Stamp duty changes

capt_slog

Anyone who has completed their house purchase recently will be spitting blood and feathers!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30291460

This includes my son who paid around £1280 stamp duty and would this would have been about £60 now.

CiB

Mansion tax by any other name isn't it?

Unlucky with his timing. If it was Wiggle he could have sent it back and bought it next week.

arran77

Had our house valued this morning, it's going on the market in the next few days, I'm quids in

RideOnTime

There's no sense in Stamp Duty at all.

Because you've bought a house you must pay a wedge of tax.

If you choose to move more often which would make a great deal of sense in terms of mobility in the housing market and the economy.. you will pay more Tax...

I think stamp duty should be exactly that a tax on stamps... Everyone who collects a stamp should pay 50p and anyone with an album should have a license - £200 year and if they move the album £500.

There's something which has hair and its moved... tax it.

Stevo_666

arran77 wrote:

Had our house valued this morning, it's going on the market in the next few days, I'm quids in

Depends on the value of the house you're buying, not the one you're selling

VTech

It's been done to stop foreign investment into the housing market which can be deemed good and bad.
We are moving to Essex from Stratford so this isn't really great news for some.

arran77

Stevo 666 wrote:

arran77 wrote:

Had our house valued this morning, it's going on the market in the next few days, I'm quids in

Depends on the value of the house you're buying, not the one you're selling

You know what I mean you pedant :P

Stevo_666

arran77 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

arran77 wrote:

Had our house valued this morning, it's going on the market in the next few days, I'm quids in

Depends on the value of the house you're buying, not the one you're selling

You know what I mean you pedant :P

I knew you didn't know what you were talking about until I put you straight

Ben6899

I think we've just saved £3K. About to complete...

bernithebiker

VTech wrote:

It's been done to stop foreign investment into the housing market which can be deemed good and bad.
We are moving to Essex from Stratford so this isn't really great news for some.

I doubt Osborne said to Cameron - 'I know let's stop foreign investment in London housing'.

It's simply a fairer way of taxing property. 1st time buyers should not have to pay stamp duty, whilst if you can afford a £1m + house then you can probably afford a few grand extra in stamp duty.

And lets not forget that many £1m+ houses are paying very little in council tax so have been getting away with murder for some time now.

The Saudi that's paying £20m+ for his Mayfair flat is not going to walk away because he has to stump up a few grand more in stamp duty.

mamba80

bernithebiker wrote:

It's simply a fairer way of taxing property. 1st time buyers should not have to pay stamp duty, whilst if you can afford a £1m + house then you can probably afford a few grand extra in stamp duty.

And lets not forget that many £1m+ houses are paying very little in council tax so have been getting away with murder for some time now.

The Saudi that's paying £20m+ for his Mayfair flat is not going to walk away because he has to stump up a few grand more in stamp duty.

yes and it will just continue, the change in SD doesn't address this, its a one off payment per purchase.
any one with half a brain will up their selling price to reflect the savings the buyer would be making, apparently house prices are set to rise by an extra 30% because of these changes - Great news if you are in the buy to let market as demand will just spiral as even more people wont be able to afford to buy their own house, rents go up, housing benefit bills rise.

VTech

Forgive me but I live in Stratford, one of the costliest areas in the country for council tax so although I have no problem paying it, its is higher per home in my PC than almost all areas in the UK.
Same for Business rates with zero deductions which have destroyed worcestershire town shops.

Reducing stamp is a negative, they can increase in the upper values but it was stupid to reduce the lower rates because who will pay for this ?

capt_slog

VTech wrote:

Forgive me but I live in Stratford, one of the costliest areas in the country for council tax so although I have no problem paying it, its is higher per home in my PC than almost all areas in the UK.
Same for Business rates with zero deductions which have destroyed worcestershire town shops.

Reducing stamp is a negative, they can increase in the upper values but it was stupid to reduce the lower rates because who will pay for this ?

When I heard it I wondered if there was a deficit and where it was going to come from.

The old system though, seemed unfair to bizarre, because you paid on the whole lot after going over the threshold level. As in £124000 house sale paid nothing but £126000 house sale paid £1260. I surprised they didn't reduce the threshold level when they brought this in.

Ben6899

Capt Slog wrote:

The old system though, seemed unfair to bizarre, because you paid on the whole lot after going over the threshold level. As in £124000 house sale paid nothing but £126000 house sale paid £1260. I surprised they didn't reduce the threshold level when they brought this in.

Yeh it works more like Income Tax now. A good thing.

florerider

mamba80 wrote:

bernithebiker wrote:

It's simply a fairer way of taxing property. 1st time buyers should not have to pay stamp duty, whilst if you can afford a £1m + house then you can probably afford a few grand extra in stamp duty.

And lets not forget that many £1m+ houses are paying very little in council tax so have been getting away with murder for some time now.

