Former senior May adviser- replace stamp duty with CGT on main home

[aerobubbles]

Abolish stamp duty and replace it with a CGT on expensive properties.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/aug/05/i-saw-theresa-may-at-work-new-message-vital-to-avoid-defeat

This used to be met with howls of outrage by the right, now several of them have been proposing it. Can't be long until some form comes into effect.

[longgone]

may as well rent forever if they do that .  

 

[jiltedjen]

This would be nice so stamp duty for FTB to pay on an already stupidly expensive purchase. and the gov can flaw back some of the boomers stolen gains. 

[honkydonkey]

I can't see how CGT on expensive properties will help though, unless by its imposition it reduces any inflation to tax at all, perhaps not making it retrospective; Otherwise it will just seize the market up. I did like the points raised about reducing tax on production and increasing it on renterism though, that makes perfect sense to anyone.

Of course the simple solution is a LVT, which will cause an instant repricing of homes values. Set it at 5% and see the price of houses instantly halve overnight. 

[billy budd]

1 hour ago, aerobubbles said:

Abolish stamp duty and replace it with a CGT on expensive properties.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/aug/05/i-saw-theresa-may-at-work-new-message-vital-to-avoid-defeat

This used to be met with howls of outrage by the right, now several of them have been proposing it. Can't be long until some form comes into effect.

 

Let's hope so. In Germany there is no CGT exemption and even in the USA CGT is payable on gains above $500k

[Habitationi Bulla]

So charging even more tax when selling will help get the market moving ... genius.

They need higher rates of council tax for upper band houses, so its all those who are sitting on unearned gains that pay not just those who decide to move.

[nightowl]

In theory applying CGT above the RPI rate is sound except if someone increased the value by an extension or new kitchen say, would they be able claim relief as a result. In theory again yes but this has the potential to be a admin nightmare.   Better enforcement on flippers and BTL speculators would be better.

Funny thing is when I click the Guardian link I get sponsored adverts for overpriced property. Better yet they are being advertised by Trump Estates!

[Mrs Bear]

That'll go down well with the champagne socialists who bought their Hampstead/Notting Hill/Islington houses for relative peanuts in the 70s and 80s.  

[Orsino]

6 hours ago, Habitationi Bulla said:

So charging even more tax when selling will help get the market moving ... genius.

They need higher rates of council tax for upper band houses, so its all those who are sitting on unearned gains that pay not just those who decide to move.

How would that work for renters? I rent in London partly because I cannot afford the ludicrous house prices in my area. It's a modest one-bedroom flat with affordable (for me) rent, but would cost over £600k to buy. Why should my council tax be increased further because my landlord has benefited from a dramatic rise in his property wealth? His capital gains should be taxed like many other forms of assets already are. If that discourages the questionable high-paced dynamism of London's property casino, so much the better.

[Habitationi Bulla]

1 minute ago, Orsino said:

How would that work for renters? I rent in London partly because I cannot afford the ludicrous house prices in my area. It's a modest one-bedroom flat with affordable (for me) rent, but would cost over £600k to buy. Why should my council tax be increased further because my landlord has benefited from a dramatic rise in his property wealth? His capital gains should be taxed like many other forms of assets already are. If that discourages the questionable high-paced dynamism of London's property casino, so much the better.

Good point,obviously i was suggesting this for wealthy owner occupiers as obviously CGT only hits those who move.

But LL's already pay capital gains tax if they sell, and as many buy to use property for a pension that tells me they don't intend selling.

Though if council tax was high on such a property theyd have to drop the rent to attract people.

Maybe some form of LVT so it hits the land owner and not the renter.

Best policy i think is to raise interest rates, end IO BTL mortgages, max 3.5 times salary mortgages,  bring in S24 for all taxpayers in April 2018 and spend the next few months watching them all run to the exit..

[adarmo]

11 minutes ago, Habitationi Bulla said:

Good point,obviously i was suggesting this for wealthy owner occupiers as obviously CGT only hits those who move.

But LL's already pay capital gains tax if they sell, and as many buy to use property for a pension that tells me they don't intend selling.

Though if council tax was high on such a property theyd have to drop the rent to attract people.

Maybe some form of LVT so it hits the land owner and not the renter.

