To think an annual property tax is incredibly unfair?

So anyone in social housing would pay nothing? So no council tax and no property tax either? But the schmuck with a mortgage has to pay, and anything they can’t afford is rolled up and collected when they sell/die (probably with interest) ?

A lot of houses will be falling in value if they have a large property tax attached. Then the new owners will surely demand a reduced property tax as the house’s value has gone down - or will it be once decided, the band remains come what may?

LAND value

or

HOUSE value, though??

His proposal wi mean annual house values are used to determine how much you pay so if like we had just after a cocid a price surge you annual bill will end up more than the year before.

Since house prices rarely go down significantly we can all look forward to increasing lvt bills not to mention it will start off at 0.48% and they will fond ways to increase that % to. Seems like better off selling up and renting to avoid paying lvt!

Deferring is only if your in hardship snd majority of working people won't fall under that.

And of course for single person no discount.

Absolute fucked if your in London on a single income having to find an extra £100 a month.

That's just messed up, it really is. Lets hope this doesn't come to fruition.

Only the inefficient asset hoarders pay...😉

It says in the article that they wouldn't.

capped at what you have to pay but you still owe the balance - a deferred liability. Devil is in the detail.

Isn't that kind of them - a charge based on an unrealised value, on an asset you already own.

They don't care about fairness. The aim is to get people with real wealth into larger homes so they can raise more tax from them. It's not unlike a landlord evicting tenants they know can't afford a rent increase, then replacing them with tenants who can to extract even more money without the government having to do a thing.

All the people feeling pleased about the reduction won't be smiling when their own increases kick in, and they will. Student loans started out much lower than they are today. Instead of stamp duty, you now have an annual charge that can keep increasing for the rest of your life. Let's see how that works out when people are living on a pension.

Everyone has set up their finances based on the existing tax structure. A change like this, will create disruption as people reconsider their finances and what they can afford.

A lot of households in the Southeast could be facing 10% of their after tax income going to property tax. Many won’t find this sustainable and will sell. House prices likely to drop. Interesting to know how houses will be valued for this tax. At their sale price? What people have put on their mortgage applications? Surveyor estimate? Can it change if the market dips?

I thought it was going to be capped for the current owners and then the full amount kicks in for new purchasers as and when the house is sold. Could be wrong on that though. Where did you read otherwise?

I'm an American. Local governments and schools are funded primarily by property taxes, and it's not widely seen as unfair.

Commercial properties are taxed in addition to residential properties. When you buy a house, you have to budget for it alongside your mortgage payments and other housing costs. They're not a surprise to anyone. And voters can accept or reject the local and school budgets, which determine total tax collections.

And you're free to move to an area with lower property taxes. I've done that myself.

If the majority will be better off e.g. paying less than they do now how are they funding adult social care which is a big chunk of most councils costs. The numbers don't seem to add up. If they had announced it alongside adult social care reform it might make more sense.

The current system is fairer than the fairer share property tax. The issue is bringing salaries up not dragging people down.

You still owe the difference it is just rolled up into a debt , presumably with interest which is paid at the when you sell.

Well if you paid your stamp duty already and many years ago with no intent on moving how are you better off? In my case lvt will mean I pay even more than I do currently with council tax.

You're only better off if you want to move. Those in big houses will not be better off at all. LVT of .48% on a house worth £1.5m gives a charge of £7,200. Council tax on same property is likely to be in the region of £4000. So not better off at all, UNLESS you want to move.

There is a reason they're capping it at £1200.

It’s not so crowded and nicer and the air is cleaner?

.

Council Tax and Stamp Duty will not be payable anymore, only the LVT. According to the article in the Standard above.

So you'll be better off by a mile!

By the same token, how is it fair that I, in an economically shit part of Wales with a cheaper house than you, pay almost 2 grand more in council tax than you per year? The current system isn’t fair, and the new system would also shaft some people.

My bit of East Anglia isn't rural, it's a small market town. And it's shit. And unfortunately, the councillors who were actually starting to make a difference through hard work and engagement with the people got voted out and replaced with Reformaloons who only care about what's in it for them.

My Welsh band F house (worth £350k) costs me £3.5k in council tax currently. It would be less than half that at 0.48%. I wonder if some if the people worried about this are calculating it incorrectly? It’s your house price multiplied by 0.0048.

It’s just a reframing of Council Tax. It’ll all be relative to your neighbours.

Same here. I pay more council tax for my Band D than someone in the borough of Westminster. It's ridiculous. And our services really aren't that great. Also in East Anglia. The system urgently needs reform.

At 0.48% I would pay slightly more because of what my house is worth, but not much. But we don't know what the actual rate will end up being, or how this is going to be structured so it's all speculation.