Stamp duty holiday for 6 months for properties up to £500K

[24gray24]

1 hour ago, winkie said:

Has anyone looked at old deeds....a home that once cost £100 when built has been bought many times over using in recent times copious amounts of debt....turnover of homes is big business, new decoration, new kitchens, new jobs, new jobs to continue paying liability.....100% owned property removed from the system.....new debt and rent is the new system....keeps things turning over.

 

1 hour ago, mattyboy1973 said:

Because it has nothing to do with benefiting buyers, and everything to do with benefiting sellers (and keeping prices high).

But it's mostly: sucking out the profits of an entire life's labour through mortgages, at the same time as government sucks out the rest in money printing. 

Houses have to be over priced to factor in how much less pound will buy in 10 years. 

Also, gold gen . 

[MARTINX9]

7 hours ago, Switch625 said:

Prior to the expenses scandal in 2009 something like 1 in 3 MP's was a landlord with a portfolio often built up using the overly generous expenses allowances for second homes. This figure has now dropped to roughly 1 in 5 being a landlord.

https://tribunemag.co.uk/2020/05/government-by-landlord

The reason for the drop is probably linked to the removal of the old expenses system, but they still kept a second home allowance of £17,000 per annum which has since risen to £22,000 of legitimate, tax free lolly. Lovely jubbly!

https://www.politicshome.com/news/article/mps-accused-of-claiming-expenses-for-dependent-adult-children

We live in a Democorruptcy.

There has been a large turnover of MPs particularly since 2015 with all the SNP MPs, more Labour ones in 2017 who then lost in 2019 and now all the blue wall Tory MPs.

An MPs salary - even with expenses - was enough to buy a house in London 20 years ago. Now that salary would barely get you a one bed flat in Dagenham!

They can claim for the rent in London - so do as they can live in a better area than Dagenham.

Of course the share for the Cabinet is probably 50% and more - and the two key ministers on Housing Jenrick and Sunak have several homes. And they are the ones making the decisions.

Nothing will change for a generation - until most MPs and the Cabinet are private renters. Too poor to buy - too rich to get social housing!

[winkie]

2 hours ago, 24gray24 said:

 

But it's mostly: sucking out the profits of an entire life's labour through mortgages, at the same time as government sucks out the rest in money printing. 

Houses have to be over priced to factor in how much less pound will buy in 10 years. 

Also, gold gen . 

One brilliant way of getting cash into the economy....use it as debt secured on land and buildings... one average house could have pumped millions into the economy.

[xxxx]

18 hours ago, Voice of Doom said:

Good. May I ask (roughly) where?

Prices are still falling in my target area of outer West London and also one area of south London I monitor. Some big drops (£40K in one go), some modest ones (£15K), but all in the right direction and nothing selling.

"Property log yellow" has become my new favourite colour.

I am about just outside of London.  Nothing is selling here, the market is dead.

[Sour Mash]

It might stimulate the market a bit - a colleague at work today (who was thinking of moving before all this) remarked in a chat that the new stamp duty cut was a good opportunity to 'save money' on buying a nicer (ie more expensive) house.

 

I didn't want to get into a long discussion with him so said nothing.  But house prices have been a one way street for over two decades now (aside from one brief period where you could theoretically have lost money if you had bought/sold within about a one year window around 2008/2009) so I'm not going to be against them continuing to go up, with the authorities throwing everything they have into making them do so.

 

[Dreadnought]

Can't see it mentioned anywhere else but land registry usually updates it's sold prices on the 3rd-5th of each month but still not updates. (Currently showing early March sales that was last updated start of June.)

Wonder if being suppressed.

[Habeas Domus]

Given that it takes 6 months to process the paperwork for a house sale, the 9 months of this scheme seems perfectly timed for a landlord looking to exit the market. July, August and Sept to find some mug to take it off your hands.

The music stops on April 1st 2021

[LondonCallingHPC]

On 09/07/2020 at 20:36, Speed1987 said:

The goverment are giving 3 million HK residents passports, which shows their priorities and direction.

Its pretty clear, that big business are using the immigrants for cheap labour. This won't change, actually expect it to get much worse, long term.

When we leave the EU, you will see we have more immigration, possibly from the common wealth, India and Africa. Once we start striking, new trade deals, immigration is heading ⬆️⬆️⬆️.

 

wrong!

You are making a lot of assumptions here aren't you? I think you are underestimating the CPC for a start. But even if the CPC were up for it, you are not aware of the power the anti-immigration overton window will command post 2021 census... doesn't matter whether its big business, the CPC, or the british government/new immigration policy... they are all going to fall in line eventually which will mean LESS immigration.

[NobodyInParticular]

19 hours ago, Switch625 said:

The reason for the drop is probably linked to the removal of the old expenses system, but they still kept a second home allowance of £17,000 per annum which has since risen to £22,000 of legitimate, tax free lolly. Lovely jubbly!

