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.

Where are these homes that are over a million pounds, outside of London, but I just small family properties?

Your posts indicated the report would be an announcement this week which isn’t the case. But that 1% would hit average terrace houses in London in the suburbs.

People in average jobs would be in financial strife, I doubt you’ll get the 1% you’re after.

4 bed homes are not mansions.

Some can be.

Also, some very wealthy people have homes that come with a lot of land, or a swimming pool, or fancy architectural quirks which mean it's incredibly expensive.

These aren't standard family homes. It's disingenuous to pretend that they are homes for anyone other than the very wealthy.

You see the goalposts already moving even if it isnt policy now its a 1% land tax...so does council tax remain as they only say this is to replace stamp duty.

Well ive paid my stamp duty so why should I pay a land tax until I move?

A single person income here, I could afford my house when I purchased it 14yrs ago in zone 5 London at £250k now its worth £550k so I will be hit of this went ahead. My council tax is £1600 a year, where and how am I supposed to afford this land tax if it happens and if its on top of CT where do I find almost £400 a month from? My job is London based so moving out isn't an option because then commute costs go up massively.

Why can't they phase in stamp duty like an interest free loan you pay it back over x years. So people can still move homes without needing a big deposit.

Lets see what happens but quite frankly I am not impressed. We need a general election.

But when you buy that expensive house, with its “swimming pool or fancy architectural quirks” you already pay for the privilege? One, in stamp duty. Two, you buy the house with money already taxed at a higher rate.

And if this goes through, as long as you stay put, the maximum more you'll pay is an extra £100 a month, nothing in the grand scheme of the give the eye watering cost of any mortgage/upkeep.

If you move, then you won't pay stamp duty so for even most large and expensive properties, people will be better off for at least the first 15 years of living there.

How on earth do you work that out? If this goes through, it will be hundreds a month more for me. And I’ve very recently paid the stamp duty. From already higher rate taxed income!

They're not bringing the 1% in, that's a proposal which is not being endorsed by the Labour party. There's no indication this is their policy, it's pure scaremongering on here.

If the fairer choice policy is brought in, your council tax (equivalent) would be £2,640, £87 a month more than you pay now, but you could defer it until you in the future sell the property, if needs be.

Although that sounds like high council tax, because it's more than you're used to, it's about average for the UK, so millions are already paying this amount, no doubt on a similar or lower income.

Under the policy, people in their existing homes would pay no more than £1200 a year more per household. So £100 a month maximum.

The full 0.48% is is someone moves, and it'll be a lot cheaper for you than stamp duty.

Yes we definitely do, we will be shelling out SD very soon as well and he can’t have it all ways

also is no one frustrated that these Labour politicians are very wealthy and won’t be leading by example

Seriously, I voted for Labour and they are a bunch of jokers! As chaotic as the Tory party just repackaged. I didn’t vote for Burnham or this North South divide.

Really? I have read nothing to suggest that, but I’m happy to be wrong. Let’s see…..

I know its a proposal I never said it was being brought in.

Ah yes by all means I have a spare £87 to pay per month its just me alone one income. At least I had single person discount. Why should I pay same tax that a household with 2 working adults pay less per person?

And there is no mention of being able to defer it otherwise everyone will do it and where is the tax money being collected to pay for services?

So if i am in my forever house by your account I can defer it and then they can collect the money once I die and sell it off. Actually wait thats great then I pay nothing so I will be quids in actually.

If you can't manage it, how do you think millions of other people are already managing it as your council tax is less than half the national average? How is that fair?

Why should a single person in Dorset, living in an average house pay upwards of £2k, whilst you pay less than half of that?

And yes you will be able to defer, at least under the current plans. Obviously things may change.

As Op has said time and time again but I'll say it once more:

It's not my fault my Council Tax is lower than Dorsets.

Rural counties like Dorset have very different costs. They have far more rural roads to maintain, bin collections have to travel much further between properties, and services like adult social care and transport are more expensive to deliver because people are spread out. In a densely populated borough in London many services can be delivered more efficiently because of economies of scale.

Different Council Tax bills reflect different local costs and spending decisions, not whether one resident "should" pay more than another. The fact you pay more in Dorset doesn't mean people in London ought to be paying the same.

Kent Council went bankrupt hence why their residents pay more CT, Croydon Council in London also mismanaged funds went bankrupt and again those residents end up paying more CT.

So you see its not comparable.

Don't live in a rural area if you can't suck it up, isnt that your line to me. Thats the trade odd between living in a rural area vs more densely populated areas like cities.

If you Council is wasting money and not being efficient than vote in someone that will do better.

I'm not in Dorset. It's just the place with the most expensive council tax. It's also nowhere near as rural as some counties.

Compared to London it is rural. That5s ny point you can't expect services to be delivered at the same economies of scale it doesn't work like that. Council tax is for local services if one town has more elderly people needing more adult social care compared to another than of course their council tax will ne higher to pay for it. Same with transport, fewer people using it fewer services and the cost per person will be higher. London has a transport system funded by those paying to use it, millions od people means more money for them to invest in it. You cant say that isnt fair.

It sounds like your barometer of fairness seems to be heavily influenced on whether you'd pay more or less.

No you just ignore rhe point about population density and ability to deliver services with economies of scale.

You are buying an expensive house that is an asset though. Your shortage of disposable income now is still an investment in your future.
It’s less unfair than a blanket tax on say petrol, where rural people need to run a car and buy fuel. That money has gone.

People are buying a home, to live in because we all need a roof over our heads. Its not an asset, you cannot take the money from it if it goes up unless you sell and move somewhere cheaper.

Owning a second property would be an asset.

We need ro move away from this idea of your primary residence being an asset and making you money. By the time you come to sell you could find yourself in negative equity.

If it’s not an asset why would you buy a house rather than rent? And why is renting often referred to as “money down the drain”?

When our house value went up we could use it to borrow against

Hooting at “driving growth” : these increases would result in fewer meals out, fewer holidays, fewer car purchases.. and as for home improvements - no fear! You would be in danger of increasing what you have to pay!