Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

No More SDLT Holiday Extensions


Recommended Posts

Apologies if posted elsewhere, but just picked this up - https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/mortgageshome/article-9644175/Government-closes-door-permanent-stamp-duty-cut-saying-8bn-tax-help-recoup-Covid-cash.html

So no more ridiculous extensions, but also confirmation that no chance of SDLT reform in the short term.

Biggest thing that stands out for me is the potential "cost" to the taxpayer of £8bn WTF were they thinking.....I can think of many, many ways that money could have been used to help this country during the pandemic. But these clowns decided to spuff it on supporting the well-off move house more cheaply, whilst fuelling a boom which will have priced out millions more young people. Just today you have govt infighting and outrage because they're only willing to spend fraction of that on helping our kids catch up on missed education due to the pandemic.

Absolute scandal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Smiley George said:

Apologies if posted elsewhere, but just picked this up - https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/mortgageshome/article-9644175/Government-closes-door-permanent-stamp-duty-cut-saying-8bn-tax-help-recoup-Covid-cash.html

So no more ridiculous extensions, but also confirmation that no chance of SDLT reform in the short term.

Biggest thing that stands out for me is the potential "cost" to the taxpayer of £8bn WTF were they thinking.....I can think of many, many ways that money could have been used to help this country during the pandemic. But these clowns decided to spuff it on supporting the well-off move house more cheaply, whilst fuelling a boom which will have priced out millions more young people. Just today you have govt infighting and outrage because they're only willing to spend fraction of that on helping our kids catch up on missed education due to the pandemic.

Absolute scandal.

I'm not particularly well off. It helped me move, which meant someone else bought my smaller house.

The scandal is stamp duty in the first place. We should get rid of it entirely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, dugsbody said:

I'm not particularly well off

Anybody spending £500k on a house is not on the breadline.

I take your general point re SDLT, it is a hideous tax and the fact there appears little appetite for further reform off the back of the recommendations is very disappointing, but not surprising.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Smiley George said:

Anybody spending £500k on a house is not on the breadline.

I take your general point re SDLT, it is a hideous tax and the fact there appears little appetite for further reform off the back of the recommendations is very disappointing, but not surprising.

I don't think £500K is much to spend on a house. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, MonsieurCopperCrutch said:

I don't think £500K is much to spend on a house. 

All depends on where you buy it, what is costs has little relevance to the quality of life an expensive compared to a cheaper house will give you.;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Si1 said:

You can always pass it off as "well, they have to have something to write about",  but jeez will these people just, I don't know, try to have fun or something? Join a band, or dance in their kitchen at least? 

It's nearly as bad as contributing 100s of posts to internet forums on the subject!

PS from the article:

"There is no quick fix for this and I am in favour of a longer tapering over the next year or so to calm the market down, give us all time to think and contribute to the discussion on a longer-term alternative."

Time to think? Oh my god.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Trump Invective said:

You can always pass it off as "well, they have to have something to write about",  but jeez will these people just, I don't know, try to have fun or something? Join a band, or dance in their kitchen at least? 

It's nearly as bad as contributing 100s of posts to internet forums on the subject!

PS from the article:

"There is no quick fix for this and I am in favour of a longer tapering over the next year or so to calm the market down, give us all time to think and contribute to the discussion on a longer-term alternative."

Time to think? Oh my god.

It's almost as if their sales fell off a cliff etc.

Edited by Si1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Trump Invective said:

PS from the article:

"There is no quick fix for this and I am in favour of a longer tapering over the next year or so to calm the market down, give us all time to think and contribute to the discussion on a longer-term alternative."

Time to think? Oh my god.

Did you miss this bit?

"Personally, I would like to see SDLT abolished altogether, and I am increasingly swayed that some form of land tax could take its place"

Hard to argue with that. Though I think SDLT should remain for 2nd homes (it should probably be much higher than 3% though).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Young Turk said:

Did you miss this bit?

"Personally, I would like to see SDLT abolished altogether, and I am increasingly swayed that some form of land tax could take its place"

Hard to argue with that. Though I think SDLT should remain for 2nd homes (it should probably be much higher than 3% though).

