To think an annual property tax is incredibly unfair?

I don’t have wealth. I have a massive mortgage because I live in London where housing costs more.

I might be happy to pay for the plot my semi sits on, if I paid no income tax, no NIC, no capital gains, no IHT, no road charges, no stamp duty, no VAT etc.

A land tax on top of everything else is not what classical economists were advocating.

Aside from flats, the largest portion of the value of most family homes is in the plot if land. To this extent, the difference is not significant.

What Andy Burnham is proposing is not a proper Georgist land value tax.

The classic LVT idea is to have it, only it, and nothing else. Hardly the latest proposal.

Those who think that LVT is a nasty left wing idea may be interested to know that past advocates include

Adam Smith, the Father of Economics
(in The Wealth of Nations)

Winston Churchill

Margaret Thatcher’s Economics guru, the American supply side economist Milton Friedman

This information is in the OP of a thread in the News forum started by @MikeRafone on 19/06 and was verified by me.

Fascinating, isn’t it?

Yes of course

I was challenging the notion that rent was no cheaper than private and it’s not subsidised but I suppose tenants are not paying market rent

Well I think most people are happy to pay their share. But it is increasingly the case that we have to pay a large number of others’ share too.

We who are happy to pay our share evidence sources and expect others to do the same.

To note about your point: Why should people in Westminster pay more Council Tax when they don't need to pay more to afford their local services? They will already pay a disproportionate amount of national taxes so it's not like they aren't paying their share in other ways.

No they don't necessarily. The very wealthy pay very little in tax, as they are able to get around personal taxation with business structures. Aside from stamp duty and council tax (which they are massively underpaying in many wealthy areas), most people in that demographic will pay very little. Many will also be overseas resident, with second or third properties in the UK, so don't pay other UK taxes. Paying a tax based on the value of assets held in the UK is one of very few ways to get any tax from them.

Not saying this is the right solution nationwide, but this option is one of the ways that the very wealthy can be taxed appropriately for the wealth they have and assets they own. And may also put some off buying second homes.

Yeh those demands are frequent.

Isn’t it simply typical of the more liberal (with other people’s money) posters that their responses are invariably “link” or picking on one tiny detail of a post and ignoring the substance of it. Such a tactic.

Most of the housing element of universal credit goes to private landlords. Construction cost is paid recouped via rents.

Yep

Social housing is partially funded by taxpayers, primarily through government grants for construction and ongoing welfare benefits like Universal Credit.

The rules are you provide your own evidence. No link, no credibility.

If you can find Hansard you can find the government's own website.

Link?

In practice much social housing, certainly near me, is not well maintained. If you are landed with undesirable neighbours, you have no recourse: the bar for evicting them is very high. SH is far from a panacea.

LVT will do away with stamp duty, bring undeveloped land - such as the land builders are sitting on - into taxation - and rationalise taxes. We need to see the details, but as long as it is phased in carefully and the vulnerable are protected, I see it as very moral.

The government's own website itself sets out numerous taxpayer-funded programmes that support social housing. These include funding for new council and social housing, grants to improve the existing homes, and funding for regeneration,etc

As I've already said, whether you call these "subsidies"or "taxpayer-funded" support is largely a matter of semantics. The reality is that taxpayers' money is used to build, improve and maintain social housing. So it just not true to claim that council or social housing receives no taxpayer support.

What new plan?

@BIossomtoes - but it is cheaper than private sector renting and, more importantly, secure. If you lose your job/don’t want a job then you’re not fretting about paying your mortgage, you can rest easy that it’s your home and no one can take it away. And someone fixes your toilet, and paints the outside, and provides fixtures and fittings (see interiors of new builds in Shropshire in the news).

Owners pay a mortgage, they pay for repairs, they buy a kitchen or bathroom, general upkeep. And then - oh no - you are hoarding wealth so let’s tax that. I’m happy to pay for local services but this new plan is immoral.

My quote was from Hansard. Somewhat more reliable than Chat GPT. The biggest recipients of housing benefit are private landlords whose profits are subsidised by the taxpayer.

From Chat GPT, because I have to get to work.

The Housing Revenue Account is largely self-financing for day-to-day management, but that does not mean government funding is absent. The government provides substantial financial support for both council housing and social housing through capital grants, low-interest loans, regeneration funding and housing benefit. Whether you choose to call these subsidies, public investment or financial support is largely semantic; they reduce the cost of providing social housing and are funded by taxpayers. The government's own publications describe grant funding for the development of social and affordable

It’s not subsidised by taxpayers as evidenced above. Social/council housing washes its own face.

Part of it is subsidised by taxpayers so there does not need to be profit.

Security is the key need which is simply not available on the private market, even with the change in the law. If you are low enough income that HB kicks in then the slightly lower costs in most social housing will not be the key factor.

Its the biggest single difference between UK rental markets and countries where renting long term is the norm for much of the population. This also contributes to more stable housing markets overall.

I have never understood the refusal of successive governments to implement the type of long/mid/short term rental contract framework and the improved stability which follows.