There needs to be a second home allowance as an MP is required to have a home in and ties to their constituency, but for practical purposes is going to also need a home relatively near Westminster. If not, then only the independently wealthy could afford to be MPs, which would be a bad thing. You could argue that it should be a rent allowance instead of a subsidy for buying (based on family size and other needs of the MP), or that a purchase subsidy remained and any capital gains for the house in London was paid back to the Exchequer, and I would probably agree with you that this was a reasonable alternative to the current system.

[Switch625]

4 hours ago, NobodyInParticular said:

You could argue that it should be a rent allowance instead of a subsidy for buying

For what it's worth that is certainly my take on it. It would have the knock on effect that those in charge would be in the same boat as renters and would have a disincentive to push the housing market as the only game in town.

[Tulip_mania]

9 hours ago, NobodyInParticular said:

There needs to be a second home allowance as an MP is required to have a home in and ties to their constituency, but for practical purposes is going to also need a home relatively near Westminster. If not, then only the independently wealthy could afford to be MPs, which would be a bad thing. You could argue that it should be a rent allowance instead of a subsidy for buying (based on family size and other needs of the MP), or that a purchase subsidy remained and any capital gains for the house in London was paid back to the Exchequer, and I would probably agree with you that this was a reasonable alternative to the current system.

I think for those elected 2010 onward it is a rent allowance, they can't buy and claim mortgage interest as before. Though the rent for a 1 bed flat close to Parliament can run to £1500-2000/month for a fairly average place.

[Peter Hun]

Rishi Sunak’s stamp duty cut is not about helping first-time buyers, but shoring up the whole UK economy

 

 

https://theconversation.com/rishi-sunaks-stamp-duty-cut-is-not-about-helping-first-time-buyers-but-shoring-up-the-whole-uk-economy-142443

[NobodyInParticular]

22 hours ago, Switch625 said:

For what it's worth that is certainly my take on it. It would have the knock on effect that those in charge would be in the same boat as renters and would have a disincentive to push the housing market as the only game in town.

Yes, it would be a very good thing in that regard,  I expect.

[GregBowman]

On 11/07/2020 at 00:00, Sour Mash said:

It might stimulate the market a bit - a colleague at work today (who was thinking of moving before all this) remarked in a chat that the new stamp duty cut was a good opportunity to 'save money' on buying a nicer (ie more expensive) house.

 

I didn't want to get into a long discussion with him so said nothing.  But house prices have been a one way street for over two decades now (aside from one brief period where you could theoretically have lost money if you had bought/sold within about a one year window around 2008/2009) so I'm not going to be against them continuing to go up, with the authorities throwing everything they have into making them do so.

 

Perhaps I am reading this wrong but isn’t the common thought on here that more volume helps price discovery ? That surely will only go in one direction ?

I know personally and I am looking to move any goon that tries to put the price up or indeed will take less than it was ‘worth’ a year or two ago I won’t be talking  to ?

This is more about velocity ie money moving around 

Would benefit downsizers particularly 

Don’t see house prices doing anything but decline 

Edited July 12, 2020 by GregBowman

[Switch625]

@Peter Hun Pretty much nails it, although he has forgotten to mention the power of vested interest.

Housing is the only game in town for UK plc. and this is why everyone who doesn't have a house is consistently thrown under the bus and those that have big mortgages are very vulnerable if and when this national sized ponzi collapses.

[stuckinlimbo]

7 minutes ago, Switch625 said:

 

@Peter Hun Pretty much nails it, although he has forgotten to mention the power of vested interest.

Housing is the only game in town for UK plc. and this is why everyone who doesn't have a house is consistently thrown under the bus and those that have big mortgages are very vulnerable if and when this national sized ponzi collapses.

 

He forgot to mention the effect on people that do not own a home. That is a huge oversight in that article.

[Switch625]

 

1 hour ago, stuckinlimbo said:

He forgot to mention the effect on people that do not own a home. That is a huge oversight in that article.

From the article 'And though Sunak presented the cut in stamp duty as beneficial to first-time buyers, the move will keep prices high. This will make it harder for them to get on the housing ladder.'

He does mention them, but beyond a recognition it makes things 'harder' for them, doesn't explore it any further. I am making an assumption here, but this probably reflects the writers own position, namely that they can see the damage being done to others, but dwell on the damage done to themselves i.e. paying more for their house. Fairly normal human behaviour.

For what it's worth I think the rest of the article is a good insight into the thinking of successive governments for the last two decades. They can't see beyond their phoney measures of the UK economy and have been willing to destroy sections of the electorate to protect those figures.

Edited July 12, 2020 by Switch625

[GreenDevil]

On 08/07/2020 at 14:47, longgone said:

Big shout out to sellers in the 500k to 650k bracket.  you all need to relist at 500k now. ? 

Not at all. The governbankment have made sure you still get the 15k off your 500k, even if you spend 525k. They wont make that mistake again, as it puts a cap on prices.

