To think an annual property tax is incredibly unfair?

[Itchthescratch]

I come from an area with low house prices. It is great! My friends can generally afford houses even with lower salaries as the earnings:house prices ratio is better. Rents are also lower so they have proportionately more disposable income.

I have moved to a more expensive area where house prices are higher and people have really had to push themselves to buy a property. Salaries are higher but not high enough to make up the difference. They have had to pay more stamp duty , pay more interest and have less disposable income each month.

I am really struggling to understand why my friends in the South should also automatically be paying more property tax under the new proposals being suggested by Burnham supporters? What is the justification? They would love to buy a large detached house for £300k like my friends from home but this isn't possible. It feels like they are being double penalised.

Just to add house prices haven't risen in real terms in the area in live in now for 20 years so the value of my friend's houses is simply money they have paid in.

This is still nuts. The person has a lower monthly cost. There’s a reason it’s for a lower earning demographic and in high demand.

She pays nearly £900pm. So is paying well over that and has done for years.
HA increases the rent by about £20pm each year.

She is paying double the national average social rent. Your mum isn't typical.

Nope. For @XenoBitch ’s mum you need to know about the past costs and the past value of money.

I don't have all the figures... but we moved into the house 40 years ago. I have no idea what the rent was then as I was a kid. I remember going up to the local civic office because there was no direct debit then. I got sat in front of a massive fish tank, whilst my parents went to pay their rent.
Sorry, a bit of a derail, but bringing up memories 😊

The nations of the UK are each much smaller than the US . England is roughly the size of the largest state by population (California).

I am not advocating for any particular locus of control. Given the scale of the UK various possibilities seem workable. We need to see how this plays out.

This is endearing.

You talk about the US system and as the outlined in pp it’s different to what Burnham would propose. There’s no way schools will be linked to higher property tax in wealthy areas.

So @XenoBitch ’s mum is paying a high rent, £900 per month. Chances are exceedingly good that she has in fact paid off the costs associated with building her unit, including a reasonable interest, in the 1930s.

Chances are very good she is contributing to paying off building costs for other social tenants also, because £900/mo is a lot of money relative to the capital cost of 1930s SH and the average maintenance costs I quoted above.

Well well well well well.

Idk how big the house is but if she feels she’s over paying it’s easier to move to private system than the opposite giving waiting lists.

The SH could be freed up if she feels she’s overpaying and private is a better deal.

We need to wait and see.

I don’t think it is right that poor areas in the US have worse schools because of PT. I would prefer a centralised allocation system.,

Chances are the house we moved into was fully paid off anyway. As a few if us have said, SH rents wash faces.
Yes, they had a new kitchen and bathroom every decade (albeit very basic).
But SH tenants have to paint/paper walls, put carpets/lino/tiles down. You don't do that in private housing.
DM pays £900pm and is a pensioner.... so still works to afford to live.

I do not sense sge is complaining. I am countering the idea that SH is necessarily heavily subsidised.

Note the phrase ‘taxpayer subsidised flat’ in the Times article.

Whereas under PPT, the taxpayers dime would most likely be funding an excellent quality of life for the private equity investors and owners of the private companies that are providing an ever increasing share of social care services to local councils.

I honestly find your posts puzzling. This isn't the gotcha you think it is.

You have no idea how much @XenoBitch mum's house cost to build or even if her mum exists at all. We are on the internet and anybody can claim anything. What we do know for sure is by the government's own statistics her mum is in a tiny minority if she genuinely pays £900 a month which is double the national average. She is not at all representative of the average SH tenant so she is a complete red herring. So much so that data suggests her mum will either be in specialised supported housing or in a large London property as it's that rare for someone to be paying that much for genuine SH.

Do we really believe SH will deliver huge savings due to people suddenly finding employment and not needing the NHS as much?

From your link.

Yesterday, a report by Sheffield Hallam professor Jim Clifford, commissioned by housing association Hyde, found that England’s 4.2 million social rented homes contribute £77.7bn a year to the national economy in savings for the NHS, councils, police and government.

And this report was commissioned by a Housing Association so there is almost certainly some funding bias going on. It's very hard to escape:
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.adz7173

You provided the link and are relying on facts from it as evidence. You can’t pick and choose and cherry pick what evidence is credible and what isn’t.

I provided which link?

How would the value of the property be calculated? I can see online it says actual market value but what is the basis of the calculation for actual market value?

We purchased our property 6 years ago and Zoopla thinks it’s gone up £100,000 in that time period, and property prices increased 20%, which is insane and not remotely accurate for our house because I’ve seen similar properties selling recently for not much more than we paid 6 years ago.

I agree it is unfair as a replacement for council tax but it is much better than stamp duty, so if it replaces that as well I’m in favour.
I would pay more under the proposal but I also want the flexibility to move house in the future and I’d much rather everyone pays a property tax than the huge cost being lumped onto moving house.

Yeh agree plus the selling in of the US system, and living standards based on it, which is never going to happen here in terms of what it pays for and where.

Likely to be the Valuation Office, using whatever criteria they choose to apply. It is unlikely to be a property-by-property valuation, as that would be a really unwieldy model. Possibly more likely to be based on a slightly larger area.

So your particular house may not have gone up in value, but others in your area have, and up goes your bill based on what the Valuation Office thinks your house would be worth if you bought it this year.

So that £100k increase on paper would cost you more money, today, even though you can't access it, didn't ask for it and your salary hasn't gone up.

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.