to think mansion tax is an unfair tax on London and the South East?

[goodnessgracious]

I disagree with mansion tax but regardless it seems to me to be unfair on Londoners.

Aibu to think that it may also force some people to sell their properties who are income poor but property rich?

Why is "asset rich and tax poor" a special class which should be protected from contributing? Those are the people most likely to be enjoying a high standard of living due to blind luck or inheritance rather than any above average amount of effort or need....

"mintyy
Agreed that incomers affect London prices. However, they are often non resident incomers who could be targeted by specific measures / taxes."

You say that to me like its something I don't know Chaz.

Of course the problems in London are swathes of top end buy to invest properties (being bought by foreign billionaires), and city workers earning absurd amounts in salary and bonuses living alongside the rest of us.

No ordinary person in London is happy with house prices as they are. I've been on the housing ladder here for 25 years and I am priced out of the sort of property you might reasonably expect high earning fifty somethings like dh and I to be able to afford.

And I say all this as a staunch unwavering Labour voter with strong lefty principles.

I live in the SouthEast. We bought a four bed detached 18 years ago for £192,000 Now that Crossrail is coming to my town and the house is within a walk of the station it is now worth around £600K. We certainly could not buy it now. We might sell it though and move to a mansion up North though....

These are some examples of people who will be affected (and I know people in all categories):-

1. Youngish couple, both work full time, £30k a year childcare costs, £50k - £90 a year mortgage interest costs who had to move to London to find work. Mortgage very large. House worth just over £2m, capital in the house about £010k. Just paid the state 7% stamp duty when they bought, taxed to the hilt, no child benefit.

1. Elderly lady, no carpets on floor, lives on 0.5% interest on modest savings and state pension.

1. Someone like I was a few years ago - massive £1.3m mortgage taken out to pay a husband on a divorce, no savings at all thereafter, over drawn single mother supporting children alone. no way has £2m whether in the house as equity or in savings. Needs 4 or 5 bed house as is looking after the children whilst working full time paying for them and the ex husband. Ex husband has more cash, more savings and unmortgaged house but he won't have to pay the tax as he has a house worth less than £2m as he chose not to see or house his children. The state pats him on the back for choosing to invest in shares or whatever rather than housing his family - well done those who don't house a family in London.

1. Housewife whose husband runs off with a younger woman at work. I am thinking of one man's wife. He had to choose between his wife and mistress and chose the latter with whom he now has a new family. Wife got the £5m Hampstead house. She has not worked for 20 years. If they had a clean break ) no spousal maintenance) then she would need to sell the house or go back to work to fund the mansion tax. 3 children still at home. Presumably no mortgage. I am not weeping for her. Another one - another man I know - his new girl friend who had just got £3m on her first divorce despite the children being at boarding school she has chosen not to work for 15 years - persuaded him to sell his country house and buy a massive one with her. Thankfully they had a written agreement. He had to go to court to sell it when she turned on him a little after purchase and he got his share back but only because she had snared rich man number 3 who bought out man no 2's share. There are these women around who move from man to make taking a small fortune each time and my point above was that if these ones who choose not to work because a man always pays have to get jobs to pay the mansion tax then I am not too sorry about that. We could call it a tax on rich divorcees,. In fact there will be a lot of men out there who lost just about everything to their wife on divorce because he worked and she didn't who may be very pleased they gave her a clean break so she has to sell the house to pay the tax.

Anyway the most unfair of cases are those where the person owns a £2m house which has a huge mortgage on it and like most younger people they put their all into the house so no savings other than that. We even used the children's life savings when we scratched together the mortgage on this house. There was not a single penny left over.

No one will weep for those who are able to raise £1m a mortgage though. However it sends a message to people that if you do the right thing and invest in housing your family rather than hide your money in gold bars or cars you will have part of that "wealth" confiscated even if you are only worth £100k. If instead you spend your money on wine women and song you avoid the tax and the state seems to regard you as the good guy and those who buy a home for their family as a target for envy and hatred.

Mr tumbles.

I don't own my house by blind luck. I worked three jobs through uni, and saved 4k for a deposit on a tiny flat in a just about ok area.

My friends all tried to talk me out of it. Why would I tie myself down. Why did I want a mortgage at 21. What if I wanted to go travelling or move? This is including one friend who had been given 50k for her 21st off her dad and another who had, sadly, lost her mum, inherited the family home, and just sold it.

20 years later and two house moves later, one to a 3-bed ex council, then to a two bed in a naice area, I've just bought our family home- a modest 3 bed terrace.

My friends, obviously, now want to jump straight to the nice family home, but find the can only afford a starter flat or house in a not so great area.

