Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 97
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

1 hour ago, dugsbody said:

Thanks. I'm not averse to paying my fair share of tax. Spud knows I pay a lot now already. I don't even mind a wealth tax so much, if it helps to balance the growing inequality. 

But I learned my lesson about house prices the hard way. What I don't want to do is become a repeat victim of government idiocy and lose out on the ability to by a decent family house.

Deleted.

Edited by petetong
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, RomfordDon said:

So what would happen if I took out a 150k loan to do up my house.

Got the cash in my account will they tax it?

(just thinking out loud I don’t have 150k or a house)

Its typically done on net assets. In that circumstance your net assets are nil 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎04‎/‎07‎/‎2020 at 18:21, Gigantic Purple Slug said:

TBH I'm not sure I can handle another 10 years on this website of people moaning that the government has "stolen" their money.

The middle class are going to pay for covid, because they are the only people that can. The poor can't, and the rich will evade.

So anyone with excess wealth is going to be lined up to pay for it. I don't see any alternative.

It really annoys me that people saving for a house, and that may have been saving and waiting diligently for a crash for years may be about to get slapped in the face again. But history tells me that is the way it is going to go.

Did you see that BBC4 programme on the compensation scheme for slave owners?  Apparently the biggest bailout in history, with 46,000 recipients, many getting millions in today's money.

However, there is a UCL website where you can trace your ancestors who received slave owners' compensation.  It looks like huge resources have been devoted to this particular track 'n trace software.  Far more than a History research project would normally be granted.

So I am wondering why.  Could it be that the descendants will be paying it back ?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, kzb said:

Did you see that BBC4 programme on the compensation scheme for slave owners?  Apparently the biggest bailout in history, with 46,000 recipients, many getting millions in today's money.

However, there is a UCL website where you can trace your ancestors who received slave owners' compensation.  It looks like huge resources have been devoted to this particular track 'n trace software.  Far more than a History research project would normally be granted.

So I am wondering why.  Could it be that the descendants will be paying it back ?

 

Firstly it was far from the biggest bailout in history. It todays money was £17billion. Which while vast is about the same as given out in bounce back loans in 6 weeks or about 15% of the yearly social security bill at the moment. 

In terms of trace, all members who were paid were done so based on a 1834 census which is a public document. 17,000 names isnt that hard to go through with a team of pHD students. 

Sadly those that benefited from it and their decedants will get away with it. BLM would do well to put pressure on mind you rather than tweet about palanstian comrades. One is more achievable than the other 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, captainb said:

Firstly it was far from the biggest bailout in history. It todays money was £17billion. Which while vast is about the same as given out in bounce back loans in 6 weeks or about 15% of the yearly social security bill at the moment. 

In terms of trace, all members who were paid were done so based on a 1834 census which is a public document. 17,000 names isnt that hard to go through with a team of pHD students. 

Sadly those that benefited from it and their decedants will get away with it. BLM would do well to put pressure on mind you rather than tweet about palanstian comrades. One is more achievable than the other 

Yeah I couldn't square £17bn with the biggest bailout in history either.  But that is what was claimed, several times.

It was 40% of government expenditure, that would be about £350bn today.  Maybe that is what they meant.

I recall that it was 46,000 not 17,000.

It's not the names of the recipients that is the hard part.  On the contrary, their details are meticulously recorded along with the money received, to the fraction of a penny.  Not taken from a census BTW.

What disturbed me was you put your own name in and it finds your bailed-out ancestors.  From that it is only a short step to calculate how much money you owe.  46,000 in 1830 will have a lot of descendants in 2020.  I've not tried it myself and we are not a moneyed family, but a great number could fall foul of this.

https://www.ucl.ac.uk/lbs/

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, kzb said:

Yeah I couldn't square £17bn with the biggest bailout in history either.  But that is what was claimed, several times.

It was 40% of government expenditure, that would be about £350bn today.  Maybe that is what they meant.

I recall that it was 46,000 not 17,000.

It's not the names of the recipients that is the hard part.  On the contrary, their details are meticulously recorded along with the money received, to the fraction of a penny.  Not taken from a census BTW.

