No split on capital gains tax

Graham_Devon

Business Secretary Vincent Cable has insisted the coalition government is not split over planned increases to non-business capital gains tax.
The move could see second home sales taxed at a rate of 40% or 50%.
Senior Tory MPs have attacked it as a tax on the middle classes and a betrayal of Conservative values.
But Mr Cable told BBC News it was a "key" part of the coalition deal and there was no disagreement over it between the Lib Dem and Tory partners.

Looks like it's going ahead?

Thrugelmir

No pain , no gain.

Every possibly source of taxation revenue needs to be tapped. If its not detrimental to industry or the wider economy its a valid target.

Gain in property prices is at taxpayers expense, as there the ones bailing out the banks. So paying a proportion back seems fair.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Looks like it's going ahead?

Looks like it's being "watered down".......

From todays The Times.....

The coalition Government is facing its first serious rift after Lib Dem aspirations to rebalance the tax system ran into angry opposition from Tory backbenchers and grassroots supporters in the shires. In response, George Osborne has opened talks on watering down the planned increases to capital gains tax before his emergency Budget on June 22.

Pennywise

I don't know about the proposals being "watered down". Did they ever say that there wouldn't be some form of taper or indexation relief?

I always assumed that a return of taper relief or indexation relief was an obvious part of increasing the rates. Indexation relief was removed when taper relief was brought in. Taper relief was removed when CGT was reduced to 18%. It just seems logical that you'd bring one or other back when the rate was increased again.

Same with business asset relief. There's always been some form of relief for business owners - it's a given that this would continue under the new regime.

The simplest would be simply to go back to the CGT regime in place in 1997 before Labour took office. Just get the old laws off the shelf, dust them down and apply them again. Quick, simple and efficient. Does what it says on the tin - i.e. reduced CGT for those who invest in business or for the long term - higher CGT for short term speculators. Simples. (It makes you wonder why Gordo had to change it so many times in so few years!!!)

Thrugelmir

Pennywise wrote: »

I don't know about the proposals being "watered down". Did they ever say that there wouldn't be some form of taper or indexation relief?

I always assumed that a return of taper relief or indexation relief was an obvious part of increasing the rates. Indexation relief was removed when taper relief was brought in. Taper relief was removed when CGT was reduced to 18%. It just seems logical that you'd bring one or other back when the rate was increased again.

Same with business asset relief. There's always been some form of relief for business owners - it's a given that this would continue under the new regime.

The simplest would be simply to go back to the CGT regime in place in 1997 before Labour took office. Just get the old laws off the shelf, dust them down and apply them again. Quick, simple and efficient. Does what it says on the tin - i.e. reduced CGT for those who invest in business or for the long term - higher CGT for short term speculators. Simples. (It makes you wonder why Gordo had to change it so many times in so few years!!!)

Makes total sense to do.

The media seems to have bought this diversionary tactic. As the real "savings" in the budget are bound to cause uproar.

Jonbvn

Pennywise wrote: »

It makes you wonder why Gordo had to change it so many times in so few years!!!

Because he could?

IMHO, he really was/is the definitive megalomaniac.