They say I was "lucky" getting on the property ladder when I did. Personally I think it was nothing to do with luck, but some good judgement, hard diy, good money management along the way, and it was nothing they couldn't have done.

I'm a nurse, so was never going to earn big. i had to plan to get to this point.

If the gvt. decided my house was worth too much and decided to tax it, we'd have to move. My family and I would have to leave the home I've worked half my life for, and either move to a 2bed for the 4 of us, or a completely different area.

But hey, I'm "lucky" to be able to afford a house that others can't, so why not tax it...

Why is "asset rich and tax poor" a special class which should be protected from contributing?

Because the asset only has a paper value and everybody needs somewhere to live.

It doesn't seem logical to exclude actual gains on private residences from capital gains tax but tax theoretical gains. Why not make an adjustment to CGT so that gains on PPRs above a certain amount are taxed?

I would be more concerned about our cultural heritage - old, rambling manor houses etc that already let out holiday cottages, advertise as wedding venues etc just to pay for their upkeep - on top of their owners having full time jobs. Anyone else in a high value property could just sell up and downsize. If those houses are sold - who to? And a part of our history is the potentially lost. I think the tax should be on properties built after a certain date.

*then

Do the right thing.Don't make me laugh.

The baby boomers who are now the elderly are sitting on expensive houses and pensions largely through luck at the time they were born.Pensioners up and down the country downsize and move when they can longer afford the upkeep.When my parents could no longer afford the upkeep re their very old expensive far too large crumbling house they sold it,downsized and moved.They didn't moan but excepted how incredibly lucky they are.Down here you have nearly entire towns full of downsized pensioners.

Re the doing the right thing and working hard.Sorry most of the very wealthy people I know are wealthy due to a huge dollop of luck and often far less working hours than many on a lot less.My sil and bil being a case in point.Indeed our own Xenia loves to tell us how her expensive education has bought her a lifestyle us lowly state educated peeps can only dream about ie bring paid to make a few calls after she sorts her horses out and flits about doing exactly what she wants.

I do not live in London but on the outskirts. I bought my house 15 years ago for under £160000. My next door neighbours house is only 2 beds but has just gone on the market for nearly £1.5 million.

The Mansion Tax comes across as something a group of people have come up with over a beer in the pub. Great idea but deeply flawed. What happens if the government tax a household for their £2 million pound property but they then sell for less than the £2million. Would they get a rebate.

Wouldn't mums and dads just sell the property to their children for a nominal amount whilst stating that the house was being sold with sitting tenants (themselves) so making the house virtually worthless. I can think of many ways of getting around this tax and if I can then so can people who are a lot more intelligent than me so it will end up as a tax on the elderly or those that can least afford it.

If people thought the bedroom tax was unfair then this tax will have the same effect.

Can one buy anything but a flat screen tv these days?

By golly you are right Marseillais! The thing to do is move out of your London house and buy a lovely bijoux cottage in some pretty village and spend your change on maybe a yacht… or maybe keep a pied a terre in London… or just have lots of foreign holidays... sorted!!!

As long as you don't spend your money on a semi in Twickenham you are fine.

I don't believe that this tax would stay at £2m or at the equivalent of £2m. Do you think the threshold will be inflation linked or will the Government let it be gradually eroded by price rises. After all look at the 40p tax band.

Mandy, good, another way to right the injustice of the proposed tax. I will add it to the list.
It is a tax on residential properties. Most stately homes are arguably agricultural or tourist business. So they may not be liable. The devil will be in the detail.

Like everyone no this thread who has a house I don't think it's fair to say we have just been lucky. It was not as someone implied above my education that enabled me to buy a house. In fact virtually no one went to university from our school. It was hard work. I got the best A level results in the school not because of luck but because I sat there in front of the books learning stuff whilst most other teenagers go out, drink, mess around and don't put in the work. It was not luck I got to university aged 17 - it was hard work. Itw as not luck tha I earn quite a bit - I did not choose to go into the arts or hair dressing - I deliberately chose a career that pays well. It is not luck I did well int he career. I worked for 30 years without even any maternity leaves and very long hours. I was today 30 years on at my desk doing some work at 6.45am today ( a Saturday).

It is not luck I am never ill so can work. it's in large part because I don't drink or smoke am not fat and eat healthy foods only.

It is not luck the work I do pays well. Instead I left the North East which meant no baby sitting from family ever in those 30 years to move hundreds of miles for work to London. One reason I could was again not due to luck but due diligence before getting engaged I made sure I married a feminist who would follow my career.

