30% fall in property if no deal brexit

westernpromise

AG47 wrote: »

There have been many examples of unfinished property developments just abandoned around the world because the property market crashed.

Squatting on these developments becomes rife.

This can’t happen in the good old UK, right???

As squatting has been a criminal offence since 2012, no, almost certainly not. Squatters get jailed now. It was fun all the way for them when the only offences were civil and the owner had no recourse, but it's now up there with theft in terms of the penalties.

Once again the worst-informed poster on the site opens his gob and sticks his own boot down his throat,

westernpromise

trickydicky802 wrote: »

Mind you, would it be such a bad thing anyway? Easier for first time buyers, lower fees, lower SDLP, easier to move up, etc.

Whatever circumstances triggered a 30% crash would also wipe out a lot of the entry level jobs that FTBs are in, meaning that they will unemployed in perfect time not to benefit. The beneficiaries will be whoever owned property before.

I'd also be cautious about assuming that a decline in property prices would result in a pleasant decline in buyers' SDLT costs. Over the least 20 years, SDLT has gone nowhere but up. It was £2,500 in 1999 on the flat I still own; today it would be nearly £40,000. This is on the same property. Somehow, whoever could afford £2,500 in 1999 can magically afford £40,000 now.

The inference is that SDLT only ever goes up, massively beyond inflation and massively beyond even property inflation (I reckon the flat's worth about 4x more but the SDLT is ~14x more). In the event of a property price decline, the SDLT would just go up to compensate the state, and more - so to buy my flat, whatever its then value, will probably be £50,000 for the next buyer and £100,000 for the one after that.

Malthusian

westernpromise wrote: »

As squatting has been a criminal offence since 2012, no, almost certainly not. Squatters get jailed now. It was fun all the way for them when the only offences were civil and the owner had no recourse, but it's now up there with theft in terms of the penalties.

To be fair to AG, if the UK ever does fall into economic crisis, I don't think it will be a police priority to arrest people who are living for free at a rich person's expense (rich enough they can afford to leave a house empty) so they can live for free at the taxpayer's expense instead.

Anti-squatting laws are only effective against pot-smoking middle class trustafarians (the kind who get the place wired for electricity and interviewed in the Grauniad). Genuinely homeless people have nothing to lose.

Naturally AG's vision of abandoned building projects being taken over by penniless squatters leading to a 30% house price crash won't happen, because people will cut everything to the bone before they stop paying their rent.

Land anywhere anyone wants to live is at a premium. If a developer goes to the wall, the skeleton of its buildings won't just sit there. Someone will take it over, eject any squatters, and either complete the project or bulldoze it and start again. If nobody can be bothered to do that, nobody will want to squat there either.

Malthusian

westernpromise wrote: »

The inference is that SDLT only ever goes up, massively beyond inflation and massively beyond even property inflation (I reckon the flat's worth about 4x more but the SDLT is ~14x more). In the event of a property price decline, the SDLT would just go up to compensate the state, and more - so to buy my flat, whatever its then value, will probably be £50,000 for the next buyer and £100,000 for the one after that.

Indeed. In a recession and 30% house price crash, nobody can oppose raising taxes on those rich enough that they can still buy a house. The vox populi will demand taxes for the rich - and people who aren't rich at the bottom of the market will find they are when the economy recovers. Tax thresholds that only apply to the rich in a recession will apply to the squeezed middle ten years later.

In an economic crisis the political priority is putting bread on the table, not 3-bedroom semis in the hands of incels.

phillw

Malthusian wrote: »

In a recession and 30% house price crash, nobody can oppose raising taxes on those rich enough that they can still buy a house.

I think our current government would.

Malthusian

phillw wrote: »

I think our current government would.

The same Government that put the top rate of Stamp Duty up to 15%, compared to 4% under Labour? Sure, they'll probably just directly confiscate the houses of anyone earning less than £100,000 and give them to George Soros because they hate non-rich people so much.

Tory Governments which find themselves managing a recession need to find the money to keep paying their salaries the same as any other.

If revenue from SDLT goes down then SDLT will be increased to maintain the books, whether it's increased by red or blue politicians is entirely unimportant.

Thrugelmir

phillw wrote: »

I think our current government would.

Comrade Corbyn is going to have to tax whatever the economic situation to deliver his Marxist agenda.

phillw

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Comrade Corbyn is going to have to tax whatever the economic situation to deliver his Marxist agenda.

When you say Marxist agenda, do you mean the end of "withdrawing benefits from disabled people and seeing how many people die as a result" as a way of reducing the cost of those benefits?

Malthusian wrote: »

The same Government that put the top rate of Stamp Duty up to 15%

You're confused, bless you. Those are parties. The current government has only existed since 24th July 2019.

Conservative Party Chairman James Cleverly said setting out a legislative programme via a Queen's Speech was what "all new governments do".

Although Theresa May didn't prorogue when she took over in 2016. So what the party chairman said is actually a lie.

Thrugelmir

phillw wrote: »

When you say Marxist agenda, do you mean the end of "withdrawing benefits from disabled people and seeing how many people die as a result" as a way of reducing the cost of those benefits?

You are a Corbynist them? Momentum member?

phillw

Thrugelmir wrote: »

You are a Corbynist them? Momentum member?

No, why? Life long conservative voter until the last election, the loonies in charge now are not conservative.

I've been more and more dissatisfied since 2008, but we need something different & Labour are offering something different.