To think an annual property tax is incredibly unfair?

Of course people want others to pay more. That’s Labour. Every meeting is who can we tax for benefits - Pat McFadden. It’s the same motivator.

It all depends on the % that they use. With the figure of 0.48% that you quote, I would actually be paying around £600 less.

Stamp duty could go, you could move and not need the extra £ off property tax. You’ll have the sale funds.

Yes, but surely how it impacts you personally doesn't totally dictate your idea about what is fair?

Someone in my hometown with a family of four living in a detached home in a lovely area will be paying £1.5k a year. In my local area the equivalent would be closer to £6k. They wouldn't use more services or anything that would justify them paying more. They would have a higher mortgage, pay more interest etc already.

Stamp duty also means less choice in retirement. Id like to move from our four bed double garage house to something smaller. The stamp duty is one of the reasons DH won't.

Under this system you hade less ability to plan because your costs are unpredictable and can become prohibitive. You also will have significantly less choice in retirement.

Calculator isn't using up to date council tax rates. Have you adjusted for that.

What about in three years time when the paper valuation of your flat has increased much faster than your salary? Will the figure still be cheaper?

The Fairer Share model is based on annual revaluations. So your tax bill each year is based on what it would cost to buy your flat if you were buying it that year.

It won't increase for everyone. From the figures quoted id be £1k a year better off.

I honestly think this will cost Labour their London stronghold.

The whole thing will be a bodge job when they implement it, then another 3 years of this crap until the next election.

Whst happened to Labour’s manifesto pledge not to increase taxes on which they were democratically elected? And Andy Burnham saying the South will no longer have to subsidise the North? What utter nonsense.

Stagflation, no growth, councils burning through our money without any transparency or accountability it seems. I wouldn’t trust them to run a bath. Sorry to be so negative but I’m so disillusioned with the current state of affairs and the way this is heading.

Yes, but surely how it impacts you personally doesn't totally dictate your idea about what is fair?

Someone in my hometown with a family of four living in a detached home in a lovely area will be paying £1.5k a year. In my local area the equivalent would be closer to £6k. They wouldn't use more services or anything that would justify them paying more. They would have a higher mortgage, pay more interest etc already.

I am starting to believe that democracy is completely broken. The Labour manifesto absolutely doesn't mention an annual property tax or anything of this nature. Reeves promised before being elected that there would be 'no additional tax rises' before the election and the manifesto explicitly stated “Labour will not increase taxes on working people” on page 21.

Now we find ourselves with a government that has risen additional taxes and is looking to increase property taxes that disproportionately imlacf working people. As always those who don't work such as the majority of people in SH stand to gain most from this policy whilst owner occupiers where the majority work will stand to lose.

If it's designed to be tax neutral in terms of revenue raised and has high administrative costs then it will lead to a net loss in tax. Yes, lots of ifs and buts. If he essentially increases taxes so that the administrative costs can be covered then I'm sure this would cause absolute outrage.

Yes, it's hard to see how people's gripes about Council Tax bandings being unfair from neighbour to neighbour would be easily resolved using the new system unless it was a LVT. Realistically they will never be able to accurately value each individual house, especially for houses that are on roads and in areas where each house is unique.

We also all know that how you maintain and decorate your home can make a huge difference to value. A property developer down my road bought a house, made no structural changes but modernised the whole building and managed to sell a year late for £300k more. So how would you feel if you knew your neighbour had done all that work and was sitting on a more valuable asset than you but was paying the same? Conversely what if your house was found to have subsidence and you found out you had been overpaying for decades because actually your property was always worth hundreds of thousands of pounds less than you though. Where is the rebate?

Houses don't have any particular value until they're sold. How do you know that your house won't sell for over the estimate or will need at huge reduction to sell? Yet you will be forced to pay a tax on some arbitrary value someone has placed on the home. It's bonkers.

It will cause delight, not outrage, overall if the large majority of personal tax bills are the same or less and the increase comes from bringing the land builders are sitting on into taxation.

Motivate the builders to ….. build.

Besides, in no world is a start up admin fee of less than 1% considered high.

If it's designed to be tax neutral in terms of revenue raised and has high administrative costs then it will lead to a net loss in tax. Yes, lots of ifs and buts. If he essentially increases taxes so that the administrative costs can be covered then I'm sure this would cause absolute outrage.

I’ve just done the maths and 0.48% of the value of my flat in zone 3 in London works out to exactly the same (to the pound!) as what I pay in council tax with the single person discount.

But the point is that the proposal is tax neutral. So you have spent £500 million and raised no extra money. This is the same amount that we currently spend on UK migration enforcement for context. An issue that is often listed as a key concern for lots of voters.

We have no idea about how reassessment could work. We know from America for example that administrative costs often remain high and states like Texas have an enormous amount of costly disputes. LVT would be easier than property value but both have issues for an exercise that ultimately will almost certainly lead to a net decrease in overall tax receipts once costs are accounted for.