What disturbed me was you put your own name in and it finds your bailed-out ancestors.  From that it is only a short step to calculate how much money you owe.  46,000 in 1830 will have a lot of descendants in 2020.  I've not tried it myself and we are not a moneyed family, but a great number could fall foul of this.

https://www.ucl.ac.uk/lbs/

 

 

But just taking 40% of goverment expenditure today as your comparison is incredibly misleading. 

Back then there was no:

State healthcare

State pension

State education 

State welfare

Police force was only mid 19th century 

 

Basically its 40% of not a lot. The state pre 20th century really was small. Furthermore the taxation system was such that the expected bailout as it was put could have reasonably be expected to be gathered from the same landed gentry going foward. 

 

That search is surname based. So is meaningless. It has no knowledge of whether you are THE Smith or just one of thousands of people with the surname Smith. 

Slight joy of having irish heritage. Nobody looks back at the starving peasants and says you never had it so good back then.... Oh wait some seem to be

Edited by captainb
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 04/07/2020 at 17:51, Gigantic Purple Slug said:

tax on cash in the bank doesn't do that [liquidating assets]

Gold, bitcoin, foreign investments

On 04/07/2020 at 17:51, Gigantic Purple Slug said:

the cash in a savings account is surplus, it is sitting there and is not benefiting the economy.

False. Saved wealth is the primary driver of economies.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Taxing assets is hard not just because of their non liquid nature but also confirming ownership. On going taxation when cash is actually earnt is so much easier to apply also taxation of use. I can see in short order:

40% tax relief band on pension contributions going possibly the NI relief

Down the road a form of stamp duty for the seller of house (mini capital gains tax but not called that but will escalate ) 

Tax allowances frozen from here onwards

Revalue all the council tax bands - the councils collect more money less money needed from the Treasury

Increase 2nd home stamp duty and abolish any relief council tax relief if second home 

Road pricing or rapid roll out of congestion charging 

IHT could be tweaked down I personally  think over generous at the moment and pensions included 

Spot Tax when taking money out of ISA investments - there is £584 million in there 5% could be played as minimal and would raise £25 billion on a rolling basis

Income tax rises penny here penny there 

Freezing the triple lock

Higher VAT on Full on luxury Items Top end cars/watches etc 

Start charging VAT on private school fees perhaps at a lower rate 10%

I am sure there are plenty of other areas you could go at without scaring the horses

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GregBowman said:

Taxing assets is hard not just because of their non liquid nature but also confirming ownership. On going taxation when cash is actually earnt is so much easier to apply also taxation of use. I can see in short order:

40% tax relief band on pension contributions going possibly the NI relief

Down the road a form of stamp duty for the seller of house (mini capital gains tax but not called that but will escalate ) 

Tax allowances frozen from here onwards

Revalue all the council tax bands - the councils collect more money less money needed from the Treasury

Increase 2nd home stamp duty and abolish any relief council tax relief if second home 

Road pricing or rapid roll out of congestion charging 

IHT could be tweaked down I personally  think over generous at the moment and pensions included 

Spot Tax when taking money out of ISA investments - there is £584 million in there 5% could be played as minimal and would raise £25 billion on a rolling basis

Income tax rises penny here penny there 

Freezing the triple lock

Higher VAT on Full on luxury Items Top end cars/watches etc 

Start charging VAT on private school fees perhaps at a lower rate 10%

I am sure there are plenty of other areas you could go at without scaring the horses

 

 

 

LVT would be much better than tax on selling.   The wealth is living in an expensive home - not moving from a to b.

From a Labour point of view LVT would be bad because "poor"people living in council housing in expensive parts of London would find their rents go up.  (Are you really poor if you live in an expensive home for a cheap cost?).

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, iamnumerate said:

LVT would be much better than tax on selling.   The wealth is living in an expensive home - not moving from a to b.

From a Labour point of view LVT would be bad because "poor"people living in council housing in expensive parts of London would find their rents go up.  (Are you really poor if you live in an expensive home for a cheap cost?).

We don't have a culture of LVT - I think electorally you have stated the left's view. The rights view is someone might of scrimped and saved and that really is  their only wealth. It also hits harder proportionally harder in the South East.

It is also open to being used for care something someone in social housing gets for free which is inequitable anyway.

Council tax is essentially land value tax anyway just needs adjusting, Poll tax was for the services x residents more of a consumption tax

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, iamnumerate said:

LVT would be much better than tax on selling.   The wealth is living in an expensive home - not moving from a to b.