The Saudi that's paying £20m+ for his Mayfair flat is not going to walk away because he has to stump up a few grand more in stamp duty.

yes and it will just continue, the change in SD doesn't address this, its a one off payment per purchase.
any one with half a brain will up their selling price to reflect the savings the buyer would be making, apparently house prices are set to rise by an extra 30% because of these changes - Great news if you are in the buy to let market as demand will just spiral as even more people wont be able to afford to buy their own house, rents go up, housing benefit bills rise.

yup, we're addicted to rising house prices, this just feeds the addiction. If houses are sold on "what the market will bear" they will rise if other costs are reduced.

Pross

Capt Slog wrote:

VTech wrote:

Forgive me but I live in Stratford, one of the costliest areas in the country for council tax so although I have no problem paying it, its is higher per home in my PC than almost all areas in the UK.
Same for Business rates with zero deductions which have destroyed worcestershire town shops.

Reducing stamp is a negative, they can increase in the upper values but it was stupid to reduce the lower rates because who will pay for this ?

When I heard it I wondered if there was a deficit and where it was going to come from.

The old system though, seemed unfair to bizarre, because you paid on the whole lot after going over the threshold level. As in £124000 house sale paid nothing but £126000 house sale paid £1260. I surprised they didn't reduce the threshold level when they brought this in.

Apparently it will be funded from part of the additional tax banks will be paying on their profits. Apparently they will only be allowed to write off 50% of their profit against past losses and so will have to pay corporation tax on the remainder (assuming I understood the tax expert on Radio 2 last night which is a big assumption).

It seems to be a very rare tax policy that has been accepted as a good thing fairly universally (except amongst some Bike Radar forumites of course!).

VTech

Pross wrote:

Capt Slog wrote:

VTech wrote:

Forgive me but I live in Stratford, one of the costliest areas in the country for council tax so although I have no problem paying it, its is higher per home in my PC than almost all areas in the UK.
Same for Business rates with zero deductions which have destroyed worcestershire town shops.

Reducing stamp is a negative, they can increase in the upper values but it was stupid to reduce the lower rates because who will pay for this ?

When I heard it I wondered if there was a deficit and where it was going to come from.

The old system though, seemed unfair to bizarre, because you paid on the whole lot after going over the threshold level. As in £124000 house sale paid nothing but £126000 house sale paid £1260. I surprised they didn't reduce the threshold level when they brought this in.

Reducing one tax and increasing another isn't the way.
we should not be reducing tax for things we have all become accustomed to paying and with this revenue, if we added the extra tax for the banking system our children may have been able to live in a relatively debt free society.

Apparently it will be funded from part of the additional tax banks will be paying on their profits. Apparently they will only be allowed to write off 50% of their profit against past losses and so will have to pay corporation tax on the remainder (assuming I understood the tax expert on Radio 2 last night which is a big assumption).

It seems to be a very rare tax policy that has been accepted as a good thing fairly universally (except amongst some Bike Radar forumites of course!).

Stevo_666

Pross wrote:

Apparently it will be funded from part of the additional tax banks will be paying on their profits. Apparently they will only be allowed to write off 50% of their profit against past losses and so will have to pay corporation tax on the remainder (assuming I understood the tax expert on Radio 2 last night which is a big assumption).

It seems to be a very rare tax policy that has been accepted as a good thing fairly universally (except amongst some Bike Radar forumites of course!).

And who might that be

Not sure that they have directly linked the reduction in stamp duty revenues with the increase in revenues from restriction on tax loss usage by banks, although the amounts are similar. There are lots of pluses and minuses in the budget P&L - at the risk of sending you to sleep, have a look on pages 64-66 of the attached (for what forecasts are worth):
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/382327/44695_Accessible.pdf

The other big item in that lot is the increase in the tax free personal allowance which benefits pretty much everyone. Bit surprised about the 'Google tax' - thought that might be expected bring in a lot more.

orraloon

Stevo 666 wrote:

Bit surprised about the 'Google tax' - thought that might be expected bring in a lot more.

In the blue corner, Boy George; in the red corner Google, Starbucks, Apple and the rest..... Now who do you think will win that one?

orraloon

orraloon wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Bit surprised about the 'Google tax' - thought that might be expected bring in a lot more.

In the blue corner, Boy George; in the red corner Google, Starbucks, Apple and the rest..... Now who do you think will win that one?

Oh yeah, then there's Amazon....

Stevo_666

orraloon wrote:

orraloon wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Bit surprised about the 'Google tax' - thought that might be expected bring in a lot more.

In the blue corner, Boy George; in the red corner Google, Starbucks, Apple and the rest..... Now who do you think will win that one?

Oh yeah, then there's Amazon....

Expected to, not will. Govt tax take estimates are sometimes a bit optimistic.