MSE News: Calls to extend stamp duty concession

nollag2006

gmang wrote: »

Who cares? Just pass on the 1% reduction to the vendor. House prices are already falling at that rate each month.

Complete nonsense.

Both Halifax and Nationwide surveys have been positive for the past couple of months. The Land Registry figures are still negative, as they lag the mortgage providers by a few months.

razam

Caveat_Mortgagor wrote: »

How about a different currency as well?

Thanks for your constructive comment
I see you located in the Midlands so may not fully appreciate the house price issue in London.

Just as an example i'll compare prices between South-East & London. In Southend (SE Essex), a 2 bed flat can be got for around £120-130k & a good size 3 bed end-terrace house (my parents old house) can be bought for about £170-180. But like-for-like properties, in similar areas (not best area, not worst areas) will cost AT LEAST double in London.

That's comparing against the South East, the difference would be far greater the rest of the country. So in London, you'd have to pay more stamp duty for like-for-like property!

ed666

Caveat_Mortgagor wrote: »

How about a different currency as well?

In Hong Kong buses are covered in ads advertising how to buy property in London! Clearly the London market appeals to investors the world over....

Why not consider what the Australian government has done - block foreign buyers from the UK market?

tagq2

razam wrote: »

That's comparing against the South East, the difference would be far greater the rest of the country. So in London, you'd have to pay more stamp duty for like-for-like property!

The solution is to not offer concessions and to abandon all measures which make buying houses - especially expensive houses - easier.

The country needs people to stop chasing the house-buying dragon for prices go down (especially in London). Then life's a little better for everyone but the bank and property speculator. Indeed it's also better for the bank if it's interested in a long term future of sound lending not propped up by government.

razam

tagq2 wrote: »

The solution is to not offer concessions and to abandon all measures which make buying houses - especially expensive houses - easier.

The country needs people to stop chasing the house-buying dragon for prices go down (especially in London). Then life's a little better for everyone but the bank and property speculator. Indeed it's also better for the bank if it's interested in a long term future of sound lending not propped up by government.

Agree with what you're saying in principle, but in reality it will not work in London.

As Ed666 has hinted at, rich foreign buyers, bigbonus boys, etc. are purchasing very expensive properties - eg. One Hyde Park, etc. - which then artificially bumps up the prices in the local area, which then affects the next area, and so on. Removing govt. schemes may reduce prices London a little - but not enough.

But if foreign buyer ban is done alongside stopping of govt. schemes, then yes that would make a difference - problem is we all know that won't happen. So being realistic, a seperate scheme/help is needed for FTB is London.

Caveat_Mortgagor

razam wrote: »

Thanks for your constructive comment
I see you located in the Midlands so may not fully appreciate the house price issue in London.

Just as an example i'll compare prices between South-East & London. In Southend (SE Essex), a 2 bed flat can be got for around £120-130k & a good size 3 bed end-terrace house (my parents old house) can be bought for about £170-180. But like-for-like properties, in similar areas (not best area, not worst areas) will cost AT LEAST double in London.

That's comparing against the South East, the difference would be far greater the rest of the country. So in London, you'd have to pay more stamp duty for like-for-like property!

House prices are an issue across the UK. My bio describes me as a potential ftb baulking at insane prices.

If you cant afford something you cant afford something. The reason property prices are insane is because for too long govt policy has been all about driving prices up.

Cutting stamp duty would only ever be considered if the govt thought they needed to help inflate or maintain insane prices. ie help people who cannot afford something to go ahead and buy it.

I sympathise if you live in London and I acknowledge that prices there are far worse than where I live.

But you have identified a valid problem and offered the wrong solution. Hence my curreny remark - which isnt really as flippant as it sounds.

Caveat_Mortgagor

ed666 wrote: »

In Hong Kong buses are covered in ads advertising how to buy property in London! Clearly the London market appeals to investors the world over....

Why not consider what the Australian government has done - block foreign buyers from the UK market?

Housing whether renting or buying - is essential. Generally speaking its not something that is optional (except perhaps for people choosing the time to move out of their parents home)

It would make economic sense to do something which protects our economy against increases in price of something that is essential and expensive.

Alas we live in a country which identified the huge increase in the cost of housing and so removed housing from the inflation figures aloowing them to pretend it wasnt happening.

Summary: Not going to happen. No political will.

mustrum_ridcully

Institute of Fiscal Studies says household incomes will fall by 7.4% over three years due to government austerity measures.
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-2068195/Institute-Fiscal-Studies-Household-income-fall-7-4-2013-austerity-measures-bite.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

That suggests to me that house prices need to come down 7.4% over 3 years just to maintain current levels of "affordability". The government really ought to stop wasting taxpayers money in propping-up house prices, because if those figures are true all they're doing is making them even less affordable in the long run.

geoffky

This year looks set to have the lowest number of housing transactions in 40 years.

A total of 840,000 transactions are predicted, almost 50% lower than in 2007, and the equivalent of the average home changing hands just once every 26 years.

House prices are also heading slowly but surely down, Hometrack reported this morning.London has prices remained unchanged in the last two months,The rest of the uk is all down.
But Hometrack warns that London is unlikely to escape the continued turmoil

JimmyTheWig

Caveat_Mortgagor wrote: »

I am not sure its clearcut that the ones buying the big house right away would pay less tax than someone who moves a further 3 times.

These figures probably wont stack up in the sarf, but ooop north, imagine the first two purchases are below the threshold to pay SD, then 2 purchases at 1% each time. Total tax paid might be £3k.

Compare that to someone buying at £300k and paying SD for just buying and staying - total paid £9k.

Fair enough on those figures, but it wouldn't take much of a price increase to push the second purchase into the 1% bracket and the third purchase into the 3% bracket. Which would hugely increase the tax paid by those people. Whereas the same increase for the one-time purchaser wouldn't make much difference at all.

To answer your first point - if the tax was bracketed then the £300k purchase would pay only £2750 tax. Since you had the worry about a rich person buying the house they wanted at the first time of asking rather than climbing a ladder and paying tax on various moves, I ask you would you prefer it if that person paid only a third as much tax?

If the tax was bracketed then the percentages could be increased.