AIBU to think a £2m homeowner should pay mansion tax?

There's a reason my very high earning DH wants to move to UAE. This sort of nonsense isn't there. You actually keep what you earn and can leave things to your kids.

Torn on this one.

Personal experience, my relative lives in a house worth ££££££. Never had a mortgage as bought outright by their family before they were born.

Has £££££££ in the bank. Tight as they come.

Yes they should pay tax and if it reduces the amount of £ their kids get who do fuck all then even better.

On the other hand, the thought of someone elderly having to leave the only home they have ever known is tragic.

It is only average to lower earners paying less than similar countries.

Higher earners are paying equivalent or higher rates.

Except again, in the article the man interviewed states that they have a investments and pensions that rise with inflation. He specifically says they won't be left destitute by the tax but is worried for people that will. There may well be people who live in 2 million houses but are cash poor, but it doesn't help the Telegraphs case that they weren't able to find anyone in that position and interviewed him instead.

Easy - it’s not your money.

Once it’s paid in tax, it’s the governments money.

Including any money that is taken in future tax changes.

Yeah right. And pigs fly

Property rich, cash poor. It happens and esp in these situations.

That's right. I think folk on here who complain about taxes in this country would have been shocked 60 years ago!
We also pay fairly low tax compared to many other developed countries. We're not a high tax country.

That's right. I think folk on here who complain about taxes in this country would have been shocked 60 years ago!
We also pay fairly low tax compared to many other developed countries. We're not a high tax country.

All those mums. Yes I feel sorry for them. But can you explain why then that means they have rights to my money or anyone else's?

I do appreciate that no one likes paying tax. And there are some people whose £2m houses haven't appreciated in value who still have to pay that mansion tax.

I would not like it if I had to pay tax on an expensive watch I owned (although, as far as I'm aware, none of that has been proposed).

But I'd feel a bit embarrassed if I shouted about how unfair it was to me. I feel it would be a bit shameful of me, actually, in my £2m house for which I clearly was able to stump up a £500k-1m deposit then clearly had the income to support a humungous mortgage. If I was in that position, I would consider myself among the top earners and most asset-rich of society and probably keep my complaining to myself.

I'm sorry. There's a mum in my school WhatsApp Group who couldn't pay the £2 no-uniform contribution to the PTA until she got paid. There's a baby food bank in my town. One of the mum's had to alternate water and formula to her newborn before it opened, because formula is £12 a can. I just don't feel very sympathetic when I compare the two.

I don't think it's "penalising" people for buying a home. We tax different forms of wealth differently throughout the tax system. Someone who spends their money on shares pays capital gains tax when they realise those gains. Someone who inherits wealth may pay inheritance tax. Property isn't uniquely exempt from the idea that accumulated wealth can be taxed.

I do agree the super-rich should pay more and that trusts should be tackled first. But I don't think "the Duke of Westminster avoids tax" is a reason why nobody else with multi-million-pound assets should ever contribute more. That's an argument for closing loopholes, not abandoning wealth taxation altogether.

But they dont, do they? Years and years of idiotic Tories have cut taxes by selling the idea you can still run state services to a decent level. We pay far less than people have in the past and it's gone to dangerous levels. Ironically, the people who vote for governments with those policies are also often the first to squeal about public services not being fit for purpose.

But he has been taxed all his life?

And you want more and more.

No, but in the 80s and 90s, the salaries they were on could afford you a property that would now be worth that amount.

My FIL sold his 6 bedroom house in Cheshire, and bought another house here and a property in Spain, outright. That was in 2003, he might get three properties now - who knows!

To be clear I am a huge fan of the guy, but the idea that anyone like him, who has bought property that has multiplied in value to that level, doesn’t have £2.5k is absurd.

Interesting. I've got to say, I would not like buying a £2m house and then immediately finding out I needed to pay a new tax on it. If it hadn't appreciated in value, I'd also find it rather unfair. Although, at the same time, owning a £2m house I would be in a better position than most of the population to afford it. I wouldn't expect buckets of sympathy.

My original post wasn't this, however. It asks, is it unfair for someone whose house has appreciated from £15,000 to £2m to pay the mansion tax? Given that they don't have to pay CGT, I don't feel it's unfair. I don't have buckets of sympathy. I understand why they don't like it. But I don't think it's unfair.

The UK has the highest tax take it’s ever had

the highest earners are contributing a larger proportion of that tax take than ever before

and it’s still not enough for some people

the country needs to cut its cloth, invest in growth and job creation and grow the economy to fund all the lovely things everyone wants

Okay, according to Indeed etc., the average salary for a professor is £80k/year.

The average salary for a TV exec producer is £54k/year.

The average salary for an advertising director is £70k/year.

Let’s be generous and round one of those up to £100k. Even at £100k, none of these individuals would be able to buy a £2 million house.

As pointed out by a previous poster 15k was a very expensive house in 1960.
It is not the case that the average person would have been able to buy a house of that value at that time.