Our website uses cookies to enhance the visitor experience (what's a cookieCookies are small text files that are stored on your computer when you visit a website. They are mainly used as a way of improving the website functionalities or to provide more advanced statistical data.). Are you happy for us to use cookies during your visits?
Please note: continuing without making a choice equates to giving us your consent, which you can withdraw at any time via our cookies policy page.

 

  • ICAEW
  • SAGE

 

0161 928 3276

 

 

We understand our clients

Inheritance Tax (IHT) - a problem with taper relief

Newsletter issue - January 2022

Making gifts of value during an individual's lifetime is a tried and trusted way of reducing the exposure to IHT. Many people are aware of the so-called "seven-year rule", which provides that a potentially exempt transfer (PET) becomes fully exempt as long as the person making the gift is still alive on the seventh anniversary of the date the gift was made. Of these people, some will be aware that there is a partial relief where the person making the gift dies before the seventh anniversary, but after the third anniversary. As a result, many make large gifts later in life without taking professional advice in the belief that, if they survive at least three years, there will at least get some IHT relief. However, in practice the rules are not that simple.

Taper relief

The partial relief is of course taper relief. This provides that where IHT is payable on a failed PET, the tax is reduced by 20% after three complete years have passed, and by further 20% increments for each subsequent year up to the seventh - when of course the PET becomes fully exempt.

There are a few misconceptions about the relief. Firstly, it is important to note that the relief applies to the tax charge and not the value of the gift. A failed PET is brought into the IHT account at its full value. This of course has a knock-on effect on how much the estate exceeds the nil rate band (NRB) by. When individuals are trying to do DIY planning, this misunderstanding can mean the estimated exposure to IHT is understated.

A further misconception stems from a lack of understanding of the underlying legislation behind the relief. This is perhaps best illustrated using a simple case study.

John passed away recently. He was never married but had three children. He owned no property but had a reasonably-sized investment portfolio including listed shares and cash. Just over six years ago, John made a gift of £250,000 to his eldest child. The reason for doing so was partially IHT motivated and was done on the understanding that this represented one third of John's estate. Essentially, John's eldest child was getting their inheritance in John's lifetime. The remaining amounts would be split between the other two children upon John's death. John made no other gifts during his lifetime.

As John died before the seventh anniversary of the gift date, the PET failed. However, the beneficiaries are broadly aware of the taper relief provisions and expect there to be an 80% reduction in the IHT bill, i.e. 80% of £250,000 x 40%. Unfortunately, this is not correct. In order for there to be a taper relief deduction, there has to be a tax charge on the failed PET in the first place. Because the rules specify that failed PETs are subjected to IHT before the rest of the estate, there is no IHT charge as the value of the failed PET is below the NRB of £325,000. There is therefore no IHT charge to reduce.

Solution?

Of course, purely from an IHT perspective an easy answer to the problem would have been for John to give more value away to ensure that the gift exceeded the nil rate band. The problem is that this may not be practical in real life situations; particularly with modest-sized estates like John's.

A potential solution would have been for John to take out a fixed term insurance policy to cover the potential IHT charge if the PET were to fail. At least that way the beneficiaries would have the insurance pay out to cover the tax charge.

This serves to show how what is a relatively simple aspect of IHT legislation can still be far more complicated than it appears on the surface and taking advice prior to acting is essential.

 

To work Smarter in your Business Contact Beauchamp Charles

Contact Us

"Join our newsletter for hints, tips and tax advice"

 

What our clients say

Dakins Property Services

Great Results, Personable, High Integrity

Choice Events Limited

All at Beauchamp Charles are very helpful, approachable and easy to talk to. They keep me informed with key dates; I can feel totally confident that I won't ever miss any deadlines! Whoever I deal with, always deal with matters professionally and efficiently and if they are unavailable they get back to me promptly.

FT leisure Ltd

I have worked with Beauchamp Charles as our management accountants for over 20 years and have never received anything less than exceptional service. Their approach is both professional and personal. Finances and particularly tax strategies are a minefield for small businesses; Beauchamp Charles have in-depth knowledge of these area, which is comforting. They pay very close attention to our business activities and have provided financial strategies that have helped our company develop.

Fredrick Thomas Electrical and Maintenance

We have used Beauchamp Charles since company formation back in 1998. Beauchamp Charles offers us a one to one service as they are small enough to offer this dedicated service and large enough to do the work and offer best advice. They get to know us as individuals and a business, always giving sound advice. Frederick Thomas Electrical are in a stronger place thanks to the service we get from them.

Barnes Walker Landscapes Limited

We are a small business and had employed the same accountancy firm for many years. Two years ago we took the decision to switch to Beauchamp Charles after several othe local businesses recommended them very highly to us. We have not been disappointed with the service they have provided to us over these last two years.