Yes true - they'll never agree with any tax though, because of the threat to prices. "some kind" indeed - they havent even got an idea what they want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Trump Invective said:

Yes true - they'll never agree with any tax though, because of the threat to prices. "some kind" indeed - they havent even got an idea what they want.

Why do you think he cares about prices? He's a conveyancer FFS!

If stamp duty was removed, the cost of moving would be reduced, so people would move more often.

If a land tax was introduced, the speculative motive for owning a house would be reduced (buy the big house you'll want in five years now, because it will probably be a lot more expensive in five years; stay in the big house until you die, so that your children get a bigger inheritance; BTL). People would be less likely to buy a big house years before they had children and stay in it for decades after their children left, as there would be a big tax bill for doing so. A knock on effect of this big tax bill would be lower property demand and so lower price appreciation.

So he'd benefit from a land tax (the same as most people), so I don't see why he wouldn't want one. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Young Turk said:

Why do you think he cares about prices? He's a conveyancer FFS!

If stamp duty was removed, the cost of moving would be reduced, so people would move more often.

If a land tax was introduced, the speculative motive for owning a house would be reduced (buy the big house you'll want in five years now, because it will probably be a lot more expensive in five years; stay in the big house until you die, so that your children get a bigger inheritance; BTL). People would be less likely to buy a big house years before they had children and stay in it for decades after their children left, as there would be a big tax bill for doing so. A knock on effect of this big tax bill would be lower property demand and so lower price appreciation.

So he'd benefit from a land tax (the same as most people), so I don't see why he wouldn't want one. 

Im sure you are correct! But why so sheepish about LVT? He is only recently into it, and not very convincingly. He should be shouting LVT from the rooftops! But he isnt. Why is that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The main reason why TPTB will probably not want to introduce an ad valorem land tax is because of its impact on house prices. Suppose the annual tax is 1% of market value. But market value will be very much lower because of this tax. For example, with no tax, a house sells for 500k. With a 1% annual tax, that is 5k per year. The capitalized value of this outgoing depends on what you think is an appropriate discount rate. Given that capitalized values of inflation linked pensions are, at present, approximately 40 * the annual pension, it seems to me that 40 might  be an appropriate multiplier. Hence, the present value of the ongoing tax liability is of the order of 40 * 5k = 200k. And the 500k house would fall by 200k to 300k. (And so of course we have to recompute the present value of the tax stream. At 300k, it would be 120k decline in value. So the actual decline in value would be between 120k and 200k. 

If you are skeptical about this, consider house values in different markets in the US (try redfin.com). Chicago, Illinois has land taxes of approximately 2% of market value; Atlanta Georgia has taxes at about 1% of market value. Household incomes are similar. Interest rates are identical. For comparable houses/flats prices in Chicago are far lower. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, bearishonhouses said:

The main reason why TPTB will probably not want to introduce an ad valorem land tax is because of its impact on house prices. Suppose the annual tax is 1% of market value. But market value will be very much lower because of this tax. For example, with no tax, a house sells for 500k. With a 1% annual tax, that is 5k per year. The capitalized value of this outgoing depends on what you think is an appropriate discount rate. Given that capitalized values of inflation linked pensions are, at present, approximately 40 * the annual pension, it seems to me that 40 might  be an appropriate multiplier. Hence, the present value of the ongoing tax liability is of the order of 40 * 5k = 200k. And the 500k house would fall by 200k to 300k. (And so of course we have to recompute the present value of the tax stream. At 300k, it would be 120k decline in value. So the actual decline in value would be between 120k and 200k. 

If you are skeptical about this, consider house values in different markets in the US (try redfin.com). Chicago, Illinois has land taxes of approximately 2% of market value; Atlanta Georgia has taxes at about 1% of market value. Household incomes are similar. Interest rates are identical. For comparable houses/flats prices in Chicago are far lower. 

 

Great post

Link to comment
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...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.





×
×
  • 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.