LEAVE the Conservative Party and save your country!
Comments
-
Sure but I mean if you want a British passport you gotta declare your wealth and pay tax on it etc.TheBigBean said:
So long-term residents escape it? In any case, the US system is a mess, and they have introduced far reaching rules to enforce it by blacklisting non-compliant banks. Even then, they are just looking at income and not wealth.rick_chasey said:
What about a US style if you have a British passport you pay British wealth taxes scenario?TheBigBean said:
The problem is that people just go abroad at some point. Earn lots and then take your wealth abroad. Then you start looking at taxing capital flows out of the country, and before you know it, it is a mess.rick_chasey said:
A well thought out wealth tax im all for.surrey_commuter said:
Not much detail there.rick_chasey said:One for you Stevo
How do you feel about a wealth tax? I was surprised to see they were lumping pensions in and that got me thinking about why not make it much broader. So on the grounds that £1k is worth having why not do 5% on £20k and up?
If I was creating a new system from scratch I would go heavy on wealth and light on income.
For me anyway you want to really disincentivise rentier behaviour but also encourage max competition.
I also like the idea that if you have one great year you don’t immediately get smacked.
I have made my views on inheritance tax already.
It is of course a deeply anti establishment by nature but it does mean you make it easy to generate some wealth but hard to hold onto masses without earning a lot.
I want to incentivise earnings not wealth.
0 -
Ah ha ha, ah ha ha ha 😊 very funnyrick_chasey said:
Sure but I mean if you want a British passport you gotta declare your wealth and pay tax on it etc.TheBigBean said:
So long-term residents escape it? In any case, the US system is a mess, and they have introduced far reaching rules to enforce it by blacklisting non-compliant banks. Even then, they are just looking at income and not wealth.rick_chasey said:
What about a US style if you have a British passport you pay British wealth taxes scenario?TheBigBean said:
The problem is that people just go abroad at some point. Earn lots and then take your wealth abroad. Then you start looking at taxing capital flows out of the country, and before you know it, it is a mess.rick_chasey said:
A well thought out wealth tax im all for.surrey_commuter said:
Not much detail there.rick_chasey said:One for you Stevo
How do you feel about a wealth tax? I was surprised to see they were lumping pensions in and that got me thinking about why not make it much broader. So on the grounds that £1k is worth having why not do 5% on £20k and up?
If I was creating a new system from scratch I would go heavy on wealth and light on income.
For me anyway you want to really disincentivise rentier behaviour but also encourage max competition.
I also like the idea that if you have one great year you don’t immediately get smacked.
I have made my views on inheritance tax already.
It is of course a deeply anti establishment by nature but it does mean you make it easy to generate some wealth but hard to hold onto masses without earning a lot.
I want to incentivise earnings not wealth.
0 -
nope he pays the % on his total wealth each year (not just the increase) so the total value of his properties, pension and savings. To maximise the impact assume the bloke and his wife are 65 so have been investing wisely and living frugally for 50 years.john80 said:
How do you handle the guy on minimum wage that was astute enough to buy a Glasgow flat and keep it and now it is worth 3 times as much as his residential home? Do you charge him every year for a percentage of the estimated increase. Do you charge him when he sells it. He was also living frugally so put 10% of his minimal earnings into a pension fund for the last ten years. Does the government want some of that. You can take this argument all the way up the wage scales and it is only when you are at the obscenely rich will it not have a pretty significant affect on their finances and therefore their spending habits.rick_chasey said:
A well thought out wealth tax im all for.surrey_commuter said:
Not much detail there.rick_chasey said:One for you Stevo
How do you feel about a wealth tax? I was surprised to see they were lumping pensions in and that got me thinking about why not make it much broader. So on the grounds that £1k is worth having why not do 5% on £20k and up?
If I was creating a new system from scratch I would go heavy on wealth and light on income.
For me anyway you want to really disincentivise rentier behaviour but also encourage max competition.
I also like the idea that if you have one great year you don’t immediately get smacked.
I have made my views on inheritance tax already.
It is of course a deeply anti establishment by nature but it does mean you make it easy to generate some wealth but hard to hold onto masses without earning a lot.
I want to incentivise earnings not wealth.
