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/

Where are you getting your data from? ISC released figures that 30 k kids had been pulled out of fee paying schools since VAT was introduced, and that 100-105 schools had closed. While I recognise the falling birth rate - it didn’t decrease that much in five terms!

For the love of god, aren’t you just an envious idiot.

Why should someone pay tax on something they’ve already paid for just because it’s increased in value

"fairness"

What am I envious of?

From The Times on 31 May

Since the introduction of a 20 per cent VAT charge on private school fees in January 2025, the number of independent schools shutting has risen modestly. Across the independent sector, including special educational needs schools, closures rose from 58 in 2024 to 71 in 2025

Although closure numbers have fluctuated in recent years — from 66 in 2021 to a peak of 85 in 2023 before falling to 71 in 2025 — analysts say such movements are not unusual.

Where is the data on the number of kids removed from schools? As well as a statement that school closures is a result of a falling birth rates and not VAT?

Total Drop: Independent schools have seen a reduction of 30,000 to over 33,000 students since the 20% VAT policy took effect in January 2025.
Impacted Year Groups: Declines have been steepest in intake years, with drops of up to 6.6% in Year 1 (primary), Year 3 (prep school), and Year 12 (sixth form)

https://www.nuffieldfoundation.org/news/why-falling-birth-rates-mean-big-changes-for-englands-schools

You must be confused, that address the impact of a falling birth rate, not the impact of VAT. While the two are not mutually exclusive one is not solely related to the other.

It shows that the falling birth rate is reducing demand for places in all schools therefore the fall in numbers is multi faceted and not solely attributable to the introduction of VAT. I don’t think it’s me who’s confused.

Oh I think you are, I referred to the falling birth rate having an effect, you referenced it as THE reason.

Nonetheless, while I have clearly stated that I am happy to pay tax, that there is a falling birth rate, that I am not entirely opposed a LVT, but that there needs to be other systemic changes, you are just attack, attack, attack - without offering solutions.

Its pointless engaging any further. Good luck to you.

How about this one for £838/sq ft?
www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/71331788/

Maybe you'll argue that it's actually in Fulham even though there are plenty of establishments describing themselves as "Chelsea" to the west of it.

£1,100/sq ft however will get you loads of decent listings in the heart of Chelsea. So it's a bit of a stretch to say that £2m only gets you a 1,000 sq ft flat (i.e. £2,000/sq ft), isn't it? You can pay that price, but only if you go out of your way to do so.

I didn’t. But never mind. I appreciate comprehension can be difficult.

Sorry, that is not the heart of Chelsea, it’s definitely the cheap end! It’s definitely not prime central London, not by a country mile. Have you actually been down there? It’s by the Worlds End estate, not the nicest place. There are of course some nice streets in SW10. That isn’t one of them.

£1,100 will NOT get you a lot in the heart of Chelsea, as I previously said, it’s a basement or a short lease.

Prime Chelsea, SW3, Sloane Court West and East. Smith Street, Dovehouse Street, area around Chelsea Green (NOT Sloane Avenue). That list is not definitive, it’s just what popped into my head.

I have lived in the area for years and years, and know what I am talking about. I am pretty sure though that you won’t accept that someone that actually lives in the location, has done for years and has had a number of flats in the SW3 postcode doesn’t know what they are talking about.

94sq m isn't that small for a three-bed, it's actually the national average for a three-bed. New builds went much smaller than that after Thatcher abandoned the Parker Morris standards. Before the NDSS was adopted in 2015, RIBA found three-bed newbuilds as small as 65sq m. That's the same floor space per bedroom that I have - a bit small, but manageable if you don't accumulate lots of crap.

I'm guessing that when you lived abroad it was somewhere like Australia or the US, where land is cheap. Maybe that's distorted your perception of what is 'normal' and caused you to (somewhat rudely) describe my home as an "attic".

We are not the US, we are a small, crowded country. Our average dwelling size is 96sq m (1,033 sq ft) Go to Germany and the average dwelling size drops to 94sq m. France 93 sq m. Belgium averages a mere 86sq m, Ireland 88sq m, but the Netherlands 107. We're pretty average among our European peers and considerably more generous than much of Asia.

Are you saying that Capital Gains should not be taxed at all? So tax breaks for billionaires while PAYE workers get fleeced?

So you're now defining a very limited area of very exclusive streets in "prime Chelsea"? Even looking at some of the places you've listed, I'm still finding a handful of properties for less than £2000/sq m.

I've forgotten, why did you drag me off on this tangent? What is the argument you're making that relates to taxation?

No idea! Your choice to look into it, I didn’t drag you anywhere. I was merely pointing out that that link wasn’t the heart of Chelsea……which it isn’t. You had made an argument that the bigger the footprint the more public services used,,,,,I had put forward what about small flats in Chelsea over the £2m mark. You then set out to make the point, it seemed to me, that I was wrong about small flats in Chelsea being caught by the mansion tax, by linking the flat down at World’s end and references it as being in the heart of Chelsea.

I also very clearly stated that the streets I had listed were not the only ones, just the ones that popped into my head.

I think you were arguing that it was very possible to get a flat in the heart of Chelsea for circa £1000 a square foot, unless it’s a basement/ short lease I put forward that it isn’t. I also didn’t state that every flat was £2million or more…..but yes a decent size two bedroom, not on basement or top floor walk up will be a lot more than £1000 sq ft in the heart of Chelsea. The prices will of course have dropped, as let’s face it £2 million will be the cliff edge, makes sense for there to be ‘price inprovements’ .

That link you posted was very far off the heart of Chelsea.

I just can't work out how my post at 12:05 (about the benefit of Land Value Tax over the present system) was relevant to yours which quoted it at 15:41.

Unless you thought that I was arguing in favour of taxing by property value, rather than land value. Land value taxing means that a townhouse divided up into flats would pay the same as an identical townhouse not divided up into flats - you're taxing the plot, not the building. Therefore encouraging more efficient use of the most valuable land, encouraging high density development.

No, my abroad was just across the channel, and yes, land was cheap but building costs were not.

i think it’s a shame that 94m2 is average, but I consider myself to be fortunate to have more space, however, I too would be interested to see what will happen if this tax goes ahead to people who have recently paid huge sums in stamp duty. We could be quite close to the £2 million threshold so it would feel particularly unfair.

sorry about the attic comment, you said you lived in 45m2, I struggled to see how that could be a whole house but you have confirmed that it is.

There are some very interesting statistics here:
squaremeterstosquarefeet.com/

Until you realise you have probably paid £200k+ in mortgage interest on £400k property...

There is no point working today, the top 2% already pay 40% of tax revenues.

We have retired early at 50, downsized to enjoy life, rather than continue to pay a massive mortgage and a ridiculous amount of tax that just gets wasted by successive governments. Especially after watching my FIL lose everything to a broken social care system.

Unlikely given that the top 1% pay 29% of income tax. Obviously there are many other forms of taxation which make up total tax revenues and are spread equally over all income groups

Equally if you didn’t pay mortgage interest you’d have to pay rent and have nothing to show for it at the end of 25 years.