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/

My son will never work.

He’s not feckless or lazy, he’s severely disabled.

Obviously not by choice.

More “greedy and spiteful” than feeling entitled to money you’ve never earned? Thinking you somehow have a right to other people’s money because they have “more” without the slightest modicum of insight that you will absolutely have “more” than someone else?

He bought it with a very small amount of taxed money. He’s now sitting on a goldmine which he has done nothing whatsoever to earn. It’s not as if the proposed tax is punitive. We need more money for defence, social care and numerous other areas of expenditure and it has to come from somewhere. Yet the begrudging payers of tax immediately jump to “feckless” benefit claimants.

And, yes, I have more than a lot of people. The difference is my belief in fairness.

I do have more than lots of people, and I absolutely don’t mind that that means I support people who don’t.

I employ people with significantly less than I have, and where necessary have personally supported them with financial emergencies etc. I’ve paid my brother’s council tax. Put money on my cousin’s electric meter.

Me and mine are looked after, why would I think or feel otherwise?

I guess some people are just wired differently.

You seem think it's okay to steal as long as it's for your virtuous projects.

I rest my case. Taxation is not stealing.

And why would you think I do anything different to you? I do all the things you describe, plus an awful lot more. I just do not necessarily (at least until full details are released) agree with this tax.

If someone told me they were adding £2.5k to my annual tax bill so that those who needed it could be better supported, or services could be improved, I’m not sure I’d even blink.

And I don’t own a £2m house.

What a selfish old git. No thought for the ‘hard working people’ of today who are no doubt paying his pension and retirement benefits, and can’t afford a home of their own, let alone a 2m mansion. People like this should be taxed a lot more imo.

It’s a bit like being in opposition in government isn’t it? Extremely easy to say what you “would” do, when you don’t actually have to do it.
As many have pointed out on this thread, a £2m house is a standard family home in parts of the country.

All those years ago it wasn't a "very small amount of money" it was a "large amount of money" it only looks small now because the currency has been devalued. He spend a "large amount of money" on to by "one house". He still has "one house" and it is still only worth "one house". He's made no gain at all, very probably the affordably ratio, the ratio of house hold income to mortgage payments is still the same. This narrative that houses were "peanuts" in the past and people are now sitting on "a goldmine" is for the birds. Houses are and always have been very very expensive and do and did, take focus, sacrifice dedication and prioritisation to buy

He's made no gain at all

You just jumped the shark.

Because some people work all hours to better themselves. I have 2,jobs at the age of 60, because of a situation which happened to us.
I do not wish to pay more tax for people who do not want to work hard. I am more than happy for my tax to pay for those who are unable to do so, but too many people feel it is their right to take money from others, when they are more than capable of working as hard as me.

I pay basically no attention to my deductions. I get what I get, and I’m grateful that it’s enough for my family.

I do pay more tax than I did 5 years ago, because I’ve changed thresholds. Not bothered.

I get paid what I get paid, they take what they take, I don’t see it as optional or “theft” as others claim, and if it supports a family with less than mine - good.

You do know that it costs money to run the country? You’re all carrying on as if every penny of tax collected is spent on benefits. You’re not going to pay this tax - or at least I assume not if you need two jobs.

That’s not true. We live in the highest CT area in the country and will still need to pay it.

He had one house, he still has one (the same ) house. Happy if you can tell me what the gain is in that situation? I

f he had £15K in the bank and now has £2M in the bank that would be different, but that is not the situation

That’s a different point though. You’re considering the equity in his house which is more of a CGT issue. What about those who have £2M home bought entirely with taxed income, no equity built up (due to time bought), mortgages, etc.? Should they pay the £2.5K?

The gain is the difference between the £15,000 he paid for it and the £2 million it would now fetch, ie £1.985 million. But apparently he’s made no gain at all. Make it make sense.

Where is that £2M now? In what bank? In what name? It hasn't actually "fetched" £2M has it? That is a theoretical paper gain that doesn't actually exist. At the moment it eventually sells, yes there may well be a gain but until that point, there is no actual gain.

So pop in an extra £2.5k on top then? If you’ve enough for your family and you think the tax is reasonable and you wouldn’t blink? Then pay it, try it out, see how that feels for you. HMRC has the means for you to do so if you wish. Or would that feel unfair to you? Even though you admit you have more than other people?
Or do you just want this to be paid by people who have more than…you?

And when it sells he will either be dead and pay IHT or it will pay for his care?

I clearly wasn’t referring to the severely disabled on the basis they’re neither feckless or lazy, to use my previous wording. They should be supported, more than they currently are.

Because if he sold it, it would be worth a lot more? Now, he doesn't want to sell it that's true! But given there is a mechanism to defer paying the tax if you can't afford it until you DO sell, then he hasn't lost at all has he?

It's true part of the increase in the value of the house is because of inflation. It would have been an expensive house when he bought it. But house prices have increased in value far above the rate of inflation and far above the rate that wages have gone up. That's not debatable. You would have to be reasonably well of to buy that sort of house in the 1960s, now you would need to be very very rich.

The other aspect affecting the value of the house (apart from his own spending improving it) is government investment in the area: continuing to provide services, building infrastructure, maintaining the parkland etc. it's not only people on benefits who benefit from public spending. People that own land see that land value go up as a result of the government spending tax money. So while he has been paying taxes all his life he has also been benefitting from the government spending those taxes and continues to do so. As it should be.

Am not sure where you got the ‘feel sorry’. Of course it’s a choice, the point is these kinds of people are not the wealthy that need to in some way pay more tax……

I don’t try and reason with stupid though….there is no point. Good luck to you.