I think this would only lead to a lot less saving, a lot less ownership of things deemed investments and a lot more money on living the good life for which the next generation have to pay for when he is in a home, incontinent with dementia. Have you got and financial interest in hookers and coke that you would like to disclose.
There must be a lot of 60 year olds in the SE worth a couple of million if including pension and home who might have to write a cheque for £100k each year.
This is why i suggest it applies to everybody so the masses are not voting for a tax on somebody else.0 -
A 'well thought out wealth tax' sounds like a contradiction in terms so would welcome your thoughts on one.rick_chasey said:
A well thought out wealth tax im all for.surrey_commuter said:
Not much detail there.rick_chasey said:One for you Stevo
How do you feel about a wealth tax? I was surprised to see they were lumping pensions in and that got me thinking about why not make it much broader. So on the grounds that £1k is worth having why not do 5% on £20k and up?
If I was creating a new system from scratch I would go heavy on wealth and light on income.
For me anyway you want to really disincentivise rentier behaviour but also encourage max competition.
I also like the idea that if you have one great year you don’t immediately get smacked.
I have made my views on inheritance tax already.
It is of course a deeply anti establishment by nature but it does mean you make it easy to generate some wealth but hard to hold onto masses without earning a lot.
I want to incentivise earnings not wealth.
It probably needs to address a few fundamantal points such as:
- Ability to pay as wealth as already mentioned above
- Only getting taxed on the same thing once
- Taxation of unrealised profits and gains and potential double taxation when these are realised.
For starters.
So if you want to incentivise earnings, are you supportive of getting the top rate of income tax back to 40%?
Is it a reasonable assumption that you don't have much wealth?"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Good way of driving wealth offshore. And ignores the pretty fundamental tax concept of tax residence.rick_chasey said:
What about a US style if you have a British passport you pay British wealth taxes scenario?TheBigBean said:
The problem is that people just go abroad at some point. Earn lots and then take your wealth abroad. Then you start looking at taxing capital flows out of the country, and before you know it, it is a mess.rick_chasey said:
A well thought out wealth tax im all for.surrey_commuter said:
Not much detail there.rick_chasey said:One for you Stevo
How do you feel about a wealth tax? I was surprised to see they were lumping pensions in and that got me thinking about why not make it much broader. So on the grounds that £1k is worth having why not do 5% on £20k and up?
If I was creating a new system from scratch I would go heavy on wealth and light on income.
For me anyway you want to really disincentivise rentier behaviour but also encourage max competition.
I also like the idea that if you have one great year you don’t immediately get smacked.
I have made my views on inheritance tax already.
It is of course a deeply anti establishment by nature but it does mean you make it easy to generate some wealth but hard to hold onto masses without earning a lot.
I want to incentivise earnings not wealth."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Well exactly. People are often keen on taxes that mostly impact other people, as Rick has very ably demonstrated here.surrey_commuter said:
nope he pays the % on his total wealth each year (not just the increase) so the total value of his properties, pension and savings. To maximise the impact assume the bloke and his wife are 65 so have been investing wisely and living frugally for 50 years.john80 said:
How do you handle the guy on minimum wage that was astute enough to buy a Glasgow flat and keep it and now it is worth 3 times as much as his residential home? Do you charge him every year for a percentage of the estimated increase. Do you charge him when he sells it. He was also living frugally so put 10% of his minimal earnings into a pension fund for the last ten years. Does the government want some of that. You can take this argument all the way up the wage scales and it is only when you are at the obscenely rich will it not have a pretty significant affect on their finances and therefore their spending habits.rick_chasey said:
A well thought out wealth tax im all for.surrey_commuter said:
Not much detail there.rick_chasey said:One for you Stevo
How do you feel about a wealth tax? I was surprised to see they were lumping pensions in and that got me thinking about why not make it much broader. So on the grounds that £1k is worth having why not do 5% on £20k and up?
If I was creating a new system from scratch I would go heavy on wealth and light on income.
For me anyway you want to really disincentivise rentier behaviour but also encourage max competition.
I also like the idea that if you have one great year you don’t immediately get smacked.
I have made my views on inheritance tax already.
