This, with a much more reasonable allowance sounds a bit like your so called ‘better solution’.

That is exactly what I said. Couldn’t put it in better words. Exemptions. Only difference I said is exempt the amount upto, let’s say, what a family of 3 people needs for let’s say 3 years. That way the inheriter won’t have to pay a superficial tax while still maintaining a livable lifestyle. Charging inheritance tax on poor people (however little) puts a lot of burden on them for something they are not willingly earning or purchasing. Charging millionaires and billionaires with inheritance tax is better as there will be a continuous cycle of wealth redistribution and thus they won’t be able abuse their powers. But wealth tax is more efficient that way as it would prevent someone becoming obscenely wealthy in the first place.

Taxing the poor has never worked, they will hoard more unaccounted whatever wealth they have to avoid those taxes rather than owning real estate, shared, bonds, etc and participating in the economy. No one likes paying taxes — especially on something which they are not willingly earning or purchasing.

And how do you pay that price? With money. This is pure sophism.

Also you pay VAT and GST only once — so it is not an example of double taxation. These have been designed in such a way that the only the final customer pays tax on it as the final entity in the supply chain. Whatever VAT/GST the retailer, supplier and the service provider paid is refunded by the government in the form of ITC (Input Tax Credit).

You don’t pay VAT/GST on the money, you pay it on the product’s price (and you can avoid it if the receiptent agrees to get paid in cash and don’t show it in the books). For assets, you are buying it with your money that you have already earnd that has been already taxed. You also have to pay a stamp duty to the government when you buy any asset, you pay registration fees, you pay all the property & Municipal taxes and when you sell it, you will be paying a capital gains tax anyways, so what’s the point of charging an inheritance tax?

Simple question to you: My networth is just 100k USD, I inherited 500k USD (current market value) house from my parents, and the inheritance tax is at 20%, wouldn’t I lose all my existing money and assets I for something that is just worth 500k USD as an unliquid asset? To sell that house you will have to find a buyer which is not an easy or cost-free task. If the house doesn’t sell, you will be paying property taxes anyways, and once you sell it, you will pay the capital gains tax as well so what’s the point of inheritance tax?

What I think is a better solution: Define a certain threshold where the value of inheritance is above a level where the person inheriting becomes wealthy beyond their and their family’s actual needs, and distribute that wealth among the lower income people in the form of permanent housing.

Nowhere is this more visible outside Palestine than in India, where 200 million Muslims are being pushed to the edge of extermination by the RSS-BJP regime. Under Narendra Modi, Islamophobia has been weaponised not as fringe hate but as state ideology.

I can’t speak for other parts of the world but I can for the Indian subcontinent.

I’m an atheist, and personally, I try not to judge anyone based on their religion — it generally works well, especially with upper and upper middle class communities. From my experience, upper class Muslims are usually integrated into society and not involved in shady activities.

I also don’t agree with government policies that discriminate against people based on religion like requiring proof of ancestry after Independence because such policies are unjust and target citizens unfairly.

That said, I do have concerns about certain practices in some lower income communities in India. Poverty, limited education and social isolation can make people more vulnerable to radical messaging. Madrasas (which btw are even attended by children younger than teenagers) teach extreme ideas, like framing conversion as a duty or promoting a black and white worldview. In rare cases, this can lead some individuals to embrace jihadist ideology or commit illegal acts in the name of religion. Social media can further amplify these messages. While most Muslims are peaceful, certain forms of radicalisation especially among vulnerable Islamic populations can be more organised and aggressive compared to similar movements in other major religions.

So even the propaganda by our right wing government is exaggerated, it does have some truth to it. It can be solved by eliminating all religious education in pre-teen ages and criminalising parents for forcing that type of education on children.