Best policy i think is to raise interest rates, end IO BTL mortgages, max 3.5 times salary mortgages,  bring in S24 for all taxpayers in April 2018 and spend the next few months watching them all run to the exit..

If any party of any colour proposed to reduce income tax to zero for everyone under £80k, and replace the lost tax revenue with an LVT they'd get my vote. 

[Habitationi Bulla]

3 minutes ago, adarmo said:

If any party of any colour proposed to reduce income tax to zero for everyone under £80k, and replace the lost tax revenue with an LVT they'd get my vote. 

Funny how its Corbyns gang of so called crazy marxists who are the only people to have suggested such a capitalist policy.

Neolib/Tory press went into over drive when they saw their way of exploiting the plebs was being mentioned.

I never understand how its so acceptable to take half of someones wages in one of the varying forms of income tax, yet mention the above and its worse than swearing. 

[bobbo]

Hmmm, in my opinion LLs should pay council tax. Include it in the rent ass that is not always a clear expense

[maverick73]

BTL market is already using CGT tax. If it were to be adopted into residential transactions, that would result in a net loss for the government if the market prices under go a correction. Sounds like an attention seeking moment ?

[Errol]

8 hours ago, longgone said:

may as well rent forever if they do that .  

 

Which is precisely what lots of the very rich would do.

[adarmo]

3 hours ago, Habitationi Bulla said:

Funny how its Corbyns gang of so called crazy marxists who are the only people to have suggested such a capitalist policy.

Neolib/Tory press went into over drive when they saw their way of exploiting the plebs was being mentioned.

I never understand how its so acceptable to take half of someones wages in one of the varying forms of income tax, yet mention the above and its worse than swearing. 

Crazy indeed. A good friend of mine is a commodity broker in London. Earns very good money so pays a tonne of income tax and E'ee NI. I was talking to him once about LVT and he literally couldn't believe what I was suggesting. You could see the standard arguments coming out, like what about dear old ladies in their £5 million house (ignoring the fact that a single old dear doesn't need a house of that size, and if she can afford it she can stay. TBH I've struggled to persuade anyone of the merits of such a system. I think I might re-write animal farm. High income tax good, high house prices better or something along those lines. 

[Sancho Panza]

2 hours ago, maverick73 said:

BTL market is already using CGT tax. If it were to be adopted into residential transactions, that would result in a net loss for the government if the market prices under go a correction. Sounds like an attention seeking moment ?

There's a huge chunk of the market with huge chunks of equity.Plenty to go at.

[Habitationi Bulla]

I dont think a LVT will solve everything but it'd enable rent/ land cheaper as people wouldnt want to hold on to it unless it was used for productive use ...   it'd certainly open door to a more productive society with the wealthy/banks having to earn money in other ways ..  like forming actual companies that make stuff!

I'm going round supermarkets and the price of food seems closer to 10-15% higher in a matter of  few months, could be wrong just my perception. With leccy and insurance bills going sky high for varying reasons, if the Tory party are going to be hunting for money it would seem land/houses is where all the money is at the moment so presumably theyll be raiding this money tree come the next budget ... as opposed to NI on the self employed.

[Odin]

11 hours ago, honkydonkey said:

I can't see how CGT on expensive properties will help though, unless by its imposition it reduces any inflation to tax at all, perhaps not making it retrospective; Otherwise it will just seize the market up. I did like the points raised about reducing tax on production and increasing it on renterism though, that makes perfect sense to anyone.

Of course the simple solution is a LVT, which will cause an instant repricing of homes values. Set it at 5% and see the price of houses instantly halve overnight. 

Make is retrospective, but... ratchet it up over time.  Start my making it 75% cheaper than equivalent current Stamp Duty at launch.  To get the market moving due to this matter.

Then increase the % every 6 months, until it becomes 4 times more expensive a some point years in the future to those with in the top 10% of % gains, if you chose to hold through.

Concessions for your primary residence, concessions over how this plays with inheritance tax (again on the primary residence).  2nd residence would be considered a luxury.

 

LVT at 5% seems way to high for a yearly tax.  Mortgage is 25 years, but in 20 they need to pay the state the same ?  or is the is just the price of the land part that is taxed?  Which would be about what on average less than 2% of the price of the house ?   Should council tax also be weighted by it in some way, or simply number of bedrooms ?

