Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
fru-gal

What Do People On Here Think About Labour's Mansion Tax Proposal?

Recommended Posts

I'm happy with it actually.

The elite have been buying up land assets in huge numbers to avoid tax/as a safe haven for ages.

That a multi million pound London property often pays less in tax then a home worth a fraction of that elsewhere in the country is ridiculous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really care how much a persons house is worth. But if the land could have an extra few houses on it it may be worth charging them the council tax those houses would have brought in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's hope it leads to the removal of Capital Gains Tax on all properties. While 'primary residences' are exempt, able to make huge lottery-size windfall gains without any sort of CGT, it's no wonder property is the investment vehicle of so many.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone tweeted that slightly over 50% of the revenues generated will come from Kensington & Chelsea and Mayfair so it's quite targetted.

The problem is clearly the council tax regime overall not the small number of houses > £2m

There's a swathe of housing > c £500k up to £2000k which won't be impacted, probably 'cause it would have the 'middle classes' squealing, but that's what needs addressing.

The other point of course is that council taxes go to councils whereas general property taxes go to the treasury.

I notice Kate Barker in yesterday's Guardian (I think) was urging CGT on primary residences as being a fair way to tackle house prices but accepted it wouldn't get political support.

Still, a mansion tax is at least a start and better than the Tories or Tory ultras who are obviously completely against any sort of land reform or land taxes.

But noone is tackling the real root of the problem which is chronic lack of supply over 40 years. Labour are paying lip service to it, but their targets are inadequate and too little too late. This will take 30 years AT LEAST to resolve if it ever is.

Edited by R K

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's hope it leads to the removal of Capital Gains Tax on all properties. While 'primary residences' are exempt, able to make huge lottery-size windfall gains without any sort of CGT, it's no wonder property is the investment vehicle of so many.

Why would you want it removed :wacko: ? If it's removed then people with second properties/BTL's make even more money without paying tax???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's all waffle.

Although if Labour do implement it Blair will be having to cough up a small fortune.

Pretty much this.

Some outcomes:

1. It won’t happen

2. It will happen but they’ll be plentiful loopholes so as to not have any effect

3. If it does work, it’s Labour and tax so it’ll slowly be extended to all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty much this.

Some outcomes:

1. It won’t happen

2. It will happen but they’ll be plentiful loopholes so as to not have any effect

3. If it does work, it’s Labour and tax so it’ll slowly be extended to all

If it's extended to all I wonder what will happen to BTL properties..... Who'll be responsible then?

Although a rolling tax year on year would cripple most home owners / mortgage renters / renters especially if this is on top of council tax.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't get why people are up in arms that someone who owns a £2 million plus property will have to pay 1% or whatever tax on unearned gains which they would profit heavily from if they sold but nobody cares that someone earning say £40k per year has to pay 40% tax on some of that income. Why is it better to tax work more than we tax unearned wealth?

Edited by fru-gal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't get why people are up in arms that someone who owns a £2 million plus property will have to pay 1% or whatever tax on unearned gains which they would profit heavily from if they sold but nobody cares that someone earning say £40k per year has to pay 40% tax on some of that income. Why is it better to tax work more than we tax unearned wealth?

They're 'anti-statist' UKippers for the most part. Ideology > logic.

Edited by R K

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want to tax unearned wealth in this instance (the value of property) a more focused way to do it is at the point of sale.

Doing it with the mansion tax or council tax you are taxing the ownership of an item based on it's perceived value, and if that valuation is out of the control of the owner it opens up the question of how fair it is.

For the record I favour land tax as an alternative. And I'm not a fan of taxing work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a cat in hells chance I say.

Attack dogs already claiming ONS figures that, 25% of people in £2m+ properties earn £55k or less. "Find £15k a year out of that. " "Politics of envy" "what about granny all alone in her mansion" blah blah blah

You can't tax unearned pwoperdee wealth, or inheritance tax, the 1% or the 'talent' so I'm afraid everyone on PAYE, the poor etc will have to carry the tax burden from now on

Edited by aSecureTenant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rich bashing, politics of envy, election coming up, labour. yawn

We need more envy, and we need to disseminate it until it the great mass of the population, the 90/99%, are unafraid to expropriate the expropriators. At which point - when there is a ceiling to inequality, when the rich cannot legally become too rich, nor the wage earner too poor, envy will diminish. Such an easy solution to our social ills. The rich won't ever miss a lunch, but they won't be able to buy the political system and control our lives. What could be better? ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rich bashing, politics of envy, election coming up, labour. yawn

Fair enough, we will bung it all on your PAYE, NI and VAT!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They're 'anti-statist' UKippers for the most part. Ideology > logic.

Anybody 'anti-statist' who is genuine isn't in favour of cripplingly heavy taxation either.

Which was why UKIP's policy used to be for a flat tax. Now they've been infested with NIMBYs and reactionaries, that has changed.

Unfortunately there are too many statists in this country, is the bottom line.

Edited by EUBanana

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seeing as it's a tax on housing it would make some sense to be spent on new housing but any of their references to new housing have been a bit wishy washy and very vague.


http://

blogs.spectator.co.uk/the-spectator/2014/09/ed-milibands-ten-year-plan-speech-full-text-and-audio/

For government it means no vested interest, no old orthodoxies, no stale mindset, should stand in the way of restoring this basic bargain of Britain. It means reforming our banks, much bigger reform of our banks. Breaking up the big banks.

Don't make me laugh.


So our fifth national goal is that by 2025, for the first time in fifty years, this country will be building as many homes as we need. Doubling the number of first time buyers in our country.

Again it is going to require a massive national effort, a massive national effort. We won’t let large developers sit on land, we will say to small developers and construction companies that we will help them to build homes again in our country. We will build a new generation of towns, garden cities and suburbs creating over half a million new homes.

So that's about 50,000 per year - so they've already reneged on the 200,000 homes per year proposal.

It also confirms what Balls said yesterday about 200,000 homes by 2020 - that's also only about 40,000 - 50,000 homes per year.

That's about half the current abysmal rate of house building. So all the talk about 40 new Garden Cities has been a pack of lies. It's a couple of Garden Cities.

Incidentally Balls and Milliband seemed to have had little or nothing to say about pensions and savings in their speeches. Apparently not a single person in the pension/savings groups happened across Milliband in the park or on the street on the way to a public meeting so that he could give an anecdotal about those things.

They mustn't be in the "Together" bit. They'll be "On your own".

Strange that seeing as he was going on about restoring people’s faith in the future and building a future.

Even so it's all pretty matterless as in a few years today's conference promises will just be so much scrap paper blowing along London's Embankment - alongside all the other promises reneged on. You could go back decades and find similar pre-election speeches and similar pre-election promises - every time there's been a general election.

Edited by billybong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a swathe of housing > c £500k up to £2000k which won't be impacted, probably 'cause it would have the 'middle classes' squealing, but that's what needs addressing.

How so ? you might as well say so it hits all those soft southerners what a load of loaded tosh. As I keep repeating only a very small proportion of which are bankers or politicians. The majority are just normal working people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A much better policy would be to encourage that £2 million property to be worth less (tighten lending on housing, remove props, ban speculation, improve tenancy laws) so that the poor old biddy wouldn't be taxed. But of course, even though they're paper gains, it would still be unpalatable to these people.

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
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   215 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

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.