Personally, i think initially the prices will stay low for a few months as the old stock is cleared, then new instructions will reprice plus 3-5%.

TBH SDLT is a scam tax IMO and should be gotten rid of anyway. Its better to a) tax income, and b) tax BTL scum at a higher rate, ie 6%. I see they are intending to pass on the 15k discount to the BTL scum brigade, after all they have to look after their mates portfolios. No change there, but was a change expected, not from me. c) Tax foreign investors in UK property at 6% (wont happen either)

 

Edited July 12, 2020 by GreenDevil

[dugsbody]

4 hours ago, Peter Hun said:

Rishi Sunak’s stamp duty cut is not about helping first-time buyers, but shoring up the whole UK economy

 

 

https://theconversation.com/rishi-sunaks-stamp-duty-cut-is-not-about-helping-first-time-buyers-but-shoring-up-the-whole-uk-economy-142443

Quote

One of the big winners in UK chancellor Rishi Sunak’s summer statement is the housing market, where stamp duty has been scrapped for all house purchases under £500,000 until March 2021. This will cost the Treasury £3.8 billion, about 0.4% of the total tax take, and comes in response to four months of falls in house prices – their worst performance in almost a decade.

I'd love to know how they calculated that figure. I wonder if they're counting on a lot of people buying and selling houses at the higher end of the scale who otherwise would not have. If that happens, how much do the extra transaction increase the total stamp duty received?

[Peter Hun]

2 minutes ago, dugsbody said:

I'd love to know how they calculated that figure. I wonder if they're counting on a lot of people buying and selling houses at the higher end of the scale who otherwise would not have. If that happens, how much do the extra transaction increase the total stamp duty received?

The £3.8Bn cost will be based on the transactions under 500k that occurred in six months of last  year . If more or less occur in this and future years then the new actual cost will be recorded.

The 6 months holiday claim is ******** of course, the cut has to be permanent.

 

[dugsbody]

3 minutes ago, Peter Hun said:

The £3.8Bn cost will be based on the transactions under 500k that occurred in six months of last  year . If more or less occur in this and future years then the new actual cost will be recorded.

The 6 months holiday claim is ******** of course, the cut has to be permanent.

 

Yes, it will be permanent which is fine by me. They should go further and aim to remove it altogether. Taxes that prevent people from moving around are really stupid. There are so many good things that come out of allowing people to move more efficiently. 

[GregBowman]

55 minutes ago, GreenDevil said:

Not at all. The governbankment have made sure you still get the 15k off your 500k, even if you spend 525k. They wont make that mistake again, as it puts a cap on prices.

Personally, i think initially the prices will stay low for a few months as the old stock is cleared, then new instructions will reprice plus 3-5%.

TBH SDLT is a scam tax IMO and should be gotten rid of anyway. Its better to a) tax income, and b) tax BTL scum at a higher rate, ie 6%. I see they are intending to pass on the 15k discount to the BTL scum brigade, after all they have to look after their mates portfolios. No change there, but was a change expected, not from me. c) Tax foreign investors in UK property at 6% (wont happen either)

 

Agree but by the time the new stuff comes on mortgages still tight/job losses. I am in a position where I can afford to move and there is no way I will stop putting in offers minimum 10/15% below if not more. Having sold three houses for reasonable money people think nothing of sticking in offers well below asking but lower down the chain people seem a bit timid to do.

The Us have a good system no SDLT but capital gain tax after a certain profit I would say after 10% of the bought  house price would work 

Edited July 12, 2020 by GregBowman

[dugsbody]

12 minutes ago, GregBowman said:

The Us have a good system no SDLT but capital gain tax after a certain profit I would say after 10% of the bought  house price would work 

So, another tax on moving house? No thanks. 

I'd prefer the system the use in many states which is pretty much a LVT.

[Democorruptcy]

On 10/07/2020 at 08:06, Switch625 said:

Prior to the expenses scandal in 2009 something like 1 in 3 MP's was a landlord with a portfolio often built up using the overly generous expenses allowances for second homes. This figure has now dropped to roughly 1 in 5 being a landlord.

https://tribunemag.co.uk/2020/05/government-by-landlord

The reason for the drop is probably linked to the removal of the old expenses system, but they still kept a second home allowance of £17,000 per annum which has since risen to £22,000 of legitimate, tax free lolly. Lovely jubbly!

https://www.politicshome.com/news/article/mps-accused-of-claiming-expenses-for-dependent-adult-children

We live in a Democorruptcy.

We certainly do!

Anybody who thinks the governbankment will end this SDLT next March is deluded. The pretend end is purely to stoke more demand now.

[dugsbody]

7 minutes ago, Democorruptcy said:

Anybody who thinks the governbankment will end this SDLT next March is deluded. The pretend end is purely to stoke more demand now.

Absolutely.

But on this occasion, their sliminess has actually resulted in something good. I think we should remove stamp duty altogether. It discourages people from moving, which isn't a good thing.