Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Housing isn't a source of unearned wealth

162 replies

Itchthescratch · 14/05/2026 14:59

If you bought in the last 20 years.

Houses are now worth the same as they were worth 20 years ago in real terms. We need to get over the idea that every homeowner is sat on a money making asset and therefore is in a preferential position to pay loads of tax on all this non existent unearned wealth. Too many people don't understand how inflation works. £1 in 2006 is worth £1.65 today. House prices need to go up 65% just to be worth the same in real terms.

OP posts:
Backedoffhackedoff · 14/05/2026 18:56

measuretwicecutonce · 14/05/2026 18:54

Won’t necessarily go in care home fees as the next generation becomes more savvy. Sell your house, rent and enjoy the money, passing it on early. It just requires a bit of planning, obvs you don’t know when you’ll due but if you start early enough it should work out pretty much.

It’s not difficult for the government to stay ahead of these “smart ideas”

Chiachomp · 14/05/2026 18:56

I’m no CGT expert. I haven’t looked at if since I did my tax exams but if used to build in an indexation allowance which indexed the purchase price in real terms to ‘todays’ values. It’s been done away with though for some years, replaced by goodness knows what, but the mechanism to index gains has been used in the past.

And if you make a gain not a loss you can set that against any other capital gains you make in that year, you don’t get cash back.

measuretwicecutonce · 14/05/2026 18:54

Won’t necessarily go in care home fees as the next generation becomes more savvy. Sell your house, rent and enjoy the money, passing it on early. It just requires a bit of planning, obvs you don’t know when you’ll due but if you start early enough it should work out pretty much.

GETTINGLIKEMYMOTHER · 14/05/2026 18:47

Backedoffhackedoff · 14/05/2026 17:42

Eh? As in the house was sold in 1971 for say £30,000 and she bought it for 1% of that 45 years later for £300?

Sorry, my daft mistake - THEY paid 1% of what dd paid - so £3k - as dh found out after a good old nose on the Land Reg.

PennyThought · 14/05/2026 18:42

I had baked beans and some milk chocolate digestives for £1.00 on sale at Co-op. According to some, this makes me privileged.

DonTBeacunt · 14/05/2026 18:40

VikingLady · 14/05/2026 18:39

It’ll mostly go in care home fees anyway, which have to be paid before anyone inherits anything.

An average house value of £270k, of which 20k (I think) doesn’t go on care home fees. An average care home cost of £1250 per week. So two years for a couple, almost exactly. That’s it. All gone.

Looks like no one will inherit anything then. Except care home owners.

Namechangedasouting987 · 14/05/2026 18:39

DonTBeacunt · 14/05/2026 18:13

All depends on where you live though. £500k to 1mill in the south east is far less property than £500k - 1mill in other areas of the country

Still unearned by beneficiaries. Still choices. IHT still somewhat redistributes inherited wealth.

VikingLady · 14/05/2026 18:39

It’ll mostly go in care home fees anyway, which have to be paid before anyone inherits anything.

An average house value of £270k, of which 20k (I think) doesn’t go on care home fees. An average care home cost of £1250 per week. So two years for a couple, almost exactly. That’s it. All gone.

binliner · 14/05/2026 18:31

DonTBeacunt · 14/05/2026 18:13

All depends on where you live though. £500k to 1mill in the south east is far less property than £500k - 1mill in other areas of the country

if you are leaving a house worth £1m plus that isnt a typical 'hardworking family making sacrifices' IMO

My family did work hard but they just got lucky that the cheap bit of London they could afford went through huge gentrification.

All depends on where you live though. £500k to 1mill in the south east is far less property than £500k - 1mill in other areas of the country

But it’s still a lot to inherit. Prices need to stagnate & wages need to catch up. London hasn’t seen much growth in years because affordability does matter. Much of the property market was fuelled by equity gains & cheap borrowing.

A 500k mortgage incurs 100k of additional interest at 1.5%, at 5% it’s 380k!!!!

