AIBU to think a £2m homeowner should pay mansion tax?

[LadyJos]

Anyone read the Telegraph Article about the 93 year-old man paying mansion tax on his £2m Richmond Home he bought for £15,000? AIBU but isn't £15,000 to £2m a fairly good return over 60 years, and shouldn't he pay some tax at the end? I can't help thinking since the home is mortgage-free, he has options here to pay the £2500 a year...
‘I’m a 91-year-old veteran about to be dragged into mansion tax. This is wrong’
www.telegraph.co.uk/money/property/house-prices/91-year-old-about-dragged-into-mansion-tax/

No-one's preventing home ownership.

Owning a 2 million property is wealth.

Tax it. It's that simple.

I do appreciate that no one likes paying tax. And there are some people whose £2m houses haven't appreciated in value who still have to pay that mansion tax.

I would not like it if I had to pay tax on an expensive watch I owned (although, as far as I'm aware, none of that has been proposed).

But I'd feel a bit embarrassed if I shouted about how unfair it was to me. I feel it would be a bit shameful of me, actually, in my £2m house for which I clearly was able to stump up a £500k-1m deposit then clearly had the income to support a humungous mortgage. If I was in that position, I would consider myself among the top earners and most asset-rich of society and probably keep my complaining to myself.

I'm sorry. There's a mum in my school WhatsApp Group who couldn't pay the £2 no-uniform contribution to the PTA until she got paid. There's a baby food bank in my town. One of the mum's had to alternate water and formula to her newborn before it opened, because formula is £12 a can. I just don't feel very sympathetic when I compare the two.

and what about the third guy, put his 15k into Berkshire Hathaway, now worth £900mn.

but no tax on that.

the point is it's arbitrary, political, seen as a vote winner, bash the rich, no logic to it. same as vat on school fees.

Yeah, I imagine some of the policy is cynical. I also see that there has to be a cut off point (hooray for the Berkshire man, the real winner!). Staggering the tax might be fairer.

STILL not getting out the world's tiniest violin though.

£15,000 in 1960 is approx £450,000 in todays' money.

However wealthy or old people are they’ll always want more.

The UK has the highest tax take it’s ever had

the highest earners are contributing a larger proportion of that tax take than ever before

and it’s still not enough for some people

the country needs to cut its cloth, invest in growth and job creation and grow the economy to fund all the lovely things everyone wants

No, but in the 80s and 90s, the salaries they were on could afford you a property that would now be worth that amount.

My FIL sold his 6 bedroom house in Cheshire, and bought another house here and a property in Spain, outright. That was in 2003, he might get three properties now - who knows!

To be clear I am a huge fan of the guy, but the idea that anyone like him, who has bought property that has multiplied in value to that level, doesn’t have £2.5k is absurd.

Of course they’re contributing more of it. They have more of the money.

And I think the “lovely” things some people want, is just to feed their families.

Or care for their disabled family member. Or a suitable school for their children.

Some people don’t have cloth available to cut, and those of us who do, are probably employing them to work in our mills.

Some revolting people on this thread.

Presume the chap had surviving children and was once upon a time married. The tax allowance from both parents combined, as well as the allowance means that the most children can inherit without paying tax is £1mil. They would be paying 40% tax on the rest, so £400,000 to the treasury. If they keep the house for a while or do it up to sell on later, they would also pay capital gains tax on the extra it may have gone up in value.

Is that not enough? Considering tax was paid to buy the house, all those years PAYE, pay even more tax? Tax upon tax, just because you're envious of a purchase made 60 years ago?

Property rich, cash poor. It happens and esp in these situations.

But they dont, do they? Years and years of idiotic Tories have cut taxes by selling the idea you can still run state services to a decent level. We pay far less than people have in the past and it's gone to dangerous levels. Ironically, the people who vote for governments with those policies are also often the first to squeal about public services not being fit for purpose.

This will spread to all properties, even 2/3 bed terraces.

That's right. I think folk on here who complain about taxes in this country would have been shocked 60 years ago!
We also pay fairly low tax compared to many other developed countries. We're not a high tax country.

I don't disagree about the loopholes,

but yes, it's penalising some - you pay the same income tax, or corporation tax or whatever

but because you chose to buy something instead of spending money on holiday, you get taxed AGAIN.

It's dangerous to tax accumulated wealth, it just means wealthy people get the hell out of there before they get stung. It's already happening, and who can blame them?

All those mums. Yes I feel sorry for them. But can you explain why then that means they have rights to my money or anyone else's?

Easy - it’s not your money.

Once it’s paid in tax, it’s the governments money.

Including any money that is taken in future tax changes.

Yeah right. And pigs fly

It is only average to lower earners paying less than similar countries.

Higher earners are paying equivalent or higher rates.

Except again, in the article the man interviewed states that they have a investments and pensions that rise with inflation. He specifically says they won't be left destitute by the tax but is worried for people that will. There may well be people who live in 2 million houses but are cash poor, but it doesn't help the Telegraphs case that they weren't able to find anyone in that position and interviewed him instead.

Torn on this one.

Personal experience, my relative lives in a house worth ££££££. Never had a mortgage as bought outright by their family before they were born.

Has £££££££ in the bank. Tight as they come.

Yes they should pay tax and if it reduces the amount of £ their kids get who do fuck all then even better.

On the other hand, the thought of someone elderly having to leave the only home they have ever known is tragic.

Google is your friend.

So if I get mugged or burgled that stuff belongs to the thief now and they can spend it how they please?

There is an option on the mansion tax for it to be paid upon when the house is sold, for those who are asset rich but cash poor anyway.