Would you be offended if someone offered under asking price?

Tancred

undetterred wrote: »

The biggest problem is delusional buyers,offering on houses that they realistically cant afford.

Damn right! :T

sunshinetours

Tancred wrote: »

I don't think a flat 2% rate would 'kill' anything. The bottom line is: if you if can't afford it, don't buy it.

Ok so many can't afford the extra cash (its a tax so can't be borrowed in most cases) so won't buy it. Until market forces catch up on price correction market will stagnate.
Either way its "killed it"

As someone selling a property around the £250k mark of course its in your interest to tax all properties equally

Fiscal drag has caused this situation as you correctly say, something Gordon Brown was a master at

Personally I would scrap SDLT completely and replace it within other taxes

ukcarper

sunshinetours wrote: »

Ok so many can't afford the extra cash (its a tax so can't be borrowed in most cases) so won't buy it. Until market forces catch up on price correction market will stagnate.
Either way its "killed it"

As someone selling a property around the £250k mark of course its in your interest to tax all properties equally

Fiscal drag has caused this situation as MartinSurrey correctly says, something Gordon Brown was a master at

Personally I would scrap SDLT completely and replace it within other taxes

I don't see increasing stamp duty to 3% at £250k as bad, what is wrong is then applying that to the whole value not just the part in excess of £250k.

Tancred

ukcarper wrote: »

I don't see increasing stamp duty to 3% at £250k as bad, what is wrong is then applying that to the whole value not just the part in excess of £250k.

True - a graduated tax would make much more sense, but the problem is that it would reduce the amount of revenue taken by HMRC, so the rates would have to be higher, eg. 2% and 4%. And the idea of extra tax on first time buyers is political poison.
Whichever way you look at it, the 3% SDLT is yet another hammer on the hard pressed middle class. The rich can well afford the higher rates, but the 3% one affects ordinary people in professional/managerial jobs. So much for helping the 'strivers'! :mad:

DRP

Tancred wrote: »

Nonsense. The current system is utterly idiotic because you pay 3% on £250,001 and 1% on £250,000 - what's the logic of this? The jump from 1% to 3% is huge, and your claim that 'wealthier' buyers can afford to pay the 3% is very wrong - many people who buy at the £300k end are not at all wealthy but ordinary people who do normal 9 to 5 jobs and have big mortgages. I would prefer a flat rate 2% stamp duty on all properties under £500k. The current jump between 1% and 3% only distorts the market.

no it isn't nonsense.

I didn't claim anything - I am saying the logic (from the viewpoint of the govt) is pretty sound.

The effect on the <250 market of changing stamp duty would be profound and probably disastrous .

And this is coming from someone who is looking to sell a <250k house in order to buy a 300k one :mad:

ReadingTim

I'm in 2 minds about the original question:

If (as a seller) I'd done my homework on recently sold prices of comparable properties in the same/similar area and priced at the market rate, I'd be quite annoyed / offended that the buyer hadn't done the same and realised I'd priced to sell in the first place. Or was dealing with one of those 'what sort of discount are you going to give me?' idiots...

But if I'd done all of that, then inflated the price by 10-15% knowing it would be reduced down to the price I originally wanted; I'd treat it as all part of the game. And I could always get lucky if there was a bidding war, or someone wanted to offer the full asking price...

DRP

ReadingTim wrote: »

I'm in 2 minds about the original question:

If (as a seller) I'd done my homework on recently sold prices of comparable properties in the same/similar area and priced at the market rate, I'd be quite annoyed / offended that the buyer hadn't done the same and realised I'd priced to sell in the first place. Or was dealing with one of those 'what sort of discount are you going to give me?' idiots...

But if I'd done all of that, then inflated the price by 10-15% knowing it would be reduced down to the price I originally wanted; I'd treat it as all part of the game. And I could always get lucky if there was a bidding war, or someone wanted to offer the full asking price...

exactly right^^

i think many people who have posted are assuming the asking price is inflated and the local market is depressed.

Notwithstanding the proximity of the asking price to stamp threshold, there's no reason why asking price couldn't be met (or thereabouts).

Tancred

DRP wrote: »

no it isn't nonsense.

I didn't claim anything - I am saying the logic (from the viewpoint of the govt) is pretty sound.

The effect on the <250 market of changing stamp duty would be profound and probably disastrous .

And this is coming from someone who is looking to sell a <250k house in order to buy a 300k one :mad:

I don't agree. There would be no disastrous effect if SDLT was raised to 2% for all the <500k market - you adapt and you live with it. It would at least offer a level playing field, which is not what we have now.

Tancred

ReadingTim wrote: »

I'm in 2 minds about the original question:

If (as a seller) I'd done my homework on recently sold prices of comparable properties in the same/similar area and priced at the market rate, I'd be quite annoyed / offended that the buyer hadn't done the same and realised I'd priced to sell in the first place. Or was dealing with one of those 'what sort of discount are you going to give me?' idiots...

But if I'd done all of that, then inflated the price by 10-15% knowing it would be reduced down to the price I originally wanted; I'd treat it as all part of the game. And I could always get lucky if there was a bidding war, or someone wanted to offer the full asking price...

My feeling is that buyers have researched the local market in a haphazard and careless way - sweeping all similar properties into the 'no more than £250k' bracket, without looking at individual houses and their features, room sizes, gardens, etc. Also ignoring the fact that different streets have different prices, even if parallel to each other. Each street is different in a town centre location.

I don't believe in marketing a property at a ridiculous price simply because it deters viewers. I prefer to maket at a slightly high price in order to invite offers at £5-7k below, not £20k below!

Tancred

DRP wrote: »

exactly right^^

i think many people who have posted are assuming the asking price is inflated and the local market is depressed.

Notwithstanding the proximity of the asking price to stamp threshold, there's no reason why asking price couldn't be met (or thereabouts).

I have 9 viewers in the first week of marketing - doesn't seem to be a depressed market to me.