To think saying house prices could crash if we brexit will be a plus for many

[feellikeahugefailure]

The BoE and other banks say this as if it is universally bad news. If it stops the vast amount of foreign speculation on UK property then many will see it as a good thing.

Even if you own your own home, its paper gains unless you sell it. So even homeowners might want prices to fall as otherwise their children may never own a home.

I guess that would be a reason, but as the financial sector employs less than 10% of the population I'm not sure it would have the desired effect.

I'd also guess that Brexit may cause big repercussions across the EU and demand for London housing as a safe asset would increase.

Oh well its going to be interesting as the out vote seem to be winning.

. There is a risk as a non-EU city it's harder for banks to do business from London.

I think this misses the point. Outside the EU, the UK is not bound by EU tax laws. The UK can then set its own rate if VAT, its own rate of Corporation Tax etc. it can decide what it taxes (tampons?) and what it doesn't.

The UK has the ability to be a very attractive proposition for foreign investment, close by, but outside the EU, with a special relationship with the U.S. and within the Commonwealth.

The whole UK could be the new Channel Islands, the new Isle of Man, Hong Kong or Cayman Islands.

"The UK can then set its own rate if VAT, its own rate of Corporation Tax etc"

We can already do this tbf, there are some products which EU law says needs to be taxed with VAT which takes care of the tampon issue.

The US has already said that the UK will not have the same relationship if it comes out of the EU, and the Commonwealth? Wishful thinking there buddy.

Who would want to be the chanel Islands, Jersey is nearly bankrupt. Tax havens only work if you have small population with a higher proportion of wealthy people in them.

^"The UK can then set its own rate if VAT, its own rate of Corporation Tax etc"

We can already do this tbf, there are some products which EU law says needs to be taxed with VAT which takes care of the tampon issue. ^

Your statements contradict each other. We must set VAT within a range prescribed by the EU. When we BREXIT we can set our own rates in what we want to tax. No more "please Mr Junckers can we make tampons VAT free" crawling to the EU.

The US has already said that the UK will not have the same relationship if it comes out of the EU, and the Commonwealth? Wishful thinking there buddy.

Obama will be out of office at the end of this year. Don't believe a word. He'll say anything to help out his mate Dave. We're not planning to come out of the Commonwealth. Where did you get that idea?

Who would want to be the chanel Islands, Jersey is nearly bankrupt. Tax havens only work if you have small population with a higher proportion of wealthy people in them.

Hong Kong was built on low to zero taxes. It sustains a huge population. We could give master classes in tax havens.

But we can set the rates thats the thing, the "seeking permission" thing is about harmonisation in what applies in taxes across the EU and we would possibly still be subject to this in order to trade with the EU (in some ways Norway and Switzerland have to).

We can set our corporation tax rate to anything we like, btw, Profit taxes in Hong Kong are 16.5%, they have property taxes, and they start paying lower rates of taxes straight away, its a low tax economy not a tax haven.

I wonder if any of the posters extolling the virtues of low tax have actually lived in a large country very low tax economy? It's great when you are young - and very wealthy (obviously) - and well placed to enjoy spending all your wealth on yourself. But once you have children, the security precautions (because everyone else is very poor) become a bit tedious, and even if you don't grow a social conscience, you begin to notice how a lot of the basic infrastructure is a bit crap.

Loving the idea of the uk as the new Cayman Islands.

I meant to type 'large country with a very low tax economy'! Whoops.

Ireland and Holland have different corporation tax laws and rates to the UK - see all the tax efficient manoeuvres carried out by Google et al. Whether they can continue with these policies will depend on whether other countries will continue to put up with them, whether they are in or out of the EU. The same goes for the UK - we can set our own corporation tax rate now, but even if we pull out of the EU we will still need to trade with other countries and agree international tax treaties.

Please explain how an EU migrant on minimum wage with a wife working part time on. Minimum wage and 2 school age children living in a major southern city are net contributors to the UK economy. Please include in your workings, family credit, family allowance, local housing allowance if they qualify, free school meals, if the qualify, cost of 2 x school places at an average national cost if £4',500 per pupil and free healthcare. I think you'll find that the UK Govt is actually subsidising them to be here.

We have an ageing population and a birth rate of below 2 children per woman. Whether or not the UK government subsidises people in low skilled jobs, the dependent population is growing and the working population is not being replaced.

Like it or not, we need immigration.

You might argue that immigration is fine but you want more controlled immigration, however, just like other countries that aren't in the EU, we would still have to deals re: free movement of people.

I don't think leaving the EU would be the end of the world, but I don't think it would make much difference. EU relations are dependent on the balance of power within the EU. We would end up with broadly similar agreements and bureaucracy.

want top notch corporate lawyers from the Magic Circle , top economists negotiating our BREXIT under the watchful eye of a Eurosceptic PM ( not Cameron)

Yes, leaving the EU could be good news for lawyers.

Merry mouse - if we need immigration to sustain current ageing population - what's your solution to immigrat ageing? More immigration? Does that not look a teensy bit like a pyramid?

Yep, I live in a zero tax, heavily subsided, geographically large country. Oil down, place **ed. And yes, the infrastructure is buggered, along with attitudes to entitlements.
I prefer the UK NHS, free school of certain quality (tho Nicki might be demolishing that), decent infrastructure and reasonable chunk removed at source (40% max rate, not a super earner).

