To be scared of Labours Land tax

[Dragongirl10]

Just read about this, Labour are proposing a Land Value Tax on any land owned, could cost thousands a year for anyone even with a small house, not just the rich....they have not publicised this at all.

People with modest homes could be forced to sell or go into debt, or be repossessed...

No one who is challenging the labour tax and spending ideas wants a free ride

I disagree with this from reading the thread, it's all me me me from many.

There is a lot of double guessing about how it will work and gloom and doom scenarios. For me, the logical thing would be for people to only pay tax on the portion that isn't mortgaged as otherwise it isn't an asset/ wealth as such. This could be recorded on tax returns which increasing numbers of people will be filling in anyway.

It's utterly bizarre to me that high earners are taxed to the hilt but the truly wealthy may well pay less because of lower actual income. That makes it hard for people who come from nothing to succeed as they are while paying large mortgage/ childcare etc and allows wealth and privilege to be passed from generation to generation.

Not necessarily. Im many places smaller houses are more sought after and therefore relatively more expensive than bigger properties. Also, don't forget the costs and the hassle of moving.

Also, people should not be forced into it.

Forcing people to lose their homes is wrong.

In your opinion

What is more wrong in mine is the wealthy avoiding tax and having 4m children in the UK living in poverty and sometimes living in b and bs.

How will you do that when the market fluctuates? Will that be adjusted down when the market falls and will people get back the tax they paid?How do you know what a house is worth without actually selling it?

There's too much based on a speculation just how much a property is worth.

Surely if the wealth is redistributed a bit, the poorer will have more money to spend, cancelling out the bit less that the few richest will not spend?

Also, people should not be forced into it

Why? If I started a post 'aibu to think I have a right to stay in my 4 bed detached despite not being able to afford it?' can you imagine what the responses would be? I'd be called all the entitled twunts under the planet.

Plus why couldn't they just take equity out of the house to pay for it via a mortgage? Then no one would be forced anywhere.

If we don't have enough smaller homes to give people that choice then this needs to be addressed which is a point I made previously.

But disabled people ahould be forced into it?

Some people.live in some.sort of ivory tower sheltered from the real world

So are you telling me people living in ordinary terraced house who don't want to downsize are the reason for childhood poverty?

Childhood poverty is wrong and can be dealt with with in other ways, how about getting the big corporations to pay what they ought to?

Forcing people to lose their home is wrong too.

How will you do that when the market fluctuates?

It would have to be an annual calculation at one point in time for that year.

No Chardonnay I am telling you that people with significant assets and lower incomes are not paying their way in terms of tax.

Why can't be the answer be a lifetime mortgage if people want to stay where they are to pay any tax needed?

Forcing disabled people to lose their homes is wrong.

Why are you pitching two groups of people against each other?

but disabled people ahould be forced into it?
disabled people should be supported to find the most suitable housing to meet their needs. That may not be the house they actually live in anyway.

I also stated upthread they should be exempt from bedroom tax.

I was addressing chardonnay

Would it affect agricultural land?

If you mean the Council Tax reform mentioned on the Labour Manifesto, No.

However, the Daily Express and other detractors might choose to add it to their terrifying tales for maximum fear effect.

This is of course the purpose of the scare stories.

Would it affect agricultural land?
Yes LVT includes farmland

Isn't LVT just going to create a vicious circle.

NMW rises to £10 per hour.
To pay for it companies and businesses put more people are out of work.

To pay for these people who are claiming benefits LVT comes in.
It includes farmland so the farmer passes the price of food on to the customer
The businesses have to pay extra which means more people without a job
Which puts a strain on the government as more and more people are unemployed.

Where have I ever said disable people should be forced out of their homes?

It's all double guessing re agricultural land.

Tbh I don't see it happening anyway, even if labour get in.

I think Oliversarmy that we need a higher skilled workforce to fill HCP roles to start with. Many low paid jobs can be automated in the longer term. I'm not sure this is the main issue though.

I'm not convinced on the maths of this idea myself, but more because it would have a downward impact on the price of land anyway so it wouldn't raise as much as is probably expected and would also have other negative impacts.

I think to concentrate wealth taxation on one asset is unworkable tbh.

So Labour would attract these higher skilled professionals by taxing them to the hilt not only on their salary but on their residence here.

How are Labour expecting to keep anyone from flitting abroad as soon as they qualify if they are expected to be paid the same as a person who hasn't put any work in to get qualified in anything.

Great idea in theory that the playing field between rich and poor is levelled but as many countries have found out to their cost communism doesn't work

There won't be many lower skilled jobs in the future. People on minimum wage get benefits anyway, so there is already little difference between that and what an entry level nurse gets paid.

Lol at communism you do realise that we are one of the lowest taxed countries in Europe don't you?

I haven't read the full thread so apologies if this has moved on (these threads move so quickly) but when it comes to the tax argument, it's actually the poorest in society that pay the most tax as its not just about income tax but VAT etc. www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/the-graph-that-shows-how-the-poor-are-paying-more-than-the-rich-in-tax-10353982.html

There is so much confirmation bias going on, it's unreal.

Lol at communism you do realise that we are one of the lowest taxed countries in Europe don't you?

Under a Conservative government we are under a Labour one that might not hold true.

marciablaine in theory, but that isn't what is being proposed, the tax isn't being taken from the better off and given to others to spend as they please, the government will be spending it, on some good things like education and some far less good (IMO) like nationalising the Royal Mail, there will be less money for individuals to spend so service providers - hairdressers, cleaners, tutors, photographers, restaurants, gyms etc will also see a considerable downturn in business and therefore will be able to pay less tax, and so more tax will need to be raised from somewhere else, and so on. This is why this system doesn't work.

Oliversmumsarmy
"How are Labour expecting to keep anyone from flitting abroad as soon as they qualify if they are expected to be paid the same as a person who hasn't put any work in to get qualified in anything"

You are obsessed with moving abroad! Switzerland will not take all of the fleeing Tory tax evaders!

No one is saying everyone should be paid the same. No one on this thread, no one in mainstream politics. Why would you say this when it simply isn't true?
This issue is disparity. The disparity between the pay of the richest and the poorest and their relative tax burden. Labour, Greens, Lib Dems want to reduce disparity. Tories don't give a flying fuck.