CallMeDaphne · 14/05/2026 18:26

Itchthescratch · 14/05/2026 15:46

CGT for landlords is an issue though. Why should they pay tax on selling something that hasn't actually appreciated in value?

I also think it has long term implications for IHT. Proponents always say that the majority of what is taxed is unearned wealth through profit but what if it isn't?

But the same rules would apply if they had invested their money in stocks and shares. Why should landlords be any different?

Ginmonkeyagain · 14/05/2026 18:26

@Itchthescratch IHT does not restrict who you can leave your estate to. Estates are liaible for IHT, not people, so all it means is tax will have to be paid before beneficiaries get their cut. Yes that may mean a house has to be sold, bit unless you leave it to one single person it will probably be sold any way.

Most people do not leave eatates large enough to pay much, if any, IHT.

binliner · 14/05/2026 18:23

DonTBeacunt · 14/05/2026 17:58

Which is where most of it ends up. Still you were lucky to get £200k to go towards for just painting.

Oh definitely! I was just making the point you can spend hardly anything & still make money. It was luck. The house i’m in now is a different story.

DonTBeacunt · 14/05/2026 18:13

Namechangedasouting987 · 14/05/2026 18:01

Strictly speaking there isn't. The billionaire's beneficiaries will just pay more tax.
(Except they don't pay all of it because they can afford to pay tax advisors to reduce it, but that is not what we are discussing here).
There is an allowance. Which is £500k if leaving a house to DC or GDC, and surviving spouses can use their partners allowance as well. So in house terms for a married couple leaving their main residence to DC or GDC there is a £1m allowance. 40% paid on the value over that.
if you are leaving a house worth £1m plus that isnt a typical 'hardworking family making sacrifices' IMO.
And it does not change the fact that beneficiaries didnt earn that money. The parents made choices.

All depends on where you live though. £500k to 1mill in the south east is far less property than £500k - 1mill in other areas of the country

Crwysmam · 14/05/2026 18:03

Not sure where the OP is getting her data from. I live in an average 3 bed detached that has always been valued around that of the average national price for Uk. In 2006 it was around £170000 it’s now valued around £301000 so about 45% increase. We actually bought it in 1995 for £73000. This was at the bottom of the market and I had lost £10000 on my previous house so net cost was more like £83000. Overall growth has been fairly steady with the value doubling every 10yrs. There was a bigger increase in the first 10yrs but since the market had suffered a big collapse in the early 90d and was pretty stagnant for a number of years it evened out the gain.

Property buying is always a long term investment unless you buy and sell rapidly within a period of rapid growth. If you are just buying for residential reasons then it’s definitely a long game.

Average annual inflation has run at 3.20% over the last 20 yrs but there has been a couple of spike years associated with the pandemic and currently the fuel crisis. Great if you have savings but not so good for cost of living. So most years inflation has been closer to 2%. The spikes in inflation have led to interest rates increasing which impact the housing market. Some may say that stagnation of the current market is needed to allow wages to catch up. Ok if you don’t need to move, but a problem for those that want to move up the property ladder.

Namechangedasouting987 · 14/05/2026 18:01

DonTBeacunt · 14/05/2026 17:49

Or parents who have sacrificed and worked hard to leave something to better their children.
There is a huge difference to being a billionaire leaving a countries GDP to some spoilt influencer wannabe and someone with a family run business, where sacrifices have been made.

Strictly speaking there isn't. The billionaire's beneficiaries will just pay more tax.
(Except they don't pay all of it because they can afford to pay tax advisors to reduce it, but that is not what we are discussing here).
There is an allowance. Which is £500k if leaving a house to DC or GDC, and surviving spouses can use their partners allowance as well. So in house terms for a married couple leaving their main residence to DC or GDC there is a £1m allowance. 40% paid on the value over that.
if you are leaving a house worth £1m plus that isnt a typical 'hardworking family making sacrifices' IMO.
And it does not change the fact that beneficiaries didnt earn that money. The parents made choices.

