No stamp duty <£250k

bodgerx

tara747 wrote: »

It would be funny if it wasn't mentioned tomorrow, but the endless subsequent speculation about it happening post-election made every potential buyer postpone buying again. :rotfl:

Of course it is pretty maddening to think that it probably *will* be mentioned tomorrow and our taxes will be used to prop up the housing market for the 247th time.

Roll on 6 May...

Conservatives promise to do the same thing....

mystic_trev

If the Government really wanted to help the FTB, why not do it as a First Home Buyer Tax Credit, like they do in the US. This Govenment likes Tax credits so much I can't understand why they don't? All this will do is push up prices in the £230,000 to £245,000 range, and reduce them in the £255,000 - £275,000 range.

tara747

Really2 wrote: »

Great news for anyone looking to buy and FTBers.
There can be no argument it lowers any buyers cost (under £250K) by 1%.
Can't see why anyone wanting houses to be more affordable would say this is a bad thing as it is a housing cost.

In reality it brings hardly anything in in the way of cash to the government so I dare say it could be funded by raising tax else where or cutting costs.
You never know they might put it on the sellers costs instead.

It brings quite a lot of tax to the Treasury IIRC.

And it pushes up prices, everyone knows that. SD is a tax on the seller as well as the buyer, as buyers will factor SD (and the various bands) into their budgets.

kennyboy66 wrote: »

If they were cutting taxes, why not shave employers NI and help create more jobs, or trim Corporation tax and entice more business to start in the UK.

Why bother doing something sensible when you can throw a truffle to a smallish band of people.

Oink Oink.

+1

Excellent post, thank you.

bodgerx wrote: »

Conservatives promise to do the same thing....

I really don't care at this stage, I am just so fed up of Labour (and especially Gordon Brown) that I would vote for ANYONE to get them out. They have screwed workers, students, FTBs, businesspeople and everyone except those on benefits and the very rich. :mad:

(and if I hear the phrase 'hard working families' one more time I will vomit)

Really2

tara747 wrote: »

It brings quite a lot of tax to the Treasury IIRC.

Not really in the grand scheme of things.
Say 40,000 transactions at an average of £160K (Which I think is more than generous at the moment) = £64M PM or £768M per year which sounds like a big number.

But income tax and NI bring in around £606,661,000,000 PA alone.

So 0.001% of income compared to Income Tax and NI.
Smoking raises over £10BN.

Cannon_Fodder

Really2 wrote: »

In reality it brings hardly anything in in the way of cash to the government

Really2 wrote: »

Not really in the grand scheme of things.
Say 40,000 transactions at an average of £160K (Which I think is more than generous at the moment) = £64M PM or £768M per year which sounds like a big number.

But income tax and NI bring in around £606,661,000,000 PA alone.

So 0.001% of income compared to Income Tax and NI.
Smoking raises over £10BN.

HMRC breakdown of receipts for SDLT here; http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/about/hmrc-accs-0809.pdf

SDLT used to bring in £10Bn. Down to £5Bn since the crash. Graph on the 115th page, R8.

The threshold being talked about used to bring in nearly £2Bn. Which, yes, is small beer compared to the entire NI and Tax receipts. But as the markets are looking for a clear sign that the Govt are serious about dealing with the deficit, it would be strange to not have continued with the £125k to £175k threshold change, but 3 months later scrap the £250k level entirely or to a large degree (potentially only for FTBs as some seem to think this rumour might match Tory policy directly).

If they keep it simple and scrap the entire £250k threshold, it will cost 5 times what it costs to make the £125k to £175k change. And yet that was not considered either necessary or affordable (or a combination) in November's pre-budget report?

They could have left that in place, and had this rumoured change as the pre-election goodie, instead they will have upset many who bought since 1st Jan - unless they plan a retrospective refund.

I'm sure, like rabbits in the headlights, they are incapable of looking away from the shiny brightness that housing confidence seems to give the UK, so may well do something this stupid. But as various people go on about the poorer end of society and the fact that they should not be trying to be homeowners, how does this benefit the lower income hard-working families who are supposed to always be in the thoughts of Brown and Co?

mystic_trev

I notice the BBC article now says it will be for FTB's only

Chancellor Alistair Darling is to announce in the Budget that stamp duty will be scrapped on house purchases up to £250,000 for first-time buyers.

Graham_Devon

This isn't a bull vs bear argument. Infact, it's not even an argument.

It appears to me to be a bit of a silly give away, at a time when we cannot afford give aways.

Firstly, stamp duty should be scrapped completely, or implemented locally. A person in the North will never pay the same amount of stamp duty as someone in the south, on the exact same type of house. That's silly and unfair.

Secondly, HIPS need to go.

THEN we can look at removing stamp duty.

Now, normally, I'm very much against stamp duty. But just like yesterday when I said the same thing about not adding 3p fuel duty.....we need all the money we can as a country right now.

So this would be less money coming in to the tresury, won't do anything for the housing market in reality....it didnt in 2009, apart from a little rush at the end, which effected the following months. I'm not really sure what the point is. But the constantly moving goalposts are not helping any sector out there.

The motor trade doesnt know whether it's coming or going, neither does the buyer, with the scrappage scheme. Cars reduce in value, then the government brings them back up in value with the scrappge scheme, people rush to buy before it ends, government extends it one "final time". Then they extend it again after the "final time".

The house buyer doesn't know whether to wait, get in quick while an offer is on (stamp duty holiday), or wait until after the offer has ended (maybe lower prices)....and now, were faced with yet another game, where those who have just bought based on yesterdays goalposts were be really quite annoyed.

IMO it's all getting a little silly, and appears to be playing political games, but playing them now with real people out there who are trying to make choices based on the legislation at the time.

Really2....I think you have seriously underestimated the stamp duty revenue!!

ILW

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

It's always entertaining to see people complain about fiscal drag re personal allowances, etc, in one thread, and then laud it when it relates to house purchase expenditure in another thread.

Increasing it to 250K would help a great number of primarily FTB's. It boggles the mind that posters on a money saving site would be against such a measure.

Overall, it is not money saving at all, just moving the money from one group to another. Some win some lose.

doire_2

Whats the average house price now? £167,000 or thereabouts?

Yeah this 1% is going to really help FTB :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

A desperate measure by a bunch of morons on their way out

Really2

Cannon_Fodder wrote: »

H

The threshold being talked about used to bring in nearly £2Bn.

Cost being talked about is around £1Bn.

TBH I have no real problem with it as like I said the conservatives are going to bring it in anyway. But Like the conservative proposal I should hope Labour pay for it by raising funds from else where.

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Really2....I think you have seriously underestimated the stamp duty revenue!!

No it is quotes at £1Bn max so my figures were not that far off at all.

today say the move could cost as much as £1 billion in lost revenues.

http://www.citywire.co.uk/personal/-/news/money-property-and-tax/content.aspx?ID=389802

Over 80% of stamp duty revenue is brought in by the higher bands.