Daily Mail Cgt - Gov Climbdown Article

[Redcellar]

You didnt. Why am i screwing anybody. All i am suggesting is that any gain is taxed at a fair rate, and not influenced by the current anti anybody with an asset tax them hype.

Then if it is to be taxed at a fair rate then it should be taxed at the same rate as a bank acocunts interest. That's purely dependant upon your income (including inerest etc.) and the tax bracket you fall into. That is fair.

What annoys me is people could get a mortage for a house with no deposit, watch gains accrue based on prices just simply increasing, cash them in and expect to pay a tiny amount of tax. That is where the system is broken and simply needs to be fixed. It encouraged greed and the same greedy people are now complaining it's not fair, you want me to pay tax for an income, boo hoo hoo.

[Georgia O'Keeffe]

What do you consider to be the difference between savings and investments. Some people save cash, some try to improve on that and buy something they hope will increase in value. Then it is aninvestment. If 15 years ago someone spent their savings on an investment, say a second property, why does that turn them into theiving scum, as some here would say. If someone still had cash as opposed to an increased investment why arnt they being asked for an increase in tax. Really it dosnt matter how you save for the future.

Lifes a bitch, the art of good investment is to read current and more importantly future conditions and changes, govts are always changing the rules on something or anoother and a good investor is able to read forward conditions. For fifteen years rules and laws have been progressively changed to make investment in property sound and given a good return. For fifteen years before that they made equity investment sound, fifteen before that commodities. Its basically bad sport to bless your foresight in maybe seeing and benefitting from positive changes and then throwing the toys out when you fail to see that the investment environment has changed and may well negatively affect that investment going forward. Nothing stays a good investment they are all cyclical

You made an investment by your own words. If you dont like the fact that things change you probably shouldnt be making investments. Why dont you just sell up and move onto the next boom whatever you think that may be

[Stars]

You didnt. Why am i screwing anybody. All i am suggesting is that any gain is taxed at a fair rate, and not influenced by the current anti anybody with an asset tax them hype.

i have no idea what you think is fair, I responded to the contents of your post.

[live in hope]

Then if it is to be taxed at a fair rate then it should be taxed at the same rate as a bank acocunts interest. That's purely dependant upon your income (including inerest etc.) and the tax bracket you fall into. That is fair.

What annoys me is people could get a mortage for a house with no deposit, watch gains accrue based on prices just simply increasing, cash them in and expect to pay a tiny amount of tax. That is where the system is broken and simply needs to be fixed. It encouraged greed and the same greedy people are now complaining it's not fair, you want me to pay tax for an income, boo hoo hoo.

I dont think most of the people complaining about this are the type you mention. In my oppinion they are mostly older types who have spent a big part of their lives buying into their old age, And all of a sudden facing the possibility of having the rug pulled, possibly at a late stage in their life. I am not against CGT,especially on BTL with no deposit type mortgages. But thesecgt proposals go much furthur than to stop property profiteering.

[live in hope]

i have no idea what you think is fair, I responded to the contents of your post.

Actually i thought it was fair before browne changed it from 40 to 18%. But with allowances and taper to take account of time held. It was labour who started this row 2 years ago.

[Stars]

I dont think most of the people complaining about this are the type you mention. In my oppinion they are mostly older types who have spent a big part of their lives buying into their old age, And all of a sudden facing the possibility of having the rug pulled, possibly at a late stage in their life. I am not against CGT,especially on BTL with no deposit type mortgages. But thesecgt proposals go much furthur than to stop property profiteering.

As i explained in my other post, you can't expect to get a consistent and predictable return from fvcking productive people over.

There are political and pragmatic isues

[Redcellar]

I dont think most of the people complaining about this are the type you mention. In my oppinion they are mostly older types who have spent a big part of their lives buying into their old age, And all of a sudden facing the possibility of having the rug pulled, possibly at a late stage in their life. I am not against CGT,especially on BTL with no deposit type mortgages. But thesecgt proposals go much furthur than to stop property profiteering.

If the old people sell quickly then they will be OK, surely? Convert it back into cash. Sure you won't be on the gravy train for the next X years but you had a damn good run. Invest in something else if they feel they must. ~Selling up seems to be the answer.

There were loads of people (I know personally) who bought house after house, each one funding the mortage on the next two or three, just building up a portfolio and creaming in the cash. Taxing that lot is fair.

[Stars]

Actually i thought it was fair before browne changed it from 40 to 18%. But with allowances and taper to take account of time held. It was labour who started this row 2 years ago.

It's actually nothing like fair, though i admit it is fairer than zero CG on real estate

Compare the taxation on earned income from working with unearned returns for doing something that actualy has a negative value for others; holding real estate.