It is of course a deeply anti establishment by nature but it does mean you make it easy to generate some wealth but hard to hold onto masses without earning a lot.
I want to incentivise earnings not wealth.
I think this would only lead to a lot less saving, a lot less ownership of things deemed investments and a lot more money on living the good life for which the next generation have to pay for when he is in a home, incontinent with dementia. Have you got and financial interest in hookers and coke that you would like to disclose.
There must be a lot of 60 year olds in the SE worth a couple of million if including pension and home who might have to write a cheque for £100k each year.
This is why i suggest it applies to everybody so the masses are not voting for a tax on somebody else."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Another plus for Spaffer's crew
https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-for-the-first-time-in-its-history-unicef-will-help-feed-kids-in-the-uk-12163515
Though, 80 seat majority.
0 -
So I don’t know why my own circumstances come into it. FWIW me and my family would be hit very hard by my suggestion.Stevo_666 said:
A 'well thought out wealth tax' sounds like a contradiction in terms so would welcome your thoughts on one.rick_chasey said:
A well thought out wealth tax im all for.surrey_commuter said:
Not much detail there.rick_chasey said:One for you Stevo
How do you feel about a wealth tax? I was surprised to see they were lumping pensions in and that got me thinking about why not make it much broader. So on the grounds that £1k is worth having why not do 5% on £20k and up?
If I was creating a new system from scratch I would go heavy on wealth and light on income.
For me anyway you want to really disincentivise rentier behaviour but also encourage max competition.
I also like the idea that if you have one great year you don’t immediately get smacked.
I have made my views on inheritance tax already.
It is of course a deeply anti establishment by nature but it does mean you make it easy to generate some wealth but hard to hold onto masses without earning a lot.
I want to incentivise earnings not wealth.
It probably needs to address a few fundamantal points such as:
- Ability to pay as wealth as already mentioned above
- Only getting taxed on the same thing once
- Taxation of unrealised profits and gains and potential double taxation when these are realised.
For starters.
So if you want to incentivise earnings, are you supportive of getting the top rate of income tax back to 40%?
Is it a reasonable assumption that you don't have much wealth?
So if your wealth is locked up in illiquid assets you’ll have to liquidate some of them or start earning enough money to cover the tax.
Upside is with a decent wealth tax you will be able to have lower income tax.
As per the link I don’t think reducing the higher income bracket is enormously helpful.
You’re much better off having a much larger initial tax free range.
In an ideal world the wealth tax would be such that you’re paying very little income tax at all.0 -
Well this is all hypothetical as in my fantasy tax regime the 65 year olds would not have paid much or any income tax for their whole working life.Stevo_666 said:
Well exactly. People are often keen on taxes that mostly impact other people, as Rick has very ably demonstrated here.surrey_commuter said:
nope he pays the % on his total wealth each year (not just the increase) so the total value of his properties, pension and savings. To maximise the impact assume the bloke and his wife are 65 so have been investing wisely and living frugally for 50 years.john80 said:
How do you handle the guy on minimum wage that was astute enough to buy a Glasgow flat and keep it and now it is worth 3 times as much as his residential home? Do you charge him every year for a percentage of the estimated increase. Do you charge him when he sells it. He was also living frugally so put 10% of his minimal earnings into a pension fund for the last ten years. Does the government want some of that. You can take this argument all the way up the wage scales and it is only when you are at the obscenely rich will it not have a pretty significant affect on their finances and therefore their spending habits.rick_chasey said:
A well thought out wealth tax im all for.surrey_commuter said:
Not much detail there.rick_chasey said:One for you Stevo
How do you feel about a wealth tax? I was surprised to see they were lumping pensions in and that got me thinking about why not make it much broader. So on the grounds that £1k is worth having why not do 5% on £20k and up?
If I was creating a new system from scratch I would go heavy on wealth and light on income.
For me anyway you want to really disincentivise rentier behaviour but also encourage max competition.
I also like the idea that if you have one great year you don’t immediately get smacked.
I have made my views on inheritance tax already.
It is of course a deeply anti establishment by nature but it does mean you make it easy to generate some wealth but hard to hold onto masses without earning a lot.
I want to incentivise earnings not wealth.