Sunglade · 14/05/2026 18:00

I also agree. There needs to be more distinction made between those investing in property for gains and those buying a family home. We had to pay a lot of stamp duty when we bought our home together because although I was a first time buyer my partner was not, and he sold his flat to move into the new house with me. They shouldn't charge people starting out in life ridiculous taxes just for wanting a family home.

DonTBeacunt · 14/05/2026 17:58

binliner · 14/05/2026 17:51

Well some of it went on stamp duty for the next move.

Which is where most of it ends up. Still you were lucky to get £200k to go towards for just painting.

Amberlynnswashcloth · 14/05/2026 17:56

But doesn't that £87k allow them to buy a larger house which frees up an affordable house for you!

binliner · 14/05/2026 17:51

Well some of it went on stamp duty for the next move.

DonTBeacunt · 14/05/2026 17:50

binliner · 14/05/2026 17:46

I made 200k on my flat in 2 years, all I did was paint it once.

Aren’t you the lucky one! Did you pay any tax on that unearned wealth increase 😜

DonTBeacunt · 14/05/2026 17:49

Namechangedasouting987 · 14/05/2026 17:30

No one pays CGT on their main residence so a non issue.
The money has not be earned by beneficiaries of estates. Nor have they paid tax on the income used to buy the house. Therefore an inheritance is unearned income.
IHT redistributes to some extent the good fortune of having comparatively wealthy parents/ family. Which is pure luck.

Or parents who have sacrificed and worked hard to leave something to better their children.
There is a huge difference to being a billionaire leaving a countries GDP to some spoilt influencer wannabe and someone with a family run business, where sacrifices have been made.

binliner · 14/05/2026 17:46

DonTBeacunt · 14/05/2026 17:45

But what investment did they make into the property? When a kitchen can cost £15-20k and a bathroom £10k, carpets £2-3k, any building work done in that time? Suddenly £87.5kprofit becomes £45-50k profit over 20 years

Edited

I made 200k on my flat in 2 years, all I did was paint it once.

CoverLikelyZebra · 14/05/2026 17:46

Itchthescratch · 14/05/2026 17:14

They haven't earned £100k though in real terms as they have simply owned a depreciating asset. They have lost money. They can buy less with the £500k now than they could but with the £400k 5 years ago.

The person earning £20k a year will have actually made money. This is what I mean about people not understanding how inflation works.

Yes they have : CGT is only payable when the asset is actually sold and they have actual cash money in their posession which is £100,000 more than they would have if they had left the original £400,000 under a mattress for 5 years and that additional cash money is worth exactly the same as the £100,000 earned by the owning wage-earner

Overwhelmedandtired · 14/05/2026 17:46

Property definitely hasn't been as good an asset in the last 10-20 years as it was previously. Yes, in some places it has worked well, but it isn't the booming business it used to be, partly due to taxation (which is much more than CGT for second home owners, higher stamp duty, council tax, income tax on any rent). And thresholds have been reduced in the last few years making higher proportions taxable, with rates also increasing. There is a legacy belief that you can make a lot of money from property. There is definitely potential, but it isn't as lucrative as the 80's-00's. But honestly, instead of complaining about it, diversify your investment. The stock markets have performed comparatively much better, and you can make larger portions tax free by using ISA's.

However, as a multiple home owner (which you would be for CGT to be a concern), you are significantly more wealthy than the majority of the country, with a large portion of younger generations struggling to buy just one, and who are frustrated that they can't afford to buy with earnings much lower proportionally to property values. Better tax planning as the changes were introduced over the last few years could have helped reduce any future tax bills you are now potentially liable for. You have clearly chosen not to sell a second/third etc property, but are complaining about the way it is now taxed?

DonTBeacunt · 14/05/2026 17:45

Ophy83 · 14/05/2026 15:56

We just bought a house for £500k, our sellers bought it 20 years ago for £250k. On your figures, 1.65 inflation would give £412.5k so they have made £87.5k.

Edited

But what investment did they make into the property? When a kitchen can cost £15-20k and a bathroom £10k, carpets £2-3k, any building work done in that time? Suddenly £87.5kprofit becomes £45-50k profit over 20 years