Vespasian

Media articles NORTHERN IRELAND Hpc Related

4,881 posts in this topic

2 minutes ago, 2buyornot2buy said:

Could be, but it can't take account of the "fixed" amount that needs to be collected.

Surely it could? The 'fixed' amount is £1.3bn

Setting aside the business rates etc. LPS data should be linked to land registry data. Total value of property according to the land registry based on last price sold (or bequeathed/transferred etc). Maybe readjust the 'value' when someone builds an extension etc. Would the rates fluctuate that much per year? there are certainly ways to tweak the system given the information that is available.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, mmca22gr said:

Surely it could? The 'fixed' amount is £1.3bn

Setting aside the business rates etc. LPS data should be linked to land registry data. Total value of property according to the land registry based on last price sold (or bequeathed/transferred etc). Maybe readjust the 'value' when someone builds an extension etc. Would the rates fluctuate that much per year? there are certainly ways to tweak the system given the information that is available.

I get you now. Problem is the gap between sales. I think for value for money, a one off valuation is the way to go. I suppose there's an argument to rebase more often maybe, but the cost is going to be massive. That's one of the reasons the UK council tax hasn't been rebased since 93.

I think big data will play a part in these sort of issues going forward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, 2buyornot2buy said:

I get you now. Problem is the gap between sales. I think for value for money, a one off valuation is the way to go. I suppose there's an argument to rebase more often maybe, but the cost is going to be massive. That's one of the reasons the UK council tax hasn't been rebased since 93.

I think big data will play a part in these sort of issues going forward.

Big data indeed. The numbers are there already and it should not be too difficult to extract and come up with much more equatable system than currently. My proposal proably has some massive holes and loopholes but it solve the problem of 'fairness' in some way. The pensioner who bought a £600k house for £80k 30yrs ago gets a great benefit over time if they do not move house but pay the tax in the early years. There is therefore no need to offer them a 20% discount.  The rate can be struck every year to calculate out the £1.3bn required. If there are few transactions in a year then the multiplier is adjusted accordingly. Surely this stuff would be fairly easy to model? a couple of hundred £k to QUB would be a start. If they released the data then it could probably be done for free by interweb nerds. Sale Value, plot size (from ACE maps etc) SqM of space zoned as Residental/Commerical/Industrial. This data exists from the various government sources. Modelling this would throw up some big issues - then you work on solving those. When people buy a house they factor in the mortgage they will pay, the stamp duty and rates to be paid. I don't have a problem with removing the cap but the way in which it will be implemented. Remove the cap when a house sells?

In any event a house in Drumbeg on 1.6 acres should not be paying disproportionately less than a house in Cambourne Park. they are only 3 miles apart. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone see Spotlight on BBC1 last night?  Jim Fitzpatrick doing a reprise on continuing repossessions.

 

The Gallery got a mention/clip.  Some of the stories though.  How did the banks give out mortgages to people on benefits?  It should have been illegal since the government is effectively paying off your mortgage.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, willie said:

Anyone see Spotlight on BBC1 last night?  Jim Fitzpatrick doing a reprise on continuing repossessions.

 

The Gallery got a mention/clip.  Some of the stories though.  How did the banks give out mortgages to people on benefits?  It should have been illegal since the government is effectively paying off your mortgage.

 

I thought that was a poor example of what happened. They should have also said what the house was bought for. It was also purchased under the 'Right to Buy Scheme'. this, as I understand it offered a discount off market value.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting stuff. 

Interesting I  that banks are still lending to benefit rrecipients. Tax credits anyone. 

The housing rights comments on dual income households was also interesting.  One small blip and it all comes crashing down. Really makes you wonder what an interest rate shock or even rampant inflation will do. Carnage.

 

Little sympathy for the farmer. Classic rentier mentality. Wanted to do nothing to make everything. Buy farm with massive debt, sell sites to next generation to pay for retirement and give his kids a lift up.

 

In a group with the character who tried to arrest Gillen...

 

Edited by 2buyornot2buy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.