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!
The Real Reason House Prices Are Rising - Why Help To Buy Is A Good Idea
Comments
-
grizzly1911 wrote: »Any tax levied on the development approved land would get rolled up into the eventual cost of the built property one way or another. A developer would simply pass it on.
The only benefit it would have is to hopefully stop people sitting on land banks.
Indeed all costs incurred by businesses are charged on to the customer.
And yes, the purpose of such a tax is to encourgage the more effective and efficient use of land.
So a farmer sitting on land with planning permission would pay the tax just as a developer would or indeed the eventual home owner.0 -
Indeed all costs incurred by businesses are charged on to the customer.
And yes, the purpose of such a tax is to encourgage the more effective and efficient use of land.
So a farmer sitting on land with planning permission would pay the tax just as a developer would or indeed the eventual home owner.
The farmer would not pay the tax though. It would simply increase the cost of land in the price of a development pushing the individual house prices up.
Like VAT it will be the consumer pays.
I guess one thing it would stop is developers , who round us have planning applications in for 2000+ properties (current population 12000), no real employment, to justify need, within 20 miles, semi rural and 400 homes currently available for sale. They would just seek planning for what they could sell within any development time window before a tax kicked in."If you act like an illiterate man, your learning will never stop... Being uneducated, you have no fear of the future.".....
"big business is parasitic, like a mosquito, whereas I prefer the lighter touch, like that of a butterfly. "A butterfly can suck honey from the flower without damaging it," "Arunachalam Muruganantham0 -
grizzly1911 wrote: »The farmer would not pay the tax though. It would simply increase the cost of land in the price of a development pushing the individual house prices up.
Like VAT it will be the consumer pays.
I guess one thing it would stop is developers , who round us have planning applications in for 2000+ properties (current population 12000), no real employment, to justify need, within 20 miles, semi rural and 400 homes currently available for sale. They would just seek planning for what they could sell within any development time window before a tax kicked in.
Just to say the land tax is an annual recurring tax like council tax and not a tax on sales like VAT.
If a farmer decided to continue farming on land zoned for development for say 10 years then he does pay the land tax.0 -
the_flying_pig wrote: »the graphic at the bottom of the article is a really nice idea, & very well presented, but the numbers in it are insanely bad, total claptrap. if i was this girl's schoolteacher i'd be giving her a 'see me'.
i think that the error the journo has made is, and i appreciate that this sounds stupid but i'm almost sure that it's right, is to:
(1) quote house prices in 'money of the day' terms, e.g. £2k does sound plausible for a 1950s house; but
(2) inflate wages to account for inflation, e.g. in the 1950s £500 a year would have been a pretty good wage, but here it's listed as £9k, i.e. complete fantasy.
this obviously means that the affordability calculations are all garbage.
bit of a hoo-ha on twitter about this this AM, a few people including MSW having digs at poor Lana.
https://twitter.com/LanaC
you heard it here first*, chaps.
* - provided that you didn't first read any of the other blog comments making similar points up to a week ago.FACT.0 -
Graham_Devon wrote: »I admire how no matter what happens, prices and rents simply cannot fall....supply and demand is out of the window.
Not at all Graham.
Here's the groundhog moment yet again.
If you want prices AND rents to sustainably fall, you need to dramatically increase the supply of property.
this will affect the Supply to outweigh the DemandGraham_Devon wrote: »But when it comes to suggesting why prices may rise, it's all "ooooo, supply and demand".
Why is that?
Is it another groundhog moment where low and behold there are insufficient property numbers being built?:wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0 -
Not one single person of note has suggested help to buy is a good idea.
Sticky plaster on gaping wound comes to mind...0 -
I don't understand this. House prices by definiton are the price at which houses are bought and sold. If they are not 'affordable' then by definition buyers can not buy them so the transactions can not hppen...but they are happening.
Someone please explain.
Volumes have been falling from (IIRC) 2004. Perhaps sales volumes are a reasonable proxy for affordability.0 -
Just to say the land tax is an annual recurring tax like council tax and not a tax on sales like VAT.
If a farmer decided to continue farming on land zoned for development for say 10 years then he does pay the land tax.
So it is really a backhanded form of compulsory purchase, without actually purchasing it and then penalising the landowner for actually owner land.
You wouldn't voluntarily put your land forward and then pay a tax on it. Bit like Turkeys and Christmas."If you act like an illiterate man, your learning will never stop... Being uneducated, you have no fear of the future.".....
"big business is parasitic, like a mosquito, whereas I prefer the lighter touch, like that of a butterfly. "A butterfly can suck honey from the flower without damaging it," "Arunachalam Muruganantham0 -
Volumes have been falling from (IIRC) 2004. Perhaps sales volumes are a reasonable proxy for affordability.
I never quite understood the combination of riding prices and falling sales volumes in 2005-2007. It's not as if it stopped getting easier to borrow. I half wondered if maybe the country went so pwoperdee crazy that the traditional supply curve (people are more willing to sell at higher prices) ceased to apply, with even people who wanted to move, or downsize, or whatever still determined to hold onto their old place as well so that they could benefit when it inevitably SOARED in value. Hence upward pressure on prices but not sales.FACT.0 -
grizzly1911 wrote: »So it is really a backhanded form of compulsory purchase, without actually purchasing it and then penalising the landowner for actually owner land.
You wouldn't voluntarily put your land forward and then pay a tax on it. Bit like Turkeys and Christmas.
I suppose you could describe council tax the same way.
Land zoned for development will in general be decided by the local government taking into a/c local develeopment requirement without the land owner applying.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards