To think an annual property tax is incredibly unfair?

Yes. I’m not even sure where I stand on this tax proposal, but OP’s posts are making me support it - simply as a
means of delivering the sharp dose of reality she desperately needs.

Thing we were starting with a system that is arguably unfair an creates unfair incentives. Changing it will create winners and losers but I believe something bolder would be better.

problems as I see it:

1. stamp duty creates some really odd perverse incentives. I’ve never liked the fact that first time buyers have to factor it in as well as a massive deposit and mortgage. If it exists it really should be on the house being sold and not bought.

2. council tax can be ridiculously uneven across the county. I had friends in London paying an absolute pittance including people sat on rather a lot of property value.

but

1. I agree with previous posters making the point about equity versus house value. Older people (generally) will be sat on more equity and therefore actual wealth than youngsters.

2. it will probably be Londoners and those in the south who pay more. That is fine for the very top but there will be a lot of people with mega mortgages who would struggle and then feel pretty pissed off.

I’ve run the numbers and mine would potentially go up significantly if it was a 0.48% levy. That money would have to come from discretionary spending elsewhere which would in turn reduce money into the economy.

So, I think I could get behind the idea but maybe at a lower threshold.

House prices. It’s utter nonsense to say they haven’t increased in decades. The “value” of ours has quadrupled since we bought it in 1999.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/289129/uk-housing-market-nationwide-house-prices/?srsltid=AfmBOoo-iFNKrRVSqoPPO6NiTzsHpqcclAvsVxlDMC9kBUZmIW2_MQmB

https://www.cladco.co.uk/blog/post/history-of-uk-house-prices?srsltid=AfmBOoqF8Au_HEBOsJcD4I_4ZshgyQAefRzxtFO7oZhk5I03LNDR4px5

Because they’ll get a bigger government grant. Council tax doesn’t cover council services just now does it?

Tax income not assets.
Get more people earning money.

WTF. This is so patently untrue it’s absolutely crazy

We missed out on a few financial opportunities by a matter of months - e.g. no stamp duty for FTB.

But by virtue of missing that window, we got a mortgage rate and period that meant we renewed our mortgage before Trussageddon happened. Probably saved us more in the long run.

I would be pissed if this was introduced just after our next move though - I'd hope it was given a grace period after introduction for those who have just paid SD.

Andy Burnham will be coming up with lots of ideas to fleece us. So we better get used to it.

This is a crazy idea, is it replace council tax bandings? surely the amount of tax raised is to cover costs in that locality? How would councils offer services in areas of low cost homes.

Not read the proposed policy in full but will a valuation be required each year? Who and how will this be calculated?
What if house prices fall?
I understand renters are excluded - renters often have more disposable income so why are they excluded? Are those in social housing going to be wholly excluded from paying? They would still be using the services that this tax would generate so how is that fair?
Its everyone’s responsibility to contribute to society.

Maybe the alternative idea could be to increase costings etc in “the north” in line with “the south” and have slightly higher wages etc so that all areas of the country are experiencing the same quality of life.

All current proposed policies still seem to be insistent on taking from “the south” rather than empowering all.

Stamp duty as a tax may or may not be unfair but what it visibly does do is stop people downsizing because after stamp duty it isn’t worth it.

getting rid of stamp duty and replacing it by frankly almost anything else will help the economy.

They'll be a lot of people around the 75% mark who neither gain or lose significantly.

The big losers will surely be those in the extremely valuable houses such as £10 million houses who at the moment may pay the same as much lower value but under a 0.48% scheme will pay significantly more. Unless of course they introduce some kind of cap.

Under CT if a £1 million house and a £10 million house were in the same band they would be paying the same council tax.

Under this new system the £10 million house pays 10x more.

My point is that hammering an old dear’s estate for accrued tax in 15 years time when she finally dies, is not going to pay for schools and Defence now, or are you assuming the purpose should be to punish “the rich”/those with houses?

Rolls eyes.

Can you not understand the concept of an illustrative example?

And do you not understand that many isa dont allow you to take money out and put it back in - which is what happens with a volatile life.

Exactly. Mn is quite good at backing that line.

It doesn't appear to take account of:
a) how much capital gain there has been (you may own a house worth £1m, but what if you paid £1m for it? You have made zero, why should you be taxed?; or
b) how much stamp duty you already paid on the property. So if you bought it last year you would have paid £43,750 (out of already taxed income) before you even moved in. Why should you pay more tax when you haven't yet broken even?!
I'm not adverse to an ongoing property tax but it must offset the stamp duty people have already paid, which was the 'privilege of owning a valuable house tax' up until that point.

The rest of the country that works and bought houses is paying it already!

Perhaps it's worth remembering Pat McFadden's comment to Mandelson: "Every meeting I have is 'who can we tax in order to pay benefits to others'"

As so many have said we don't know the details yet, but for decades the above has been Labour's key mindset so it seems reasonable to expect they'll clobber - in the words of a Labour politician of my acquaintance, "All them posh rich bastards"

Agree. I’m going back a long time to when Blair was PM. There was an article in the press about the mansion he bought in I think Connaught Sq. at the time it cost 7 million and according to the article he paid less council tax on that then I pay on my 3 bed semi in the north. Which also doesn’t seem fair.

Our property is expensive for the area (about 550-600k give or take), but cheap for somewhere like London so I don't understand why we would be set to gain, but I'm not complaining 😁

Do we actually think this will happen? It seems madly difficult to implement fairly.

1. That council tax gets spent locally. It doesn't. It all goes to the government who dish it out according to perceived 'need'. In the SE, councils don't get to keep most (or in some cases, any) of this tax. If AB plans to change this so it stays locally along with local control of it, he has my support. But I will be very surprised if he does, because 'Northern' councils will get less; unless they increase their local rates significantly.aac

So mine and eveyone else's council tax is sent by my council to a huge central govt fund and then the council get a proportion back dependant on what central government perceives as what my council needs to run local services? Have I understood what you are saying? I have never heard of this being the case. Councils get funding from central govt in the form of grants but to the best of my knowledge they raise money via council tax and business rates. I live in an area which has the second highest council tax in the country, it is certainly news to me that it all goes into a central pot and could be spent anywhere in the country

No that’ll just deaden the market.

Not sure what you mean here a salary is income and subject to income tax already.