governments and maximized their profits at the cost of cheap but hard labor. In the backdrop of lack of interest either from the government or from the church the labor was taken for granted that led to birth of socialism orchestrated by Carl Marx.
It definitely helped overcome the exploitation of the labor class through socialist/ communist movements that spread and found roots across the world. Now the situation is pretty changed for good with the level of improved knowledge of the social systems among the workers and exploitation is hardly a means achieve any tangible objectives.
So forget about redistribution of resources/ wealth or whatever muck you call it, even your street vendor would pounce at you if you ever talk about govt confiscating someone's wealth for redistribution.
Therefore, nothing will really be collected from the inheritance of rich people. Of course, this can be corrected if the movement of wealth to trusts is taxed. However, doing this will undoubtedly open a different can of worms vis-à-vis financial sponsor investments and other aspects of corporate laws. Therefore, I highly doubt this will be done.
For the middle class and poor, who already don't have much, and either cant afford private client lawyers and estate planners for putting things into trust or will not have the knowledge to do so, will lose money under this mechanism. Effectively, people who have very little will lose the most.
This reminds me of the minimum balance fiasco, where the lowest of the low lost butt-loads of money to the banks owing to either lack of wealth or knowledge.
And in any case, its not like there will be a direct transfer of wealth. Irrespective of who is in the government, the recovered wealth will largely either be directly pocketed by our public servants or largely distributed to capitalist friends of the government or a mix of both.
These plans seem nice on paper but hardly have any effect! Populism will truly be the death of all of us. The early years of our democracy clearly shows that when the government comes for a big chunk of public money (that time it was through insane income taxes), the government really does not get the money, people just engage in corruption!
But what do I know!
Secondly, the idea of a 50 percent inheritance tax in India is not only 🦇💩🤪 but will lead to a lot of corruption. The money will not be spent on health or education (unlike in the EU) but will go into the pockets of corrupt politicians and bureaucrats.
On my TL I see a lot of NLU/Ashoka/Jindal students cheering this idea with zero economic awareness. They have a childish fascination with Marxism. If the Congress comes to power and implements this idea, then India will be destroyed. Even Congress supporters like Nidhi Razdan are blasting the Congress for this dumb idea.
I request LI to publish this, because law students need to know the TRUTH. See below.
https://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/us-news/what-is-us-inheritance-law-quoted-by-sam-pitroda-us-federal-govt-doesnt-have-one-only-6-states-impose-it-101713941601747-amp.html
Inheritance tax will go a long way in correcting wealth inequality. There are maharajas in Rajasthan who live their entire life on generational wealth. This will make them work and will ultimately benefit the society.
First of all, is it really true that a capitalist country like the US takes 55% of a deceased person’s wealth, as the media is reporting? If yes, that’s a superb policy and shows that even capitalist societies believe in equitable wealth distribution.
Now, coming to India, why not have a policy here? It’s constitutionally valid because the right to property is no longer a fundamental right and the DPSP indirectly supports the idea. Imagine if we take 55% of Aakash Ambani or Karan Adani or Paridhi Shroff’s inheritance. So many milllions will be instantly lifted out of poverty!