From a Labour point of view LVT would be bad because "poor"people living in council housing in expensive parts of London would find their rents go up.  (Are you really poor if you live in an expensive home for a cheap cost?).

LVT is such a radical departure from what currently exists it's never going to happen.

You might see some sort of slow move towards it over a process of years. But that would require a succession of governments to support it.

To me the two big areas are pensions and inheritance tax. To me there are pretty much two types of people with pensions. Those with nothing and those stuffing away far more than they will ever need to live on. They certainly need to remove the 40% rebate and tbh I think they should do a retrospective clawback.

For inheritance tax they should close down the loopholes and reduce the allowance.

Higher VAT on luxury items seems fair enough. Noone needs a 10k watch or 50K car.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/3/2020 at 10:54 PM, Simhadri said:

Confirms my suspicion that Starmer is Corbyn 2.0.

Kiss Labour a goodbye. They never change.

Yes but after the next election they will say - the public loved our policies - they just do not understand what we are saying - they are too stupid to get the message - they are all racist 

Same old Same old

As the saying is to keep on doing the same thing and expect a different result is a sure sign of insanity

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Gigantic Purple Slug said:

LVT is such a radical departure from what currently exists it's never going to happen.

You might see some sort of slow move towards it over a process of years. But that would require a succession of governments to support it.

To me the two big areas are pensions and inheritance tax. To me there are pretty much two types of people with pensions. Those with nothing and those stuffing away far more than they will ever need to live on. They certainly need to remove the 40% rebate and tbh I think they should do a retrospective clawback.

For inheritance tax they should close down the loopholes and reduce the allowance.

Higher VAT on luxury items seems fair enough. Noone needs a 10k watch or 50K car.

A lot in the middle me included - Don't want to be a burden on anyone children or state.  Claw back just seems spiteful imho

I agree with abolishing the 40% tax break 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, GregBowman said:

A lot in the middle me included - Don't want to be a burden on anyone children or state.  Claw back just seems spiteful imho

I agree with abolishing the 40% tax break 

You are a burden on the state ! The state is borrowing money and giving people 40% tax breaks on pensions.

What it should be doing is not borrowing the money and not giving the tax break.

The retrospective clawback isn't spiteful. If you assume the 40% break is too generous now, why wasn't it too generous previously ?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, GregBowman said:

More corp tax less money to create jobs simple equation and fine balance 

I think there should be some sort of equalisation between single person businesses and people on PAYE as regards to thinks like nics.

BUT if you pay the same you should get the same service.

IMO lots of single person businesses should have no guilt about using the dividend method to avoid NICs, because when covid support came around they got absolutely jack in terms of government support.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, GregBowman said:

More corp tax less money to create jobs simple equation and fine balance 

give them ubi instead and life essential tokens to spend as otherwise it will just be lumped on top like HTB, and a range of useful to society jobs to choose from to top it up.  

other than inflation and taking it directly from my account they have very little way of taxing me.  same as my mother state pension cash savings house paid for 30 years ago no private pension. worst for me would be IHT rising.  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Gigantic Purple Slug said:

I think there should be some sort of equalisation between single person businesses and people on PAYE as regards to thinks like nics.

BUT if you pay the same you should get the same service.

IMO lots of single person businesses should have no guilt about using the dividend method to avoid NICs, because when covid support came around they got absolutely jack in terms of government support.

i`m currently arguing with them over NIC class 1 credits which i may get the benefit from in a full state pension should i be lucky enough to get to 68 oneday, and they are not even playing ball over that, register as a business though last year and you can get 50k. 

what a joke. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, GregBowman said:

We don't have a culture of LVT - I think electorally you have stated the left's view. The rights view is someone might of scrimped and saved and that really is  their only wealth. It also hits harder proportionally harder in the South East.

It is also open to being used for care something someone in social housing gets for free which is inequitable anyway.

Council tax is essentially land value tax anyway just needs adjusting, Poll tax was for the services x residents more of a consumption tax

We should do it, it is a good tax.  Sadly landowners (Tories) council tenants in inner London (Corbyn and Kier Stammer's supporters) would both lose under it.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, richmondtw said:

As the saying is to keep on doing the same thing and expect a different result is a sure sign of insanity

Buddha has said that 2500 years ago. Labour is yet to learn its lesson once again.

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.

  • 415 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.