Dear Editors,

In recent days it has appeared that not all roads lead to Rome. The withdrawal of Italy from China’s Belt and Road Initiative further signifies the lessening of Xi’s reach across the world. Populist and far right movements are turning strongly against Chinese influence, even whilst failing to strongly oppose Russia – just look at the rise of Vivek Ramaswamy in the Republican primary. With a new Cold War seems to come a new era of anti-communism.

Best wishes,

Sue Flay

In defence of the death tax

Dear Editors,

What a strange article ‘It’s time to kill off the death tax’ (18 August) is: hysterical in tone, jesuitical in rationale. 

By what contortions can IHT be construed as ‘regressive’? What is this mythical ‘family home’ inheritors are ‘compelled’ to sell? Such a sale is much more likely to be the consequence of the division of spoils than the need to pay IHT. How does it destroy ‘long-cherished plans for the future’ or lead to ‘downsizing in every area of activity’?”

‘Death tax’ is clearly the more emotive term but, far from being a euphemism, ‘Inheritance tax’ seems a perfectly accurate description of a tax that ultimately falls on the inheritors of an estate as a consequence of their gaining what is, purely and simply, a windfall; a gain achieved not by hard work but by luck.

The double taxation argument is, as ever, trotted out, as if IHT is unique in this respect. The reality is that we are subject to double taxation every day of our lives when we buy VATable goods with our taxed income. But if double taxation is really such a concern, there’s an obvious means of amelioration. Move the burden of direct taxation from the earned (income and corporation taxes) to the unearned (inheritance and capital gains taxes). And foremost among the latter measures might be the removal of the tax exemption on capital gains on first homes.

Best,

Nic Allen

On addressing social inequality 

Dear Editors, 

I read Walter Ellis’s article in Reaction about inequality in society today and how it might be addressed.

When it comes to salary and wealth differences then proper taxation of the wealthy and their businesses is the fair and proper method of balancing these issues.

No-one worth £26 billion (James Dyson) is going to spend that amount of money in one lifetime, let alone five. So the wealth they have accrued from the products etc they made, paid for by the people who work to buy them, should see their wealth taxed fairly.

The question of property prices can only be addressed by building more social housing, as was done in the 1950’s and 60’s.

With more social housing, you address not only high housing costs but exploitation by landlords to keep rents at higher levels knowing they can charge based on mortgage repayments being so much higher.

Best regards,

Jon Fuller

Petrol’s future

Dear Reaction

Please acknowledge that petrol is a finite resource and spend your time considering the long term view and green alternatives.  

Caya Edwards 

Email your letters on the subjects of the day and to comment on points raised in Reaction articles to letters@reaction.life