Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Tired of Waiting

F T : Libdems Mansion Tax Proposal

Recommended Posts

Good FT article about the LibDems "mansion tax" proposal. Some excerpts:

"(the “land monopolist”) renders no service to the community, he contributes nothing to the general welfare, he contributes nothing to the process from which his own enrichment is derived." (Winston Churchill, 1909, during his radical liberal phase.)
Clegg: “A liberal tax system rewards work and enterprise and captures pollution and unearned wealth,”
"Economists at the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, the developed nations’ club, are forever urging countries to ramp up property taxes, which they see as the best way of collecting revenue. Their recent analysis of growth-oriented tax reforms concluded that “corporate income taxes are the most harmful type of tax for economic growth, followed by personal income taxes and then consumption taxes, with recurrent taxes on immovable property being the least harmful.”
In the UK, the Mirrlees review of tax to be published by the Institute for Fiscal Studies describes the current system as a “mess” and advocates a revolution in the taxation of land and property, including significantly heftier taxation of high-value owner-occupied housing.
(...)
That would modestly lower the burden of property tax for a large majority of households owning or living in property worth £250,000 or less, but significantly to increase taxation for for those in more expensive properties. Someone living in a pleasant but hardly palatial London terrace house worth £1m would see their annual bill rising from around £2,000 to £10,000 under this reform.

More here: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/ba0df652-5c8d-11e0-ab7c-00144feab49a.html#axzz1IOqDS0Kr

Or through here: http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=%22Politics%3A%20Threats%20to%20the%20edifice%22&rlz=1B3GGLL_en-GBGB370GB370&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbo=u&tbs=nws:1&source=og&sa=N&tab=wn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they'd get my vote!

I backed it as soon as clegg and cable announched it!

Mine too.

In this small rented flat we pay around 1% of its value per year as Council Tax (band B ).

I can't see any logical or ethical reason for this same rate - 1%/year - not be applied to all properties.

.

Edited by Tired of Waiting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A land tax makes only sense if it will cover also all unregistered land owned by the big hereditary landowners.

Also IMHO the tax should also be based on square metres not just value. Land is a finite resource so someone who owns more than his fair share should pay the community for his priviledge.

I'd suggest every adult can own say 250m2 of land tax free (2x250m2=500m2 is more than most plots for detached houses so most normal people wouldn't have to pay anything), any ownership above that should be taxed (farmland at a lower rate than residential or commercial land obviously).

--

Edited by wise_eagle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

erm, be careful what you wish for folks. From the FT's take on the Mirrlees review:

The result would be a boon to buy-to-let landlords, currently taxed on rental income and subject to capital gains tax on increased values – and an extra burden for owner-occupiers, who are exempt from capital gains tax.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

erm, be careful what you wish for folks. From the FT's take on the Mirrlees review:

The result would be a boon to buy-to-let landlords, currently taxed onrental income and subject to capital gains tax on increased values –and an extra burden for owner-occupiers, who are exempt from capitalgains tax.

Not with my proposal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they'd get my vote!

I backed it as soon as clegg and cable announched it!

I am not sure it's sensible to vote for them on the basis they would do what they promised. Once bitten, etc.

I am surprised at the number of replies based entirely on the desire that someone else be taxed, whether the outcome would be grossly unfair or not. The LD proposal seems to be to pick on the smallest possible group they can find that is wealthy enough to screw a substantial amount of money from. It may be that taxing property is indeed the best way of collecting taxes, but that is not what the LDs believe. When the proposal was first discussed, the threshold was £1e6. Then it was rapidly raised to £2e6 and the rate increased because it was not going to be such a vote-winner if a non-trivial number of people paid the new tax.

I am certainly not against a property or land-tax, but would prefer if it was thought through properly and as close to fair as a tax can be. A naive policy that needs changing in the face of the first opinion poll might not be quite it. And neither would a policy with no chance of getting past their senior coalition partner. It would especially not be something announced without details just before the local elections.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A land tax makes only sense if it will cover also all unregistered land owned by the big hereditary landowners.

"unregistered land"?! Do we still have that?!

Also IMHO the tax should also be based on square metres not just value. Land is a finite resource so someone who owns more than his fair share should pay the community for his priviledge.

I'd suggest every adult can own say 250m2 of land tax free (2x250m2=500m2 is more than most plots for detached houses so most normal people wouldn't have to pay anything), any ownership above that should be taxed

That is a very good idea, or new angle - actually a new "principle".

Start to fine tune it a bit: In London 250m2 would be too much. Though it would be very difficult to stablish areas, and borders... Perhaps we could merge it a little this principle with value: a land tax "threshold"?

(farmland at a lower rate than residential or commercial land obviously).

Maybe, probably, but I am not 100% sure about that.

If we liberalise planning enough, allowing for a construction boom (here in the south, where we do have a shortage), most of the land in the country (far from cities) will eventually fall in value close to current farmland prices anyway.

Land around cities will be naturally more expensive, of course, and taxed as much, nudging the owners to use it for what the market wants most: nowadays, houses. After a few years, our housing shortage in the south would disappear, and the land value would fall close to agricultural prices.

Actually your suggestion of taxes above a certain size plot would work well in the countryside far from cities, preventing the waste of land for pride sake: houses with too big plots, for ostentation sake, or the "driveway" malarkey.

Interesting. Things to think about.

Edited by Tired of Waiting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

erm, be careful what you wish for folks. From the FT's take on the Mirrlees review:

Capital gain should be taxed only on real, above inflation, capital gain. That would be fair. Well, as long as the overall level of taxation is fair = low, of course. The public sector can't be more than 40% of the economy. Ideally it should be less than 1/3. then we would have growth, and in a few years a bigger public sector in absolute terms, with better services. Always kept at less than 1/3 of this growing economy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they should tax not on the basis of the value of every individual house owned, but on the *total* residential assets owned - that should f*ck people like the Wilsons.

It would only be passed onto tenants in rents.

tim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would only be passed onto tenants in rents.

tim

That would modestly lower the burden of property tax for a large majority of households owning or living in property worth £250,000 or less, but significantly to increase taxation for for those in more expensive properties. Someone living in a pleasant but hardly palatial London terrace house worth £1m would see their annual bill rising from around £2,000 to £10,000 under this reform.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You'd be surprised if you hadn't looked into this and the reasons behind it before.

You may want to google something like 'who owns britain'. You'll find an astonishing proportion of our country's land is still owned by the Normans who stole it 1,000 years ago - and it has not been registered simply because it never changes hands - it passes seemlessly from generation to generation without so much as a penny in tax being forthcoming via the judicious deployment of tax planning Trust vehicles.

That little bit of land you want to build on is probably held by a descendant of the Normans. Strange but true - but then that is why we have 'The Rule of Law' rammed down our throats, the House of Lords etc. to cement their interests

EDIT: I believe this guy is from your 'manor'.

http://www.independe...ngs-443956.html

Thanks for that. I will look into it.

This is all absolutely ridiculous. What a joke. Emigration is constantly increasing its appeal.

Or, since the land is not registered, perhaps we should organize a group of a few dozens first time buyer couples, and just "demarcate" a series of small sensible plots, for some sensible terrace houses, procure some good "tools" for self-defence for all participants, and then build our family homes there. Then see what would happen. It would be fun.

Edited by Tired of Waiting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wondered why 'they' Politicians etc had been so overactive flogging London houses to rich Asians and touring Asia to advertise them as 'investments'

Once again the UK Govt/City boys will have kicked the Asians in the teeth if this tax goes ahead as relative late buyers into the housing pyramid scheme (will there be the usual avoidance clauses for outsiders?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would this mansion tax be similar to the idea that labour had - where they needed whole valuing departments to go into EVERY house in the country when they wanted and to have the right to take photos of your improvements?

Just imagine that. Two weeks after a trip to B&Q to buy wallpaper for the bedroom and you get a knock at the door. IT's the council valuation officer with his camera wanting to take a photo of your new bedroom look.

Two weeks later you get a revised mansion tax bill and you have to pay another £200 as you've pushed your house into the next band up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

dont give them ideas!

How else do you think it'll work?

They'll have to have valuers departments and enforcement teams.

Otherwise you'll be sneaking a pool and conservatory on to your 10th floor flat without paying the requistite tax.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It could just involve upgrades for when permissions have been granted so the database could be updated at that point? Just a thought. So wallpaper excluded I would suggest. ;)

Look if painting an entire house magnolia can increase it's value by 20% then putting up £80 a roll wallpaper must increase it by 40%!

Permissions don't get asked in many cases - you think that people will have more incentive to admit to improvements when they'll pay more tax?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would only be passed onto tenants in rents.

tim

It would not. Rent is driven by the market price - what tenants can afford to pay. The landlords would have to take a hit no matter how they didnt want to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You'd be surprised if you hadn't looked into this and the reasons behind it before.

You may want to google something like 'who owns britain'. You'll find an astonishing proportion of our country's land is still owned by the Normans who stole it 1,000 years ago - and it has not been registered simply because it never changes hands - it passes seemlessly from generation to generation without so much as a penny in tax being forthcoming via the judicious deployment of tax planning Trust vehicles.

That little bit of land you want to build on is probably held by a descendant of the Normans. Strange but true - but then that is why we have 'The Rule of Law' rammed down our throats, the House of Lords etc. to cement their interests

EDIT: I believe this guy is from your 'manor'.

http://www.independe...ngs-443956.html

EDIT2: There was a period after the second wolrd war where taxes on estates were leading to them being sold up and passed into the National Trust. With the advent of ways to avoid any tax and for subsidies that suddenly came to landowners via the EU, the estates became stronger once more.

And that is another point, it is strange on the one hand to have a land tax but on the other, to subsidise the owner of that land. How do you square that circle?

EDIT3: Another article:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/article786116.ece

This is how 'they' have been carrying out a modern land grab.

They have set up massive LTD Farming companies(and companies like Tate and Lyle/Silver Spoon - who are their modern form of sugar plantation exploiters) that own 100's of thousands of acres and set in motion policies to send smaller farmers to the Wall.

(The EU farming subsidies were never set up to subsidise multibillion pound Ltd companies - sugar is produced at a loss apparently, subsidised by EU Millions euros per year for EU sugar to be sold on world markets depriving other poorer countries of a living rate.)

This is done thru the manipulation of Defra policies

(who flatly refuse freedom of information requests on how many 100's/10's of millions in (public taxes) subsidies is paid annually to huge Landowners like duke of norfolk under anti-terrorism laws - blatent abuse cos you could roughly work out how much land he owns from the subsidy)

and the huge buying power of the modern supermarkets(also owned indirectly by 'them' as shareholders - shooting party executive buddies etc .

If the carrots are 1p a bag cheaper - even though the farmer was contracted to grow for a.n.other supermarket at a previous price - when it comes nearing to sell/buy they beat the farmer down on price forcing him to grow at a loss or just plough the whole crop back in - leaving less in the kitty for the next season.

That's how the super rich 'hidden' land-Barons have bust most of the small farmers and bought up their land at relatively cheap sums over the last few decades.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would get my vote, but would never happen. Even members of my own extended family live in houses approaching £1m in 'value' that are nothing special and were'nt so pricey when they bought/built.

They are the usual asset rich/cash poor, and would see it as a direct assualt on their lifetime of work.

Of course, in a purely economic sense, the fixed physical nature or land/buildings and limited job creating nature once built means taxes should be used to help stem speculative activity. But making that politically acceptable is another matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why have the liberals been proposing a local income tax for the last decade then? Twats.

:lol::lol:

Very good point.

Though IIRC that was during Charles Kennedy's leadership. I think I heard he is more of a social democrat, whilst Clegg is more "orange book" stuff?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would not. Rent is driven by the market price - what tenants can afford to pay. The landlords would have to take a hit no matter how they didnt want to.

I think I agree.

At the end of all these "prices adjustments" the final consequence IMO would be on house prices.

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.

  • 312 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.