£24 000 stamp duty!!!! I feel ill.

dougk_2

No stamp duty or lower stamp duty would just mean higher taxes elsewhere!

Whatever happens you would all still pay the same amount in tax one way or another.

My personal opnion would be that many of the "hidden" taxes should be stopped and income tax increased so those that earn more pay more.

Back to the OP's first post - is £24k really that much considering how much you have "made" on your property?

silvercar

chances are those winning the biggest "stamp duty" award will also be winninng the biggest "mortgage award".

Guy_Montag

You can argue whether we should have a low tax economy or a high tax economy. Then how to distrubute the taxes. To my mind stamp duty is pretty low, though I do agree that the system is a bit skewed so that a house at 499,999.99 pays 3% & one at 500k pays 4% of the full value. (Or however it is split.) It would be more sensible to set it in such a way that 6% is paid on everything over 500k, 5% on everything over 250k etc. adjusted to even up to what is taken in in stamp duty today.

I'm just hoping one of the parties suggests modifying council tax to be a proportion of what was last spent on the property, rather than this rediculus banding. That would take the wind out of HPI.

dougk_2

Guy_Montag wrote:

I'm just hoping one of the parties suggests modifying council tax to be a proportion of what was last spent on the property, rather than this rediculus banding. That would take the wind out of HPI.

I hope they scrap council tax and fund things in a different way. Eg either pay for what you use (i.e. the more rubbish you create the more you pay) or increase the income tax rate so its based on affordability.

PoorDave

bunking_off wrote:

It isn't the fact that stamp duty is at 3% which is the real issue, it's that it applies to the whole lot. If the thresholds applied like every other tax, you'd pay the higher rate on the amount above them, lower rate on the level below. Unfortunately, it doesn't...pay 1p over the threshold & you're stung for the full higher rate on the lot. This creates ridiculous distortions in the market, e.g. try selling a house for £260k.

I'd disagree with those who term stamp duty a stealth tax. There's nothing stealth about it...everyone knows it exists and the implications are factored into the house prices. That's quite unlike, for example, stealth taxes like those on share dividends held in pension schemes, which on the quiet took a large chunk out of most people's future income.

A very good post. Not a stealth tax at all! Are people saying it's filed under stealth because "stamp duty" doesn't have the word "tax" in it?!

The threshold system would be fairer, i think

santana-mx3

PoorDave wrote:

Are people saying it's filed under stealth because "stamp duty" doesn't have the word "tax" in it?!

The threshold system would be fairer, i think

Isn't it called "Stamp Duty Land Tax" these days?

I definitely agree re the threshold system. The current system is ridiculous.

Oddgy

As of 16:44, this thread has had 1,844 people look at this post - Maybe all my posts in future shoule mention something about the Government in the title!!! What a reaction, and a brilliant way to get people on this board to talk to one another.

cashdaddy

The average UK property now costs £169,413, therefore, someone who owns a house of £130k for example, may consider these people to be rich. I am sure if the SD threshold was changed to 3% for all properties over the average and now set it at £180k, there would be outcry. Whatever your property costs, someone is always going to have one that costs more and that does not mean they are rich. Some seem to think 'I have a £200k house so I'm alright Jack and lets tax everyone who has one bigger than mine'.

If prices continue to rise, everyone eventually will own a £500k or £600k property, but will Gordon have raised the threshold fast enough and high enough?

gingerdad

dougk wrote:

No stamp duty or lower stamp duty would just mean higher taxes elsewhere!

Whatever happens you would all still pay the same amount in tax one way or another.

My personal opnion would be that many of the "hidden" taxes should be stopped and income tax increased so those that earn more pay more.

Back to the OP's first post - is £24k really that much considering how much you have "made" on your property?

I don't agree on the whatever happens you would all still pay the same, we seem to be paying more and more each year and getting less and less, now our local council has to make dramatic cuts to stay with in its budgets next year. so the Tourist info gets it, the youth service gets it and parks get it. still they'll only increase my council tax by 5-7% next year, which means it's doubled in the 5 years we have lived in this house.

Yes i would say 24k is too much, but for us to move to the next house it would cots 6k and i think that is too much, saying our mortgage would till be under 80k?

GD

gingerdad

irnbru wrote:

As opposed to what, budgeting properly in the first place?

I don't begrudge paying NHS staff a proper wage.

I do begrudge paying over the top on PFI projects.

I do begrudge the pfi as well, the NHS staff paying a proper wage depends what you call proper! it does say a lot about where i live that the best paid jobs are in the civil service/govt