Stamp duty threshold increased to £175k for one year

Marc1978

LittleMissAspie wrote: »

I don't see how this will make much difference to FTBs. The price of 175-200k houses will now come down but FTBs wouldn't be paying that much anyway.

The bottom rung is still out of reach, and furthermore, 125-140k houses now have no incentive to lower their prices.

This only helps the 2nd or 3rd time buyer.

Surely when houses that are on at £185k come down to £175k (to be within the stamp duty level) then properties that were priced at £175k have to reduce in price to be competitive. This is then repeated all the way down the market.

skap7309

Marc1978 wrote: »

Surely when houses that are on at £185k come down to £175k (to be within the stamp duty level) then properties that were priced at £175k have to reduce in price to be competitive. This is then repeated all the way down the market.

Excellent post and good logic :T

Microstar_2

I am surprised that older members don't recall what happened when the Tories did it.
Major was facing an election in mid-'92 so in late '91 (in the grip of a crash) the chancellor (Norman Lamont) raised the threshold from £30k to £250k. FTB transactions increased by about 30% and the housing market picked up a bit. Major won the election.
Threshold was bought back in at £30k in late 1992 and FTB transactions slumped. IIRC because of this the threshold was moved up to £60k in early 1993. I was buying a house around this time and no one knew where they were with the SD!

I guess Darling et al are looking at this historical data and thinking it might work again this time. Personally I doubt it.

baby_boomer

Just found one SE London EA with only five properties available below £175K.

Is Gordon just displaying his typical anti-SE bias, or does he know the future direction of the housing market better than we think? :rotfl:

harbinger13

steadysaver wrote: »

Just the Government trying to win votes from the uneducated masses.

I thought the English knew English; hence educated:eek:

wymondham

I think this is all completely irresponsible of the Government. They are now actively encouraging people into the housing market who can i'll afford it. It's not stamp duty that is the problem, it's the price of the house (regardless of any fancy scheme)...

The Government have learnt from housebuilders, by coming up with any scheme to help them sell - the only thing that will help home buyers is a natural fall in prices, which the Government have now just delayed...

emsie01

Could someone please help me out on this I am an estate agent working in what has previously been described as a disadvantaged area now the stamp duty was always at a higher threshold in this area of up to £150,000, does the announcement today mean that this threshold has gone up aswell as there is no mention of this ANYWHERE.

I hope you can help?!?

Emma

EdInvestor

Marc1978 wrote: »

Surely when houses that are on at £185k come down to £175k (to be within the stamp duty level) then properties that were priced at £175k have to reduce in price to be competitive. This is then repeated all the way down the market.

Formerly you had pressure from EAs on people with places in the 140-150k range to come down to 125k so as to get within the old band.That pressure will now ease.

Should stabilise the bottom end, with a gap opening up between 175k and 205k or so.

If interest rates come down enough, you could see FTBs coming back in at the 150k ish level as the worry about further falls to below the 125k SD band followed by rapid descent into neg equity would no longer be a factor.

Potentially quite a well thought out move IMHO.

neverdespairgirl

EdInvestor wrote: »

Formerly you had pressure from EAs on people with places in the 140-150k range to come down to 125k so as to get within the old band.That pressure will now ease.

As houses priced at £180k - £220k come under pressure to drop to £175k on offer, though, houses under that will be pushed down in value as well.

cello57

OK if you're going to have a land tax that is charged on a transfer, don't let it be regressive - have progressive breaks but not charge the step rate on the whole lot. That creates artificial price breaks and makes people do silly things like sell the carpets and curtains separately . . . just a nonsense Reform it now!