header-logo header-logo

24 April 2017 / Elis Gomer
Categories: Features , Wills & Probate
printer mail-detail

A cause for concern

The government's controversial plans to hike up probate fees bore the hallmark of a tax, says Elis Gomer

A cursory glance through the Ministry of Justice’s (MoJ’s) press releases on the now defunct hike in probate fees demonstrates that the government was presenting the changes as ‘fair’ and ‘progressive’.

In particular, there was emphasis on the point that over half of estates would not pay any fee at all (58% of estates are worth below £50,000, the suggested lower limit) and on the fact that the new fees would increase with the value of the estate rather than being a flat fee.

The reality is that the proposals were anything but progressive. Dig deeper into the ministerial commentary and you will find the revelation that the main driver for these changes is that the MoJ has identified a ‘need’ for a new source of funding for the courts. Heaven forfend that we should view a functioning court system as a cornerstone of society and something worth funding in its own right. No, the ministerial rhetoric is that

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

DWF—11 appointments

DWF—11 appointments

DWF strengthens North West teams with 11 newly qualified solicitors

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll