We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
New government policy: Will buy-to-let investors lose out?
Comments
-
Graham_Devon wrote: »Well you are doing your absolute best to keep the thread going, and throwing copious amounts of petrol on the fire.
We'll have a whip round to get you a new poker, you seem to have worn your current one down to the nub.
BTW, Harry. Its called "rather big news". Rather big news that has the potential to effect the housing market quite a bit, dependong on how it pans out.
This one has a whole chapter to himself in the thesis. Obsessive compulsive disorder coupled with neuroticism personality traits, a heady mixture indeed."I can hear you whisperin', children, so I know you're down there. I can feel myself gettin' awful mad. I'm out of patience, children. I'm coming to find you now." - Harry Powell, Night of the Hunter, 1955.0 -
Turnbull2000 wrote: »The vast majority of BTL either can't sell or don't want to sell. Nothing much will change.
I agree. Besides that, it would be hard to get a sale in 50 days - contracts need to exchange before the budget.No reliance should be placed on the above! Absolutely none, do you hear?0 -
Turnbull2000 wrote: »The vast majority of BTL either can't sell or don't want to sell. Nothing much will change.
Professional investors will long ago taken action. A change in CGT must have been one of the most obvious tax changes post the election.0 -
Thrugelmir wrote: »Professional investors will long ago taken action. A change in CGT must have been one of the most obvious tax changes post the election.
How so? This was a Liberal Democrat policy. They came a distant third in the election with 57 seats. How would the experts forecast Liberal Democrat policy being put in place from that?0 -
dealsearcher wrote: »How so? This was a Liberal Democrat policy. They came a distant third in the election with 57 seats. How would the experts forecast Liberal Democrat policy being put in place from that?
because when Labour put in place their new 50% tax rates for high earners, they left CGT at 18% which is a huge discrepancy and was just asking for rich people to re-organise their tax affairs.
Even as soon as Labour reduced CGT people were saying it couldn't last and many cashed in before Labour realised their folly."I can hear you whisperin', children, so I know you're down there. I can feel myself gettin' awful mad. I'm out of patience, children. I'm coming to find you now." - Harry Powell, Night of the Hunter, 1955.0 -
dealsearcher wrote: »How so? This was a Liberal Democrat policy. They came a distant third in the election with 57 seats. How would the experts forecast Liberal Democrat policy being put in place from that?
If you've missed the news the UK currently has a budget deficit of around £160 billion pounds per annum. Despite changes in taxation already put into train by the previous Government there's still a gap which needs to be filled.
No party explained in their manifestos how this would be achieved.
CGT although a small contributor to tax revenues was an obvious target for change.0 -
Thrugelmir wrote: »If you've missed the news the UK currently has a budget deficit of around £160 billion pounds per annum. Despite changes in taxation already put into train by the previous Government there's still a gap which needs to be filled.
No party explained in their manifestos how this would be achieved.
CGT although a small contributor to tax revenues was an obvious target for change.
That may be so but it was a LibDem policy and not a Conservative policy.
CGT is a small contributor. It is most unConservative like to screw the small investor like this, especially when the gain to the taxman is so relatively small. Obvious target for change? I don't think so.0 -
Either way, all three parties had massive unfunded gaps in their tax policy at the election, and this is one of the obvious (sneaky) ways to fund the gap. Would probably happen whatever government got into power.“The ideas of debtor and creditor as to what constitutes a good time never coincide.”
― P.G. Wodehouse, Love Among the Chickens0 -
dealsearcher wrote: »That may be so but it was a LibDem policy and not a Conservative policy.
CGT is a small contributor. It is most unConservative like to screw the small investor like this, especially when the gain to the taxman is so relatively small. Obvious target for change? I don't think so.
I think it's obvious that at some point a sort of taper relief system will be introduced, maybe not immediately but almost certainly at some point. If it mirrors the old taper relief and eventually gives 50% relief than this effectively will cut CGT in half.Chuck Norris can kill two stones with one birdThe only time Chuck Norris was wrong was when he thought he had made a mistakeChuck Norris puts the "laughter" in "manslaughter".I've started running again, after several injuries had forced me to stop0 -
dealsearcher wrote: »That may be so but it was a LibDem policy and not a Conservative policy.
CGT is a small contributor. It is most unConservative like to screw the small investor like this, especially when the gain to the taxman is so relatively small. Obvious target for change? I don't think so.
Raising tax revenues was common to all parties. It was just a question of how much and when. So not so much party policy as a necessity.
Why should a select few receive beneficial treatment in these difficult times. Low CGT can be exploited to avoid 50% income tax rates. So it is more than merely raising tax revenues.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards