Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
The Masked Tulip

Campaign Against Cgt Increase

Recommended Posts

Guest The Relaxation Suite

No surprise there. THe Telegraph is the trusted newspaper of the landed filth across the length and breadth of Britain. I think I read somewhere that David Davis was against the CGT increase. But then I said to myself, surely not. That would make Mr Civil Liberties look like a right nasty little hyprocritical shitbag. It's like Westminster Top Trumps: property portfolio beats principles!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a rebellion by the right-wing of the Tory party. This is not just about capital gains tax but about whether David Cameron or the Tory right wing run the Government, run David Cameron and run the country.

If the Liberals back down now they will be the fags of the Tory right-wingers, if Cameron backs down then he too is David Davis's fag.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

with luck all this noise will wake some up to just how pivotal and peculiar this particular VI is

We all need to get on and lobby for this CGT rise. See my post 'Lobby your MP today' on this forum for a couple of sample letters. E-mail your MP today and let's put forward our side of the argument. I emailed my MP and George Osborne.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest The Relaxation Suite

with luck all this noise will wake some up to just how pivotal and peculiar this particular VI is

"Capital gains tax rise to punish prudent savers. A rise in capital gains tax would cause "unfair financial hardship" for prudent long-term savers, one of the world's biggest investment firms has warned."

If people bought second homes for long-term investment purposes, i.e., the rental income generated from them, then they will not be affected by this return to the revious rate of CGT. If they snapped these properties out of the hands of FTBs purely to resell for profit at a later date, then they have run out of luck. It is a sad that the Telegraph chooses to promote the disenfranchisement of young people from the stakeholder society.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"hands off our assetz".

greedy, ignorant, hypocritcal cvnts.

they must understand what a huge slice of their pwoperdee wealth has been given to them by botched government policy [non-existent financial regulation, mindless mortgage interest tax release, runaway housing benefit, inadequate house building,...]... all their hard earned savings are safe, it's just a very modest slice of the government-bestowed capital gains that are to be re-appropriated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NOW people start complaining? After all these years of economic crap we've had?

"Capital gains tax rise to punish prudent savers"? Eh? Haven't they been paying attention?

Edited by Scunnered

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Capital gains tax rise to punish prudent savers. A rise in capital gains tax would cause "unfair financial hardship" for prudent long-term savers, one of the world's biggest investment firms has warned."

If people bought second homes for long-term investment purposes, i.e., the rental income generated from them, then they will not be affected by this return to the revious rate of CGT. If they snapped these properties out of the hands of FTBs purely to resell for profit at a later date, then they have run out of luck. It is a sad that the Telegraph chooses to promote the disenfranchisement of young people from the stakeholder society.

One of the problems that our housing market has is that rental yields are so low that the only rational reason for someone to buy BTL property is the expectation of a capital gain.

Taxing these anticipated gains at a high enough rate means that buyers will eventually focus on yield rather than potential capital gain.

The yield professional buyers probably need to see before they will commit capital will require prices fall by about 50% (which means that yields double) before they become interested in the market.

If the new CGT regime means that short term amateurs will leave the rental market and be replaced by long term professionals, there will be two significant benefits for tenants :

1. Professional landlords are massively better than amateur landlords. Tenants will not be exposed to the ever changing circumstances of amateur landlords.

2. Prices will be low enough that the buy / rent decision for tenants will be massively less risky than it is to-day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think R4 today had various VI types saying how this change will kill off entrepeneurs and small businesses. Yeah right!

It seems it will affect swathes of middle classes who bought second properties as their pension (so they say). Personally, I think sellers should have to pay CGT on their principle home too if it is sold for more than £150K. That ought to put a few more properties into my price bracket. :lol:

QB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the problems that our housing market has is that rental yields are so low that the only rational reason for someone to buy BTL property is the expectation of a capital gain.

Taxing these anticipated gains at a high enough rate means that buyers will eventually focus on yield rather than potential capital gain.

The yield professional buyers probably need to see before they will commit capital will require prices fall by about 50% (which means that yields double) before they become interested in the market.

If the new CGT regime means that short term amateurs will leave the rental market and be replaced by long term professionals, there will be two significant benefits for tenants :

1. Professional landlords are massively better than amateur landlords. Tenants will not be exposed to the ever changing circumstances of amateur landlords.

2. Prices will be low enough that the buy / rent decision for tenants will be massively less risky than it is to-day.

Top marks. If the Koalishon want to even out the destructive Brown cycles of boom and bust they must attack home speculation by taxing it. Yields should be the market driver not speculative gains that rely on Brown bubbles.