The tax situation is perverse

[live in hope]

Lifes a bitch, the art of good investment is to read current and more importantly future conditions and changes, govts are always changing the rules on something or anoother and a good investor is able to read forward conditions. For fifteen years rules and laws have been progressively changed to make investment in property sound and given a good return. For fifteen years before that they made equity investment sound, fifteen before that commodities. Its basically bad sport to bless your foresight in maybe seeing and benefitting from positive changes and then throwing the toys out when you fail to see that the investment environment has changed and may well negatively affect that investment going forward. Nothing stays a good investment they are all cyclical

You made an investment by your own words. If you dont like the fact that things change you probably shouldnt be making investments. Why dont you just sell up and move onto the next boom whatever you think that may be

Dont think many saw it like that years ago. Not many were thinking of it as a boom back in the 90s. Yes things change and we make the best of it. But sell up. Depends what happens on the 22nd.

[live in hope]

It's actually nothing like fair, though i admit it is fairer than zero CG on real estate

Compare the taxation on earned income from working with unearned returns for doing something that actualy has a negative value for others; holding real estate.

The tax situation is perverse

Its not one relief or the other. Everyone here has them both. I assume that if you were lucky enough to make a big gain on year you would be happy to loose all present CGT relief and pay a shit load more tax on it.

[Georgia O'Keeffe]

Dont think many saw it like that years ago. Not many were thinking of it as a boom back in the 90s. Yes things change and we make the best of it. But sell up. Depends what happens on the 22nd.

i doubt many were complaining when laws were changed that helped inflate house prices such as the AST and taxing dividends and changing it to 18% CGT, like i say you have to be consistent and its not being consistent to say its unfair when things have a negative impact. As for the 22nd again it comes down to making a call on forward conditions and rules, not 10 days in the future but years in the future, personally i dont think what happens on the 22nd with regards CGT will make any difference to the trend and price of property over the next decade

Edited June 14, 2010 by Tamara De Lempicka

[live in hope]

If the old people sell quickly then they will be OK, surely? Convert it back into cash. Sure you won't be on the gravy train for the next X years but you had a damn good run. Invest in something else if they feel they must. ~Selling up seems to be the answer.

There were loads of people (I know personally) who bought house after house, each one funding the mortage on the next two or three, just building up a portfolio and creaming in the cash. Taxing that lot is fair.

How can they sell fast enough if this change is retrospective, as has been muted. Obviously for older people selling is probably what they planned if they were buying instead of a pension. I dont think the proposed changes were part of their plans though. I agree with you on multi mortgage gains though.

[live in hope]

i doubt many were complaining when laws were changed that helped inflate house prices such as the AST and taxing dividends and changing it to 18% CGT, like i say you have to be consistent and its not being consistent to say its unfair when things have a negative impact. As for the 22nd again it comes down to making a call on forward conditions and rules, not 10 days in the future but years in the future, personally i dont think what happens on the 22nd with regards CGT will make any difference to the trend and price of property over the next decade

Considering that CGT was changed dramatically only 2 years ago, are you saying that its open season on every tax rate and rule in the inland revenue handbook. Its only CGT that is being talked about because the govt needs some cash. How about vat to 23%, income to 25%, Car tax up 50%, stamp duty up 100%. and next week. There has to be some kind of level playing field.

[Georgia O'Keeffe]

Considering that CGT was changed dramatically only 2 years ago, are you saying that its open season on every tax rate and rule in the inland revenue handbook. Its only CGT that is being talked about because the govt needs some cash. How about vat to 23%, income to 25%, Car tax up 50%, stamp duty up 100%. and next week. There has to be some kind of level playing field.

Yes it is open season on every tax over the next few years among other things, youve had benign investment conditions for the last twenty years which has helped lead to immense prosperity for some and we are now in a period of extraordinary uncertainty and volatility (and probably poverty). You should think yourself fortunate to have had the opportunity to benefit from such an unprecedented period of growing prosperity (the last 80 years). Like i say if you dont like the heat get out of the kitchen.

Edited June 14, 2010 by Tamara De Lempicka

[live in hope]

It's actually nothing like fair, though i admit it is fairer than zero CG on real estate

Compare the taxation on earned income from working with unearned returns for doing something that actualy has a negative value for others; holding real estate.

The tax situation is perverse

you seem to have rather a comunist attitude to any type of making money. dont you think that if this country is to get up off its knees it will need some incentives for people to invest and make some money to pay the taxes we are going to need, as opposed to putting into a safe govt proposed bank account and sitting back and relaxing with it. Do you think many will buy into the new order of things without incentive.

[Authoritarian]

you seem to have rather a comunist attitude to any type of making money. dont you think that if this country is to get up off its knees it will need some incentives for people to invest and make some money to pay the taxes we are going to need, as opposed to putting into a safe govt proposed bank account and sitting back and relaxing with it. Do you think many will buy into the new order of things without incentive.

The 'capitalist' system we have creates awful incentives. The money gets stacked up into land values and in order to unlock the gains people compete over ownership.

This cripples the real economy because it lumbers it with costs that are wholly unnecessary. Taxing out this destructive element would leave people with far more money to invest in productive enterprise.

[live in hope]

The 'capitalist' system we have creates awful incentives. The money gets stacked up into land values and in order to unlock the gains people compete over ownership.

This cripples the real economy because it lumbers it with costs that are wholly unnecessary. Taxing out this destructive element would leave people with far more money to invest in productive enterprise.

