Revealed: King Charles secretly profiting from the assets of dead citizens
Revealed: King Charles secretly profiting from the assets of dead citizens
Exclusive: Assets of thousands of people in north-west England used to upgrade king’s property empire via archaic custom
You're viewing a single thread.
Revealed: US Secretly profiting off the assets of dead citizens (I.e. estate taxes exist)
I believe this is different. We also have an Inheritance Tax which is a tax on a person's estate when they die.
However this is the Royal Estate taking all of the inheritance for people who don't have a will or any known relatives. Usually in this scenario it would instead go to the govt., thus, eventually, benefiting everyone and not just the Royal family.
Also, Charlie was exempt from paying inheritance tax despite inheriting an entire fucking empire simply because he was the lucky spaff of his cousin-fucking dad.
It doesn't really make sense to have inheritance tax on the crown estate, thought it could have done on the Duchy of Lancaster.
This is the key aspect:
The Duchy of Lancaster’s website states that “proceeds” of bona vacantia go to three registered charities after costs are deducted. However, its accounts suggest only 15% of the £61m it has collected in bona vacantia over the last decade has been donated to charities.
That's basically fraudulent.
They are within their legal rights but the British taxpayers already do a lot for them through pure goodwill, and they are trespassing on that goodwill.
There's a huge difference between a state charging taxes, or even a state inheriting when there's no other legal heir, and the head of state personally taking property for their own profit.
If Joe Biden and his wife were appropriating US estate taxes to renovate their private rental properties for personal gain it would probably be controversial too.
Funny how Trump neve gets pulled up by his base for all his corruption. They probably can’t spell it, for a start.
US estate taxes help maintain the primary residence of Joe and Jill - they help fund staffing for the Whitehouse.
I agree that these situations are quite different but that article title was outrageously sensationalist and vague.
Sure. That's normal. But they're not renting out the Whitehouse and putting the proceeds into their personal bank accounts as private income.
I don't think that is a secret and I don't even think it is a bad policy. Go earn your own way in life, we don't need generations of people being a parasite on their ancestors.
You want to help your kids have a good future? Very noble of you. Hire tutors, spend time with them on homework, make it so they can go to higher ed and just concentrate on their grades, help them buy a house. Don't give them a company to run into the ground.
It's a very capitalist, or monopolistic, worldview.
To run a business corrillary; Exxon and BP were undisputed leaders in their fields going way back, whether or not they were number 1 isn't even important, they were/are major players. Studies were conducted in the 70s that showed climate change was guaranteed (nevermind newsprint from the 1900's talking about the same thing. 120 years ago this was foreseen) gave them 2 options.
-
Use that knowledge and invest heavily into solar, wind and other energy generating tech, since they already know the energy sector as players in it, they have a huge advantage on every start up. They can control the conversation. If you're business is going to be made obsolete and replaced, well, it makes the most sense for you to do that to yourself, right?
-
Ooooooooor suppress the research, PR campaign public support, act innocent when scientists with scruples finally catch up, and extract as long as you can while you can.
Which did the ruling capitalist hegemon (cuz oil runs the world) choose?
Giving your kids all the tools so they can go create and contribute however they see fit is a fucking admiral goal. In fact, it's the best you can do for your child. Taking away all challenge and hardship by passing along immeasurable wealth does not help a persons pro-social maturing. How could it, it's isolationist by its own very nature. This is why the Scrooge trope exists.
The same logic needs to be extended to copyright law. 20 years then public domain. You had an idea that took off? Good for you! Now why should the inventor of pixie sticks not have to work ever again? If anything, they've just got the next 20 years of developing and innovating funded. They already have an advantage. Those who fail to use it, imo, shouldnt warrant pity. We shouldn't reward laziness and laurels shouldn't be a ride at societies amusement park.
What are you on about? There is like 8 ideas not at all related to what I was saying.
-