It was not luck that meant we could buy a house when I was 22, a house right out here in zone 5 in London where even today those houses cost under £300k. It was because we both had chosen professional careers and worked hard and had second hand furniture. I watched the video of my daughter aged 5 recently (she just turned 30). She was in her school uniform - it was 100% second hand. The sofa had stuffing coming out (we were given it). We put what little money there was into a house and didn't have holidays and meals out, did not even buy hair conditioner because it was an extra expense. None of this is luck. Instead it is what I call "jam tomorrow" - it's making life very hard now so later it's better.

What Labour is saying is if you go for jam tomorrow they will ensure when the jam time comes they will remove it and give you bread and water for choosing to work hard and put your family first. They will spi in the face of those who make those hard choices and generated so much tax. It is the politics of envy again which says hunting a furry fox is awful but an ugly fish is fine.

That is the thing.

£2 million affects almost nobody, and boohoo-only-not-really to those "poor" rich bastards with a 2 million home....

Let's drop it to £1 million, say Labour later, and boohoo-only-not-really to those "poor" rich bastards with a £1 million home....

Actually, what about the rich bastards with a £500k home? Tax em! Or is that getting close for comfort? You may think it is just a 3 bed semi, but for many you ate an unimaginably rich bastard....

The thin end of the wedge

The politics of envy

I wish stupid house prices would just come down.

You ARE an unimaginable rich bastard

If you ATE one, that would be a different problem!

House prices need to fall end of story. ALl these schemes etc are just pushing up prices and even though they look like an opportunity they are in fact a trap which first time buyers will have really difficulty moving on from and which makes prices out of reach for those no entitled to the scheme but unable to buy at market prices. I think they will have a stamp duty amnesty next as prices are starting to fall very slightly.

I have been very lucky with property. I admit it. Yes dh and I had good jobs from a young age but we also bought or first house in 2000. Not that mansion tax will affect me.

I agree with mansion tax. increasing income tax doesn't affect the truly rich who may not have much income. Now if I came on bleating about how I couldn't afford to live in my nice house people would tell me to move and to not be so 'entitled'. somehow Jay because someone's older this is different? Don't get that. And one further point, many of these ridiculously priced London flats are being bought by overseas investors. Now assuming they have to pay it great.

Chandon your attitude is appalling.

Of course: how DARE someone get a job that pays a decent salary?! How DARE they earn more than you (I'm assuming)?! How DARE they be able to buy a house worth that amount?!

What is wrong with people getting well-paid jobs? I'm not talking footballers on stupid money, but normal people who have studied hard and then worked hard to earn a decent salary? Or should everyone be paid the same, irrespective of their skills and abilities?

If you're bitter about how much you earn, then that's your problem. Don't take it out on people who are better off than you financially.

Harrowgreen, I don't think you got my point.

I guess sarcasm is a bitch, if someone takes your words literally.

I need a sarcasm emoticon

How would you determine when to stop the clock for saying people don't have to pay this tax any more? My PILs bought their house in Edinburgh in the early 70s, just after a property boom. It cost them double what it would have a year before. There was then a boom in the 1980s when women's incomes could be included in mortgage assessments, and then another in the late 1990s/early 2000s when interest rates went down. The property is now worth over 20 times what they paid over 40 years ago (the area has gone from a bit bohemian to very respectable, admittedly the people living there are still the same!), but of course they haven't had any mortgage (or rent) to pay for 15-20 years.

I think I would have less of an issue with the mansion tax if it were to be applied only from here on in as it were, so if you were to buy a £2m plus house, you could factor the tax in to your financial planning as you would anticipate stamp duty, mortgage repayments etc. The charge should also be on a proper % basis too, the suggested band of £2m-£5m is massive - for the same amount to be levied on a £2.1m house as a £4.9m is crazy. So to buy you would have to make sure you have the cash, there would be no question about valuation etc. that might cool the market a little. Of course it would take longer to raise the taxes but it isn't quite as harsh and effectively retrospective.

This proposed policy might as well have been thought up by 11 years olds during a school politics class. Let's tax people on houses they already own. Let's force people out of their homes and out of london. Who's going to buy these empty homes? Overseas investors that's who, either that or they will be left empty and neglected. Who will want to buy your 2 million home off you?

What happens to those that move out as they can't afford the tax? They all move to the outskirts of london where they push up the house prices in affordable commutable areas until normal people can't afford them either. We're then left with an soulless london full of areas of extreme wealth or extreme poverty, people are pushed further out of the city till they can't afford to live and commute to the city so need to claim benefits and quit their london jobs, hurting the economy and also the public purse!

Oh and another joy of this policy, people will live in fear of their property rising in the future. What do they do? Sell up as soon as their property approaches 2 million, and the cycle starts again. What a great policy Ed. Clap clap clap.