I like this comment on the DT's article:

Who are these "prudent savers", these "small investors" and "second" home owners who will be hit by the new CGT rules? Are some of them by any chance the same rapacious "buy-to-let" landlords who have bought up family homes in so many University towns and turned them into student HMO flophouses, wrecking local communities and destabilising local school viability because no young family would now dream of buying a property and living in those areas? The same landlords who have gladly exploited the absurd loophole in legislation that makes their student HMO properties exempt from council tax? And who are now bleating that their property portfolios are "businesses" that should get special favourable treatment for CGT? But of course, there is no question of these "businesses" offering to pay business rates on their properties. And at the same time as government cuts in University funding make Universities realise that the only income stream they can realistically grow over the next 5 years is to invest capital to build residential accommodation for their own students, removing tens of thousands of students from the BTL HMO rental market at a stroke. Too bad folks. The BTL HMO flophouse game is over.

Edited by Realistbear

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like the HPC brigade are out there in force already.

I guess we should keep turning the screw, as the comments don't seem to be that well moderated.

Err, apparently, so someone once told me... Yer honour! ;)

B

piggies.JPG

post-13228-12750305608491_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they should have hit mortgage interest tax relief first. it would have impacted property only, rather than shares, reducing the scope for VIs to conflate pwoperdee speculation with shareholding, & would have been payable immediately [i.e. not having to wait until properties were actually sold] with little scope for evasion [e.g. reclassifying primary residence, shuffling properties round families, and so on].

oh well.

squeal, piggies, squeal.

p.s. does anyone have a link to the telegraph comments page?

Edited by the flying pig

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

squeal, piggies, squeal.

p.s. does anyone have a link to the telegraph comments page?

Here you go.

http://www.telegraph...x-campaign.html

I love the smell of bacon in the morning.

However, you'll have to take your blood pressure pills, before you go anywhere near this page. The stench of middle class hubris overwhelms the cooking piggies a hundredfold....

B

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I can't see them introducing 40% CGT without some kind of indexation/taper relief. There will be some increase, but they want to soften the blow by making everybody believe it's going to be "worse" than it is, so when they introduce the rise people will breathe a sigh of relief. It's classic nu-lab tactics. To be fair I think there should be some kind of indexation of CGT on things like shares - it's crazy if you've bought shares that have only gone up in line with inflation (i.e. not at all in real terms) but you still have to pay tax on the increase. If they can split CGT so that it encourages people to invest in shares and discourages them from buying up property then I'll be happy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a rebellion by the right-wing of the Tory party. This is not just about capital gains tax but about whether David Cameron or the Tory right wing run the Government, run David Cameron and run the country.

If the Liberals back down now they will be the fags of the Tory right-wingers, if Cameron backs down then he too is David Davis's fag.

If Joe Public actually understands what is being proposed, it will be a rebellion from all the older Tory vote who don't want their savings, already taxed once, taxed at penal rates. The shires are pretty influential you know.

The delicious irony is that the law of unintended consequences could mean a 2nd home might even be classed as business asset.

CGT is a minefield so the governement will have to go for fudge and compromise.

They should consider broad principles:

  • You need to have CGT reasonably close to income tax to avoid tax dodges. Taper relief could bring it down for longer held assets.

  • You want to be careful that you are not taxing the same income twice and punishing people wo have saved and done the right thing.

  • Most BTL-ers I know just don't own up to capital gains. Reducing tax avoidance is key, maybe put HMRC in touch with Land Registry.

  • Business Asset and non-business asset is very hard to define. Shares in Unilever are a non-business asset but shares in MyDuffCo Ltd are a business asset? I don't think so.

  • Without indexation you are taxing inflation, quite illegitmate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair I think there should be some kind of indexation of CGT on things like shares - it's crazy if you've bought shares that have only gone up in line with inflation (i.e. not at all in real terms) but you still have to pay tax on the increase. If they can split CGT so that it encourages people to invest in shares and discourages them from buying up property then I'll be happy.

you do realise some unfortunate people pay tax merely for working?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think R4 today had various VI types saying how this change will kill off entrepeneurs and small businesses. Yeah right!

I don't get it. If someone seriously made that comment then they are demonstrating their gross ignorance. Business assets are treated entirely separately. A few years ago it was deemed (by HMRC) that houses were not business assets. It is CGT that they intend to change not the taxation of business assets. The Entrepeneurs reliefis continuing (10% for approx first million of business assets sold) and it is this which encourages entrepeneurs. The goverment have even stressed they want to encourage these people. A person owning a flock of houses is not an entrepeneur and the houses are not business assets. Quite right they are taxed appropriately and that should be in line with all other gains, such as savings. Simple and fair. By the way, I have shares and I will 'lose' out. But actually I am not losing, I am just paying my fair share rather than demanding others pay it for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Joe Public actually understands what is being proposed, it will be a rebellion from all the older Tory vote who don't want their savings, already taxed once, taxed at penal rates. The shires are pretty influential you know.

The delicious irony is that the law of unintended consequences could mean a 2nd home might even be classed as business asset.

CGT is a minefield so the governement will have to go for fudge and compromise.