I think this would only lead to a lot less saving, a lot less ownership of things deemed investments and a lot more money on living the good life for which the next generation have to pay for when he is in a home, incontinent with dementia. Have you got and financial interest in hookers and coke that you would like to disclose.
There must be a lot of 60 year olds in the SE worth a couple of million if including pension and home who might have to write a cheque for £100k each year.
This is why i suggest it applies to everybody so the masses are not voting for a tax on somebody else.
0 -
So investment in property isn’t a great use of investment money.john80 said:
How do you handle the guy on minimum wage that was astute enough to buy a Glasgow flat and keep it and now it is worth 3 times as much as his residential home? Do you charge him every year for a percentage of the estimated increase. Do you charge him when he sells it. He was also living frugally so put 10% of his minimal earnings into a pension fund for the last ten years. Does the government want some of that. You can take this argument all the way up the wage scales and it is only when you are at the obscenely rich will it not have a pretty significant affect on their finances and therefore their spending habits.rick_chasey said:
A well thought out wealth tax im all for.surrey_commuter said:
Not much detail there.rick_chasey said:One for you Stevo
How do you feel about a wealth tax? I was surprised to see they were lumping pensions in and that got me thinking about why not make it much broader. So on the grounds that £1k is worth having why not do 5% on £20k and up?
If I was creating a new system from scratch I would go heavy on wealth and light on income.
For me anyway you want to really disincentivise rentier behaviour but also encourage max competition.
I also like the idea that if you have one great year you don’t immediately get smacked.
I have made my views on inheritance tax already.
It is of course a deeply anti establishment by nature but it does mean you make it easy to generate some wealth but hard to hold onto masses without earning a lot.
I want to incentivise earnings not wealth.
I think this would only lead to a lot less saving, a lot less ownership of things deemed investments and a lot more money on living the good life for which the next generation have to pay for when he is in a home, incontinent with dementia. Have you got and financial interest in hookers and coke that you would like to disclose.
In the new world with this tax regime an investment in property wouldn’t be such a stellar investment as, unless you rent it out, it’s not generating any wealth, right?
It’s to force people to put their money into productive things.0 -
I feel you’re all focused on when we transition tomorrow rather than in a works where we have always had it. Two different problems.0
-
A lot of people have most of their wealth tied up in their (1) main residence, which I'm sure you know is far easier said than done for the large majority given moving costs, personal circumstances etc and (2) pension savings - which cannot be touched until retirement age. That kind of makes your grand plan pretty unworkable in reality.rick_chasey said:
So I don’t know why my own circumstances come into it. FWIW me and my family would be hit very hard by my suggestion.Stevo_666 said:
A 'well thought out wealth tax' sounds like a contradiction in terms so would welcome your thoughts on one.rick_chasey said:
A well thought out wealth tax im all for.surrey_commuter said:
Not much detail there.rick_chasey said:One for you Stevo
How do you feel about a wealth tax? I was surprised to see they were lumping pensions in and that got me thinking about why not make it much broader. So on the grounds that £1k is worth having why not do 5% on £20k and up?
If I was creating a new system from scratch I would go heavy on wealth and light on income.
For me anyway you want to really disincentivise rentier behaviour but also encourage max competition.
I also like the idea that if you have one great year you don’t immediately get smacked.
I have made my views on inheritance tax already.
It is of course a deeply anti establishment by nature but it does mean you make it easy to generate some wealth but hard to hold onto masses without earning a lot.
I want to incentivise earnings not wealth.
It probably needs to address a few fundamantal points such as:
- Ability to pay as wealth as already mentioned above
- Only getting taxed on the same thing once
- Taxation of unrealised profits and gains and potential double taxation when these are realised.
For starters.
So if you want to incentivise earnings, are you supportive of getting the top rate of income tax back to 40%?
Is it a reasonable assumption that you don't have much wealth?
So if your wealth is locked up in illiquid assets you’ll have to liquidate some of them or start earning enough money to cover the tax.
Upside is with a decent wealth tax you will be able to have lower income tax.
As per the link I don’t think reducing the higher income bracket is enormously helpful.
You’re much better off having a much larger initial tax free range.