Maybe your right, but we have what we have. But the other way didnt work in russia an d the eastern block. There was no incentive to do anything.

[Authoritarian]

Maybe your right, but we have what we have. But the other way didnt work in russia an d the eastern block. There was no incentive to do anything.

I'm not advocating communism, it's proven to be crap. But the capitalist system has been handicapped because it's incorporated a land monopoly element at it's heart. So when it inevitably fails because we cannot bypass the land monopolists, the real commies start jumping for joy and preaching from their Marxism for beginners handbook.

The value of land creates costs for third parties (as we've seen with our house prices), taxing out this element and reducing normal taxes at the same would do a lot to improve our hugely damaged economy imo.

Edited June 14, 2010 by Chef

[live in hope]

Yes it is open season on every tax over the next few years among other things, youve had benign investment conditions for the last twenty years which has helped lead to immense prosperity for some and we are now in a period of extraordinary uncertainty and volatility (and probably poverty). You should think yourself fortunate to have had the opportunity to benefit from such an unprecedented period of growing prosperity (the last 80 years). Like i say if you dont like the heat get out of the kitchen.

Thanks but i dont need your advice. I do realise we are in a new world now,and yes, i do feel fortunate to have had the opportunity to have tried to help my family better themselves.Shame its all over,but thats the way it goes. We can only do our best in the circumstancespresented to us. Some will prosper and some wither i suppose. i suppose thats what you mean isnt it.

[live in hope]

I'm not advocating communism, it's proven to be crap. But the capitalist system has been handicapped because it's incorporated a land monopoly element at it's heart. So when it inevitably fails because we cannot bypass the land monopolists, the real commies start jumping for joy and preaching from their Marxism for beginners handbook.

The value of land creates costs for third parties (as we've seen with our house prices), taxing out this element and reducing normal taxes at the same would do a lot to improve our hugely damaged economy imo.

But owning ones own house is a huge part of our national trait. Its what the vast majority strive for. Its why prices have risen so much. Sure btl has done a bit, but in the main they rose because people wanted houses to own. How can you possiblt take that aim out of us . Even now.

[Authoritarian]

But owning ones own house is a huge part of our national trait. Its what the vast majority strive for. Its why prices have risen so much. Sure btl has done a bit, but in the main they rose because people wanted houses to own. How can you possiblt take that aim out of us . Even now.

It's possible to own your home without creating all the economic baggage that it entails under present arrangements. You'd still get all the benefits of private ownership, such as being able to deny others access to your property, but people would be paying market rates for the use of land, like we pay market prices for anything that we consume.

It's not like we can avoid these costs anyway, currently they're charged as rent or capitalised in the form of a mortgage. A land tax would cut out these middle men and lower the burden of taxation that currently falls on production, i.e investment in productive capacity would be actively encouraged through the tax system.

Edited June 14, 2010 by Chef

[live in hope]

It's possible to own your home without creating all the economic baggage that it entails under present arrangements. You'd still get all the benefits of private ownership, such as being able to deny others access to your property, but people would be paying market rates for the use of land, like we pay market prices for anything that we consume.

It's not like we can avoid these costs anyway, currently they're charged as rent or capitalised in the form of a mortgage. A land tax would cut out these middle men and lower the burden of taxation that currently falls on production, i.e investment in productive capacity would be actively encouraged through the tax system.

Surely its market rates that have forced up the house prices. How would furthur land taxes help.

[live in hope]

It's possible to own your home without creating all the economic baggage that it entails under present arrangements. You'd still get all the benefits of private ownership, such as being able to deny others access to your property, but people would be paying market rates for the use of land, like we pay market prices for anything that we consume.

It's not like we can avoid these costs anyway, currently they're charged as rent or capitalised in the form of a mortgage. A land tax would cut out these middle men and lower the burden of taxation that currently falls on production, i.e investment in productive capacity would be actively encouraged through the tax system/quote]

In think it was lending too much money to so many people who had very little as a deposit that was the cause of it all. Bad economic model i think.

[Authoritarian]

Surely its market rates that have forced up the house prices. How would furthur land taxes help.

Market rates are the rental prices really, housing prices are detached from this reality and subsequently offer terrible yields, because people have been speculating on the (unachievable) future potential of the plot.

The aim of the land tax is to tax away the surplus, or the rental price of the land.

For example, if the rental price of a certain plot could achieve £10k pa then the capitalisation price could be expected to be around £200k. This is because in the market you'd expect a 5% return on average.

Levying a £10k tax on the same plot would lower the exchange price to £0, there are now no additional financial gains to be had from keeping the land away from others, so any building that sits on top of the land will only change hands for it's true market worth.

Around half of the cost of house prices is attributable to the land.

Edited June 14, 2010 by Chef

[Authoritarian]

In think it was lending too much money to so many people who had very little as a deposit that was the cause of it all. Bad economic model i think.

Lending money against housing was a consequence of allowing all the gains to be trapped in the land price. The same wasn't true of cars for example, because cars react differently when economic activity increases around them. They don't go up in price.