They should consider broad principles:

  • You need to have CGT reasonably close to income tax to avoid tax dodges. Taper relief could bring it down for longer held assets.

  • You want to be careful that you are not taxing the same income twice and punishing people wo have saved and done the right thing.

  • Most BTL-ers I know just don't own up to capital gains. Reducing tax avoidance is key, maybe put HMRC in touch with Land Registry.

  • Business Asset and non-business asset is very hard to define. Shares in Unilever are a non-business asset but shares in MyDuffCo Ltd are a business asset? I don't think so.

  • Without indexation you are taxing inflation, quite illegitmate.

Two points to note. Houses are not business assets, HMRC published this several years ago. That is a closed case. There is an official publication out there if you Google it.

Secondly, business assets are not sold to the public, they are owned by the business, shares in MyDuff Ltd are private and not on sale to the public. A listed company sells shares that are sold to the public, anyone can buy and you do not need the Directors to sign off on their sale to an individual. Seems that you can easily differentiate the two. Maybe I am missing your point though?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here you go.

http://www.telegraph...x-campaign.html

I love the smell of bacon in the morning.

However, you'll have to take your blood pressure pills, before you go anywhere near this page. The stench of middle class hubris overwhelms the cooking piggies a hundredfold....

B

Quite hilarious , all these mugs who think they should be exempt from all taxes on their crumby btl investments ....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My comment got through

Housing is a fundamental requirement and should not be an investment option. UK housing is obscenely overpriced and out of reach for a generation. Can't you see this is not sustainable. If you want to invest there are better ways than screwing your children and thier children out of a future. CGT 50% minimum, on 2nd homes and BTL, please David. AP Bear

Come on HPC'ers, I saw Realist Bears comment also, we need this gross campaign riddled with counter argument.

TO YOUR KEYBOARDS!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The CGT rise and the hope that they might sort out the benefits system are the 2 things that make me take the NI increase (and various other bits of personal pain i'm being stung with) on the chin.

They must not bottle it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Joe Public actually understands what is being proposed, it will be a rebellion from all the older Tory vote who don't want their savings, already taxed once, taxed at penal rates. The shires are pretty influential you know.

The delicious irony is that the law of unintended consequences could mean a 2nd home might even be classed as business asset.

CGT is a minefield so the governement will have to go for fudge and compromise.

They should consider broad principles:

  • You need to have CGT reasonably close to income tax to avoid tax dodges. Taper relief could bring it down for longer held assets.

  • You want to be careful that you are not taxing the same income twice and punishing people wo have saved and done the right thing.

  • Most BTL-ers I know just don't own up to capital gains. Reducing tax avoidance is key, maybe put HMRC in touch with Land Registry.

  • Business Asset and non-business asset is very hard to define. Shares in Unilever are a non-business asset but shares in MyDuffCo Ltd are a business asset? I don't think so.

  • Without indexation you are taxing inflation, quite illegitmate.

I'd agree that fudge and compromise will be the order fo the day.

I'd suspect the following might be what they try and achieve:

1/ CGT allowance... currently about £9,000 or so... it'll be cut I suspect to around the same level as personal allowances and then allowed to rise in line. They might I suppose allow one tax free allowance and give the taxpayer the ability to take this as earnings or gains.

2/ They might link the CGT allowance to overall income such that you don't get it if earn over £150,000

3/ They will I think link CGT to earnings rates.. so either have a mirrored rate eg if a basic rate taxpayer then pay at the basic rate ... but this might still encourage swapping of income into gains or reducing income to benefit from lower cap gains taxes... instead they might mirror income tax levels and leave the bands alone...... so no eraning but £6,000 cap gains= no tax, earn £25k and have £10k of cap gains then the cap gains rate is 20%, earn £100k and have £10k of cap gains then the cap gains rate is 50%...... this will essentially treat cap gains as income and tax in the same way.

4/ Non-business assets.... I think this will apply so as not to stifle investment BUT I suspect the upshot is that BTL will be excluded if its done, they may try and make it apply to any home which isn't rented out for more than 6 months per year for instance to try and hit the second home owners ..... good news message regarding making homes more affordable in places like cornwall where second homes ratherthan BTL is the issue.

5/ Thye'll get through the investment in your own companies shares rather than say shell by maintaining this entrepreneurial allowance.

6/ They will I think allow indexing , so it would be tax on gains after indexing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a rebellion by the right-wing of the Tory party. This is not just about capital gains tax but about whether David Cameron or the Tory right wing run the Government, run David Cameron and run the country.

If the Liberals back down now they will be the fags of the Tory right-wingers, if Cameron backs down then he too is David Davis's fag.

If this Cammy Knickers coalition isn't what it appears to be, Dave needs to say, well, "Knickers" to the Knickers half. If it means another GE so be it. If this issue makes a big enough stink then there's every chance previous Tory voters will get their arses in to gear and vote in a proper Tory government.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 261 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.