Insuring Against Death Duties In principle, we believe, many and
perhaps most • thinking people will sympathize with the demand voiced by Sir W. Davison • in Committee on the Budget that !policies of insurance-taken out for the purpose of meeting Death Duties should not themselves be liable to Death Duties. It is infinitely preferable, from economic and social standpoints, that the burden of Death Duties should be spread, beforehand over a period of years through a system of insurance rather than flung on an estate at one blow when the owner dies. Yet at present this simply cannot be done for any ,large estate. For not only would the insured sum have to be enlarged -to pay the tax on itself as well as the tax which it was calculated to cover, but, the whole gross amount of it ,being added to the estate, the rate of. the tax would be increased. This state of things is thoroughly bad, and the country ought not to tolerate being put off for ever with the Treasury's reply that it is impossible to alter._ In, the history of Death Duties the history of income tax repeats itself. For decades enlightened people. demanded graduation of the income tax. The Treasury said that it was " impossible " under our system. Could we distinguish between earned and unearned income ? " Impossible " also. Could allow- ances be made for children ? " The loss of revenue that might accrue would be enormous." Yet all these things have been done without bringing the sky down on our heads ; and so this elementary reform in the Death Duties could be, if Parliament awoke to its importance. •
Previous page