In an ideal world the wealth tax would be such that you’re paying very little income tax at all.
Also you have not addressed the fundamental issues in my bullet points above."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
So every property in the country needs to be revalued on an annual basis?
commercial properties are supposed to be revalued every 5 years for rateable value and the Valuation Office can't cope with doing that.
That's made a wealth tax incredibly expensive to administer straight away.
then you have the issue of the couple who have 2 State Pensions, let's say £18,500 pa, but their property is valued at £500,000.
How do you propose they pay your wealth tax Rick?
I think you need to get out into the real world a little and see how people's incomes and wealth really match up, because your London centric FS bubble certainly isn't representative of the reality in much of the country.
There is a reason very few countries have a wealth tax on the basis suggested.
However, I suspect we'd probably both agree that the addition Residence Nil Rate Band for Inheritance Tax is plain wrong.1 -
Lads tying up your money in property is fine personal finance but in aggregate it is a monster waste of capital.
The wealth tax will make people put their money to work. So people would not have tied their money up in houses to begin with as it is unproductive0 -
Lol abroad people talk about the cult of home ownership in the U.K.
It makeadesense
Have a bit of imagination beyond your own personal finance0 -
Also hard to see how annual revaluations could be done on unlisted businesses for the self employed, or typically hard to value assets such as intellectual property.Dorset_Boy said:So every property in the country needs to be revalued on an annual basis?
commercial properties are supposed to be revalued every 5 years for rateable value and the Valuation Office can't cope with doing that.
That's made a wealth tax incredibly expensive to administer straight away.
then you have the issue of the couple who have 2 State Pensions, let's say £18,500 pa, but their property is valued at £500,000.
How do you propose they pay your wealth tax Rick?
I think you need to get out into the real world a little and see how people's incomes and wealth really match up, because your London centric FS bubble certainly isn't representative of the reality.
And for most people, forcing them to sell their main residence for something smaller to avoid getting stung is hardly practical. Especially for families and those on low incomes."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
People need somewhere to live Rick.rick_chasey said:Lads tying up your money in property is fine personal finance but in aggregate it is a monster waste of capital.
The wealth tax will make people put their money to work. So people would not have tied their money up in houses to begin with as it is unproductive
Home ownership makes far more sense than renting, particularly once you hit retirement.
Given the size of the DIY and property market, it's also pretty daft to suggest that home ownership is unproductive. Do you really think landlords would spend on those properties the same way as an owner occupier does?0 -
Stevo_666 said:
Also hard to see how annual revaluations could be done on unlisted businesses for the self employed, or typically hard to value assets such as intellectual property.Dorset_Boy said:So every property in the country needs to be revalued on an annual basis?
commercial properties are supposed to be revalued every 5 years for rateable value and the Valuation Office can't cope with doing that.
That's made a wealth tax incredibly expensive to administer straight away.
then you have the issue of the couple who have 2 State Pensions, let's say £18,500 pa, but their property is valued at £500,000.
How do you propose they pay your wealth tax Rick?
I think you need to get out into the real world a little and see how people's incomes and wealth really match up, because your London centric FS bubble certainly isn't representative of the reality.
And for most people, forcing them to sell their main residence for something smaller to avoid getting stung is hardly practical. Especially for families and those on low incomes.
I know RC is just spitballing, and it's not without some interest, but you wouldn't want to be starting from where we are now, given how intermingled the value of housing stock and people's finances are (not least in where pension funds are invested) in the UK.0 -
Pension funds aren't really invested in the UK housing stock, and certainly not directly as you can't hold any residential property in a pension wrapper. Sure they might have indirect exposure.briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Also hard to see how annual revaluations could be done on unlisted businesses for the self employed, or typically hard to value assets such as intellectual property.Dorset_Boy said:So every property in the country needs to be revalued on an annual basis?
commercial properties are supposed to be revalued every 5 years for rateable value and the Valuation Office can't cope with doing that.
That's made a wealth tax incredibly expensive to administer straight away.
then you have the issue of the couple who have 2 State Pensions, let's say £18,500 pa, but their property is valued at £500,000.
How do you propose they pay your wealth tax Rick?
