In her will dated 1845 a wealthy spinster left seven bequests of nineteen guineas to assorted relatives and others. All the other major and minor legacies were expressed in round numbers of pounds.
Dipping into Google I find that a bequest of exactly nineteen guineas was common in the nineteenth century, but no agreement on the reason for this particular sum.
Does anyone know for certain if there was some specific traditional, legal or tax avoidance reason for choosing this amount?
> In her will dated 1845 a wealthy spinster left seven bequests of nineteen > guineas to assorted relatives and others. All the other major and minor > legacies were expressed in round numbers of pounds.
> Dipping into Google I find that a bequest of exactly nineteen guineas was > common in the nineteenth century, but no agreement on the reason for this > particular sum.
> Does anyone know for certain if there was some specific traditional, legal > or tax avoidance reason for choosing this amount?
> David
I've wondered about this too David as it's an expectedly common amount. With it amounting to a shade under £20, I was convinced that it was to avoid some sort of tax threshold, although I remember seeing posts on other threads saying such bequests would have been free of tax.
On Jul 13, 11:01 am, David Marshall <djm.gen...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> In her will dated 1845 a wealthy spinster left seven bequests of
> nineteen guineas to assorted relatives and others. All the other major
> and minor legacies were expressed in round numbers of pounds.
> Dipping into Google I find that a bequest of exactly nineteen guineas
> was common in the nineteenth century, but no agreement on the reason for
> this particular sum.
> Does anyone know for certain if there was some specific traditional,
> legal or tax avoidance reason for choosing this amount?
> David
Legacy duty was a tax paid from 1796 onwards on legacies of more than
£20.
> On Jul 13, 11:01 am, David Marshall <djm.gen...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>> In her will dated 1845 a wealthy spinster left seven bequests of
>> nineteen guineas to assorted relatives and others. All the other major
>> and minor legacies were expressed in round numbers of pounds.
>> Dipping into Google I find that a bequest of exactly nineteen guineas
>> was common in the nineteenth century, but no agreement on the reason for
>> this particular sum.
>> Does anyone know for certain if there was some specific traditional,
>> legal or tax avoidance reason for choosing this amount?
>> David
> Legacy duty was a tax paid from 1796 onwards on legacies of more than
> £20.
Thank you for that, which gives chapter and verse for what was just a speculation. I have tried without a lot of success to use Death Duty Registers in the past but rereading this article from TNA may inspire me to try again.
Matt Tompkins wrote:
> On Jul 13, 11:01 am, David Marshall<djm.gen...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>> In her will dated 1845 a wealthy spinster left seven bequests of
>> nineteen guineas to assorted relatives and others. All the other major
>> and minor legacies were expressed in round numbers of pounds.
>> Dipping into Google I find that a bequest of exactly nineteen guineas
>> was common in the nineteenth century, but no agreement on the reason for
>> this particular sum.
>> Does anyone know for certain if there was some specific traditional,
>> legal or tax avoidance reason for choosing this amount?
>> David
> Legacy duty was a tax paid from 1796 onwards on legacies of more than
> £20.
I'm still trying to get "normal" back from "Medical Emergency", so I've probably missed something that would answer this, but anyone know IF there was a "death duty" prior to 1796 and if so what amount triggered it?
>Matt Tompkins wrote:
>> On Jul 13, 11:01 am, David Marshall<djm.gen...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>>> In her will dated 1845 a wealthy spinster left seven bequests of
>>> nineteen guineas to assorted relatives and others. All the other major
>>> and minor legacies were expressed in round numbers of pounds.
>>> Dipping into Google I find that a bequest of exactly nineteen guineas
>>> was common in the nineteenth century, but no agreement on the reason for
>>> this particular sum.
>>> Does anyone know for certain if there was some specific traditional,
>>> legal or tax avoidance reason for choosing this amount?
>>> David
>> Legacy duty was a tax paid from 1796 onwards on legacies of more than
>> £20.
>I'm still trying to get "normal" back from "Medical >Emergency", so I've probably missed something that would >answer this, but anyone know IF there was a "death duty" >prior to 1796 and if so what amount triggered it?
A number of sites refer to a "death tax" or "probate tax" commencing
in England in 1694.
> >> Legacy duty was a tax paid from 1796 onwards on legacies of more than
> >> 20.
was a "death duty"
> >prior to 1796 and if so what amount triggered it?
> A number of sites refer to a "death tax" or "probate tax" commencing
> in England in 1694.
this is quite different. The church of England proved wills till 18589, and an inventory was made of goods (which 'came from God', not land which came from the monarch). A charge was made on the amount declared, payable to th3e Bishop or his official. To avoid this, nonconformists would sometimes deed gtheir property over to their heirs during their lifetime. The legacy duty was imposed by the government, gto finance the War, and it was charged on a sliding scale according to the beneficiary's degree of relationship to the testator. Illegitimate children counted as 'strangers in blood, and paid the full rate. You will sometimes see the bequest made 'free of all duties', meaning the executor, for the estaqte, paid this before handing over money to the legatee.
EVE
Author of The McLaughlin Guides for Family Historians
Secretary, Bucks Genealogical Society