Merry mouse - if we need immigration to sustain current ageing population - what's your solution to immigrat ageing? More immigration? Does that not look a teensy bit like a pyramid?

I'm reliably informed by the papers that immigrants have loads of children so we should all be fine .

You are right, an ageing immigrant population would cause more strains on health care (as an ageing population would/will create more demands on health care worldwide). There are no magic solutions to the problem that we are living longer but not necessarily in better health.

However, at the moment the UK has a diamond population shape. If we want people to wipe our bottoms in 30-40 years time or find a cure for dementia, or just pay taxes, we need a larger working population.

"I think you'll find that the UK Govt is actually subsidising them to be here."

Yet the data shows that EU immigrants since 2003 contribute more than they take out and that them leaving would be more deterimental to services (due to lost tax revenue) than lowering the demand would be beneficial.

Also the point about Hong Kong doesn't stand up to scrutiny when you realise the Hong Kong has a poplutaion of 7.5 million, its a major financial centre with many corporations based there because of its low tax, of course it can fund services for 7.5 milliuon on low taxes. London could fund its population well, but then other areas in tax deficit it will not work.

Regarding the "immigration pyramid" we need immigration they provide vital skills and services, 62% of EU immigrants have degrees, and even the ones from Eastern Europe that come here have started to show an education gap between themselves and the British workforce, in their favour.

So less likely to claim out of work benefits, more likely to work, more likely to have good qualications and a good work ethic, net tax contributors to the economy. Sounds fine to me. Whats your factual, evidence based arguement against?

Why do people assume leavers are all anti immigration? I'm not.

I just prefer the govt to accept those we choose rather than those we are forced to, ie, genuine refugees and those that are a benefit to the UK.

As already mentioned though, that model (trying to reinvert the population pyramid) is unsustainable in the long run.

Because helpful lots of the pro leave posts on this thread, on others, and statements from people in real life raise concerns about immigration.

Your point about the population pyramid is true until you consider that immigrants will have children too, so the population is likely to be more sustainable with immigration rather than without.

However, a large amount of immigration is short term, people are here 1-5 years and return home. They are replaced by other migrants, so its not like all immigration is permanent.

Why would they only come here for 1-5 years? Not for purely economic reasons surely? The NB crowd on MN keep assuring us everyone that wants to come to the UK is a genuine refugee?

NZ, Australia, Canada & the US seem to be able to pick and choose, I'm sure the UK will be able to cherry pick in the same way.

Post-Brexit the UK will still be the preferred destination for many.

Well obviously not everyone who wants to come to Britain is a refugee, and people come for one to five years for all sorts of reasons, not all but a good number do go home.

Also if the UK was to negotiate trade deals with the EU after Brexit it is highly likely that it would have to include freedom of movement in those deals (as Norway and Switzerland do) so that immigration wouldn't be curbed.

NZ, Aus and Canada are able to cherry pick because they don't have freedom of movement agreements. As previously stated it is likely that the UK would have to conceed freedom of movement as part of any trade agreement with the EU.

Also with refugees, the UK is not the most popular destination, and our benefits for asylum seekers are meagre in comparison to other EU countries, stop belieiving the Daily Mail rhetoric.

I think by reading the last few posts, few understood what a pyramid is and are unable to apply the logic involved.

I'm fairly confident I do understand a population pyramid, why don't you enlighten me ..

CutTheWaffle, I have no idea! The home report was actually not too bad, just gutter/ drain problems, wear and tear in the stair etc. I think it was the disrepair inside the house which was putting other buyers off and I see this all the time.

FTB in my work in his 30s, and he is literally looking for the best house in the worst street. I keep trying to talk him out of it but he's happy, and paying £15k+ over the home report value

If the UK is not the destination of choice why do so many migrants refuse point blank to settle in the first safe country that they arrive in?

Ha, the the old Daily Mail reader slight. You are pulling out the big guns now Lurked!

If you think that people won't want to move to the UK if we are not in the EU I think you are in for a big surprise. Another Greek crisis is already brewing and we saw bow much money flowed in to the UK the first time around.

Language barriers? I don't know, you're also confusing migrants and refugees.

The United Kingdon has the 32 largest population of refugees, which somewhat makes your argument on that point irrelevant anyway. Only 11.3% of the population are immigrants anyway.

Surely with free movement between European countries, refugees (economic or otherwise) will eventually become migrants if they want to come to the UK?

I interact with people from the EU every day. Im currently staying in a lodge during the week run by a couple of young Spanish lasses, I worked recently with fitters from Bulgaria. Some of my colleagues are from Portugal, France and Germany.

We get a lot more out than they ever put in, they only get money for their labour. We get brand new upgraded infrastructure that lasts for 25-100 years. That is why we are such a wealthy country.

I am definitely pro EU as it provides a source of experienced labour who have similar educations to our native workforce. Without them everything would happen at less than half the current pace. Forget money, what makes a country great is what its inhabitants are capable of doing. There may be squeezed on resources now, but that is because we are in the process of expanding and renewing all the ageing Victorian and post war architecture. Give it 10-20 years and you will see what we have done!

BTW my thoughts on the immigration issue are the same as the Labour Party leave movement (unsure whether they are either Nazis or Daily Mail readers although I'm sure there are one or two mouth breathers).

Here is what they say

'The EUs free moment of people discriminates against non-EU skilled workers who, due to the EUs open borders are subject to overly restrictive quotas'