New higher stamp duty for BTL/second homes

ukcarper

chucknorris wrote: »

£1.5m doesn't buy that much in London or the nicer parts of the S.E., a nice property, yes, but you are living in cloud cuckoo land if you think it would actually buy a mansion :rotfl:

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-53945942.html

Not bad for one of the more expensive parts of SE

adr0ck

Generali wrote: »

I'm not crying either. I don't live in the UK and my chances of buying a house there are vanishingly small.

Gen I thought you lived in sydney

if thats the case you can defo afford a house in the UK

(might not be in London though)

adr0ck

chucknorris wrote: »

Just because I have money it doesn't mean that I live in another world, beyond being able to afford certain things.

you do though (you might like to think that you don't but the reality is you do) - not in the sense that its a different world but i'm sure you get my drift

guys the only point i was trying to make is that properties over £1,500,000 are basically mansions to the majority of the UK population - lets say circa 95% of the population

chucknorris

ukcarper wrote: »

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-53945942.html

Not bad for one of the more expensive parts of SE

It isn't bad at all, too big for us though (and more than we would want to spend), and I wouldn't really class it as a mansion (is there a definition of what a mansion is?).

ukcarper

chucknorris wrote: »

It isn't bad at all, too big for us though (and more than we would want to spend), and I wouldn't really class it as a mansion (is there a definition of what a mansion is?).

It's not Polesden Lacey, but Esher is a very expensive part of country. I'm sure the term mansion tax was just a term for large expensive properties.

chucknorris

adr0ck wrote: »

you do though (you might like to think that you don't but the reality is you do) - not in the sense that its a different world but i'm sure you get my drift

guys the only point i was trying to make is that properties over £1,500,000 are basically mansions to the majority of the UK population - lets say circa 95% of the population

I do (get your drift), but I've not always been wealthy (far from it), so I know the difference. But we still very much think about value, for example I don't think that I would ever fly business class (a few of my friends have). I've never spent more than £11k on a car, although that is going to change soon, as we have realised that we need to revise our spending habits (it isn't easy to switch from investing for your future to spending it before you die). In fact I am still in transition on that one, maybe it is being in denial about dying (not quite yet, I hasten to add).

chucknorris

ukcarper wrote: »

It's not Polesden Lacey, but Esher is a very expensive part of country. I'm sure the term mansion tax was just a term for large expensive properties.

The labour party where going to define it entirely by value, which probably means that some studio flats in Kinghtsbridge would be 'mansions' (I do realise that although that sounds daft, it makes sense from their point of view).

Wig

£1,750,000 = extra £7,500 ??

at 15% that would be £262,000

I think that someone who can afford to buy a second home over £1,500,000 can afford to pay the 15%

CLAPTON

Wig wrote: »

£1,750,000 = extra £7,500 ??

at 15% that would be £262,000

I think that someone who can afford to buy a second home over £1,500,000 can afford to pay the 15%

economic works at the margin

mystic_trev

chucknorris wrote: »

Where did you hear that rumour about CGT Trev?

Hi Chuck, I can't find it now. It was in an article about the IR wanting to clamp down on people not paying CGT on sale of second homes. Basically the Revenue want to collect the amount due at the point of sale at a flat rate.