I think you need to get out into the real world a little and see how people's incomes and wealth really match up, because your London centric FS bubble certainly isn't representative of the reality.
And for most people, forcing them to sell their main residence for something smaller to avoid getting stung is hardly practical. Especially for families and those on low incomes.
I know RC is just spitballing, and it's not without some interest, but you wouldn't want to be starting from where we are now, given how intermingled the value of housing stock and people's finances are (not least in where pension funds are invested) in the UK.0 -
The concept of a Wealth Tax on all assets is classic academic game playing, but totally impractical in reality.0
-
Dorset_Boy said:
Pension funds aren't really invested in the UK housing stock, and certainly not directly as you can't hold any residential property in a pension wrapper. Sure they might have indirect exposure.briantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
Also hard to see how annual revaluations could be done on unlisted businesses for the self employed, or typically hard to value assets such as intellectual property.Dorset_Boy said:So every property in the country needs to be revalued on an annual basis?
commercial properties are supposed to be revalued every 5 years for rateable value and the Valuation Office can't cope with doing that.
That's made a wealth tax incredibly expensive to administer straight away.
then you have the issue of the couple who have 2 State Pensions, let's say £18,500 pa, but their property is valued at £500,000.
How do you propose they pay your wealth tax Rick?
I think you need to get out into the real world a little and see how people's incomes and wealth really match up, because your London centric FS bubble certainly isn't representative of the reality.
And for most people, forcing them to sell their main residence for something smaller to avoid getting stung is hardly practical. Especially for families and those on low incomes.
I know RC is just spitballing, and it's not without some interest, but you wouldn't want to be starting from where we are now, given how intermingled the value of housing stock and people's finances are (not least in where pension funds are invested) in the UK.
Yes, indirect, obvs.0 -
Isn't this an issue more because house prices are so ludicrously out of step with salaries? Not saying that is easy to solve.Stevo_666 said:
Also hard to see how annual revaluations could be done on unlisted businesses for the self employed, or typically hard to value assets such as intellectual property.Dorset_Boy said:So every property in the country needs to be revalued on an annual basis?
commercial properties are supposed to be revalued every 5 years for rateable value and the Valuation Office can't cope with doing that.
That's made a wealth tax incredibly expensive to administer straight away.
then you have the issue of the couple who have 2 State Pensions, let's say £18,500 pa, but their property is valued at £500,000.
How do you propose they pay your wealth tax Rick?
I think you need to get out into the real world a little and see how people's incomes and wealth really match up, because your London centric FS bubble certainly isn't representative of the reality.
And for most people, forcing them to sell their main residence for something smaller to avoid getting stung is hardly practical. Especially for families and those on low incomes.- Genesis Croix de Fer
- Dolan Tuono0 -
To make it realistic why not assume income tax stay the same and the wealth tax becomes permanent.rick_chasey said:
So I don’t know why my own circumstances come into it. FWIW me and my family would be hit very hard by my suggestion.Stevo_666 said:
A 'well thought out wealth tax' sounds like a contradiction in terms so would welcome your thoughts on one.rick_chasey said:
A well thought out wealth tax im all for.surrey_commuter said:
Not much detail there.rick_chasey said:One for you Stevo
How do you feel about a wealth tax? I was surprised to see they were lumping pensions in and that got me thinking about why not make it much broader. So on the grounds that £1k is worth having why not do 5% on £20k and up?
If I was creating a new system from scratch I would go heavy on wealth and light on income.
For me anyway you want to really disincentivise rentier behaviour but also encourage max competition.
I also like the idea that if you have one great year you don’t immediately get smacked.
I have made my views on inheritance tax already.
It is of course a deeply anti establishment by nature but it does mean you make it easy to generate some wealth but hard to hold onto masses without earning a lot.
I want to incentivise earnings not wealth.
It probably needs to address a few fundamantal points such as:
- Ability to pay as wealth as already mentioned above
- Only getting taxed on the same thing once
- Taxation of unrealised profits and gains and potential double taxation when these are realised.
For starters.
So if you want to incentivise earnings, are you supportive of getting the top rate of income tax back to 40%?
Is it a reasonable assumption that you don't have much wealth?
So if your wealth is locked up in illiquid assets you’ll have to liquidate some of them or start earning enough money to cover the tax.
Upside is with a decent wealth tax you will be able to have lower income tax.
As per the link I don’t think reducing the higher income bracket is enormously helpful.
You’re much better off having a much larger initial tax free range.
In an ideal world the wealth tax would be such that you’re paying very little income tax at all.
I used to be hugely in favour of taking the tax free limit up to the max benefit level but am changing my mind as I think not enough people paying tax is causing a disconnect.0 -
rick_chasey said:
Lol abroad people talk about the cult of home ownership in the U.K.
There might be more of a cult than most countries, but there doesn't appear to be more ownership
0 -
Lol so what are they doing in France, Italy, Switzerland and Norway to implement their wealth taxes?Dorset_Boy said:The concept of a Wealth Tax on all assets is classic academic game playing, but totally impractical in reality.
You’re all just establishment with skin to lose
0 -
What does a house do? It doesn’t add value.Dorset_Boy said:
People need somewhere to live Rick.rick_chasey said:Lads tying up your money in property is fine personal finance but in aggregate it is a monster waste of capital.
The wealth tax will make people put their money to work. So people would not have tied their money up in houses to begin with as it is unproductive
Home ownership makes far more sense than renting, particularly once you hit retirement.
Given the size of the DIY and property market, it's also pretty daft to suggest that home ownership is unproductive. Do you really think landlords would spend on those properties the same way as an owner occupier does?
It’s not a factory or a machine or anything that produces stuff of value. It just sits there.
And I don’t agree ownership is important when you retire.
On the contrary you have lots of people who live too frugally in their fully owned houses in their latter years when they could have sold it off, taken the money and paid rent.
Why else is equity release such a big deal?
Free the money from housing stock. Think how much you could charge the economy up by forcing it into productive investments!
0 -
Honest question how do you think they calculate council tax?Stevo_666 said:
Also hard to see how annual revaluations could be done on unlisted businesses for the self employed, or typically hard to value assets such as intellectual property.Dorset_Boy said:So every property in the country needs to be revalued on an annual basis?
commercial properties are supposed to be revalued every 5 years for rateable value and the Valuation Office can't cope with doing that.
That's made a wealth tax incredibly expensive to administer straight away.
then you have the issue of the couple who have 2 State Pensions, let's say £18,500 pa, but their property is valued at £500,000.
How do you propose they pay your wealth tax Rick?
I think you need to get out into the real world a little and see how people's incomes and wealth really match up, because your London centric FS bubble certainly isn't representative of the reality.
And for most people, forcing them to sell their main residence for something smaller to avoid getting stung is hardly practical. Especially for families and those on low incomes.0 -
No. If you’re interested look at home ownership rates by different generations in different countries.bompington said:rick_chasey said:Lol abroad people talk about the cult of home ownership in the U.K.
There might be more of a cult than most countries, but there doesn't appear to be more ownership
Tells quite the story0 -
Honestly you lot if you had the same hatred for trust fund Charlie’s who don’t do work as you did for lifer benefits scrounges the world would be a better place.
Money sitting locked up houses doesn’t make the world go round. It’s a waste.0 -
Err, do you know when the last revaluation of residential properties for Council Tax took place Rick? Or how long it took?rick_chasey said:
Honest question how do you think they calculate council tax?Stevo_666 said:
Also hard to see how annual revaluations could be done on unlisted businesses for the self employed, or typically hard to value assets such as intellectual property.Dorset_Boy said:So every property in the country needs to be revalued on an annual basis?
commercial properties are supposed to be revalued every 5 years for rateable value and the Valuation Office can't cope with doing that.
That's made a wealth tax incredibly expensive to administer straight away.
then you have the issue of the couple who have 2 State Pensions, let's say £18,500 pa, but their property is valued at £500,000.
How do you propose they pay your wealth tax Rick?
I think you need to get out into the real world a little and see how people's incomes and wealth really match up, because your London centric FS bubble certainly isn't representative of the reality.
And for most people, forcing them to sell their main residence for something smaller to avoid getting stung is hardly practical. Especially for families and those on low incomes.
I suspect you were barely out of nappies.2