[StAlex]

So ok, if there was a taxation volte face, and we went with LVT over income tax- what would be the consequences then, apart from

the panacea of lower prices that we all seem to be after. 

Much higher rental demand and prices following? 

Immigration? 

What level would you set it at? 

What would happen to inflation? 

 

[Pop321]

13 hours ago, adarmo said:

If any party of any colour proposed to reduce income tax to zero for everyone under £80k, and replace the lost tax revenue with an LVT they'd get my vote. 

Honestly....Probably mine too - although I may be a loser. 

Problem (or maybe the advantage) is tax drives behaviour. So over last few years I paid c35% of earned income into a pension and I leave work next year rather than work the next 15 years as I am suppose to. I won't work 5 days a week (well 6.5 allowing for actual hours) but only see net pay for 3 days.

I guess the issue is that little old lady, still holding the WW11 medals from her recently passed husbands uniform...sat in the house she brought up the family, nursed other during the blitz, survived the 1970's, 1980's carnage.....on £8k a year pension being asked to stump up a LVT or face eviction. Then in move the 'angry birds' generation couple with 2 kids (both on iPads) and total household income £95k, new car and designer gear. Just my 'media' spin....but this is the lady on the front page rather than the boomer on a £40k public pension and 6 holidays a year who is wondering what all the fuss is about. Doesn't matter if she is not typical..she is a better story. 

Will be interesting to see how it develops. Perhaps reality of a LVT is too much....it would cause change and whilst those vulnerable old ladies infact nay end up a lot better off once the move to a more suitable gaff....it could be politically 'tricky'. 

[Futuroid]

Would disproportionately affect the Tory core vote (pensioners). It'll never happen.

[Cosmic Apple]

56 minutes ago, Phil321 said:

Honestly....Probably mine too - although I may be a loser. 

Problem (or maybe the advantage) is tax drives behaviour. So over last few years I paid c35% of earned income into a pension and I leave work next year rather than work the next 15 years as I am suppose to. I won't work 5 days a week (well 6.5 allowing for actual hours) but only see net pay for 3 days.

I guess the issue is that little old lady, still holding the WW11 medals from her recently passed husbands uniform...sat in the house she brought up the family, nursed other during the blitz, survived the 1970's, 1980's carnage.....on £8k a year pension being asked to stump up a LVT or face eviction. Then in move the 'angry birds' generation couple with 2 kids (both on iPads) and total household income £95k, new car and designer gear. Just my 'media' spin....but this is the lady on the front page rather than the boomer on a £40k public pension and 6 holidays a year who is wondering what all the fuss is about. Doesn't matter if she is not typical..she is a better story. 

Will be interesting to see how it develops. Perhaps reality of a LVT is too much....it would cause change and whilst those vulnerable old ladies infact nay end up a lot better off once the move to a more suitable gaff....it could be politically 'tricky'. 

Have a mechanism for the old ladies to pay it from the estate?

[Pop321]

28 minutes ago, Northern Welsh Midlander said:

Have a mechanism for the old ladies to pay it from the estate?

I guess I am saying even with such a solution....the argument will focus on taking from those to which we all know we owe everything (war veterans, 90 years old ambulance driver etc etc ) and who did have it hard. 

However, the other 98% to whom we owe nothing and had it easy just hide behind the 2%. 

So the concept is not wrong but if we are going to do this (not academic arguments but make this happen within 5 years) then just need to consider round the edges. But sure it is possible. 

It is interesting to try and understand the resistance mentioned in the example in this thread where speaking to a worker paying 50% away....revolts at the ideas of asset tax. I guess there is a small element that I can quickly change my earnings ie give up the job, go part time etc....but once assets are bought they are 'owned' and tax was paid as They Earned the wealth (HPI lie I know)

Also it's more difficult to change, react to remove the liabilty - so a feeling of being trapped? A good thing maybe but might explain the resistance from the voting tax payers viewpoint.

Not my resistance to idea...rather thoughts why there is resistance. 

[iamnumerate]

23 hours ago, Habitationi Bulla said:

So charging even more tax when selling will help get the market moving ... genius.

They need higher rates of council tax for upper band houses, so its all those who are sitting on unearned gains that pay not just those who decide to move.

+1

And no benefits if your house is worth more than £500k (I think people can guess how much my home is worth).