Mansion Tax at £1.5m - what will this mean?

[MaureenOHara]

Does anyone have any idea what this might mean for an individual and what it might do to the market. What happened to the £2m market and will that be replicated or is it different?

If you have a few houses and they are all under 1.5mil, then you don't pay it as it is per house then.

As Burnham is so keen on localism, surely the mansion tax should be relative to local house prices, not a set amount? So if your property is in the top 10% (say) in your area, you pay x% of that value in tax. In London and other expensive areas that might be a % of £1.5m but in others it would be same % but of £600,000. So you are still being taxed for having an “expensive” house but the amount takes into account relative differences in what counts as expensive.

The problem with increasing CGT is that the reason it was reduced was because they took away indexation allowance to simplify things.

if they don’t reintroduce IA then people are just going to be paying tax on inflationary gains so it makes investing pointless

I wouldn’t mind if they had taken a political hippocractic oath, and Starmer had stuck to his promise ‘to tread lightly on our lives’ (liar), but they have done nothing but wage an ideological war on many of us.

Who can forget the sneering, and the rhetoric from Starmer, Reeves, Rayner, Phillipson, Powell et al.

Yes exactly this, I really hope @Mouldemortreads this and can see your point.

That is what will happen of they don’t change course very quickly, which they won’t because they are certain that they are right even though all of the data proves the opposite. I can’t even comprehend the mental contortions involved.

The problem they will have is that next year when the new wave of inflation feeds through to energy bills, mortgage rates, rents and food prices even the slow amongst the electorate will realise that their words were nonsense and living standards are falling even faster, not rising as “Andy” promised them. The economic facts will be so dire that no amount of posturing and attempting to blame it on geopolitical issues will work when it’s so obvious that their own actions have made the impact ten times worse than it needed to be, or is in other countries who had the same geopolitical issues to deal with.

The problem for all of us is that even when the slow and the professional northerners in the electorate realise they’ve been screwed over, there is nobody competent to take over instead. We have disgraced aConservatives who expelled everyone competent from their party and are now composed of the intellectually challenged just like Labour, but in this case obsessed with culture wars rather than class wars and still so deluded they can’t admit Brexit was an act of gross stupidity and want to blame things like maternity leave or disabled children etc for the UK’s economic woes. 🙄 Or you have Reform or the Greens, whose MPs are so completely insane that it’s debatable whether they should be allowed out in public let alone considered as a viable option to govern a country. It’s like a Monty Python sketch and quite astonishing that such complete idiots have seats in Parliament. Quite embarrassing to be British these days.

That was a huge lie. It lasted a few weeks.

Not sure you have.

Sure, you stop people saving nothing, but how do you incentivise them to save more than the compulsory minimum? You know, actually save an amount that goes some way towards minimising or eliminating their future burden on the state, while also potentially still generating tax revenue for the public purse?

Nor have you answered my point about the social contract. Why should it continually be weakened for those who contribute the most? The welfare state and the NHS were designed for everyone, not just the poor, those in immediate need or the disabled. The principle was that we all contribute to a collective system and all have access to its protections when we need them, including in old age.

Nor have you answered why contributors should continually be expected to pay for government incompetence, poor long-term planning and geopolitical instability. At what point does government have some responsibility to manage the money it already takes more effectively rather than continually looking for another group from whom it can take more? We already have a pretty good example of what happens when you create perverse incentives around £100k . People change their behaviour, reduce their hours, put more into pensions ( not under your system) or turn down additional work.

You are effectively proposing the same thing. You want people to take greater responsibility for providing for themselves, while creating an effective penalty for providing more than the minimum. Making it compulsory might make people save the amount you tell them to. It doesn't give them a reason to save significantly more. In fact, your proposal gives them a very good reason not to.

And then we're back to the same old question... Why the fuck should I bother?

What may see this 1.5m threshold consigned to the bin, is the Labour governing classes in Islington, coupled with the forthcoming Holborn by-election.

Socialism for thee, but not them.

Sunak called him out countless times during electioneering.

Cue the pursed lips and the narrowed porcine eyes.

I thought you meant no tax at all.

You can't hog land in a national park...

A simple solution.

Pay the PM and the cabinet properly - Singapore style.

Attract the best - from business etc. No more bitter and twisted career politicos with an axe to grind.

It’s the only way.

Do you think the electorate will vote for a top businessman? sunak is probably the closest we’ve had to one of them and he was boring apparently.

I don’t understand the argument that means testing the state pension means people won’t bother to save. The fact pension credit exists doesn’t stop me working & saving into a pension. The fact social housing or housing benefit exists doesn’t stop me buying a house & paying a mortgage. The fact universal credit exists & that some have more dc than me but don’t work or work less didn’t stop me working or having the number of dc I felt I could afford.

Wandsworth is nearly doubling council tax for next year isnt it ?

Yes he didn’t need a high salary, but the media, Labour and electorate used that as a main point against him.

I used business as an example - the cabinet could be made up from engineering, science, tech, finance - you name it, but real world experience/acumen. Not a high school drop out with a penchant for teenage pregnancy, prosecco and fiddling tax.

As to boring, I would take that in spades, right now.

Subject to a Tory legal challenge.

If you are saving and will end up with a pension of £15k pa but this means you lose the £13k state pension then why would you save that money and not just spend it. Obviously there comes a point where people would rather save because they want a higher income than the state pension can provide.

there would also have to be tapering so you don’t end up with someone with a lower private pension ending up better off because they get the state pension

or you blow through your private pension in your first good 10 years of retirement and then rely on the state pension for the remainder

The compulsory minimum savings if raised even a couple of percentage points (which is easily affordable AS well as significant tax cuts AND a massive investment in infrastructure, education and defence) will ensure that even those with minimum wage earnings should receive in retirement significantly MORE than the current state pension when they retire, and would be able to do so at a younger age than currently.

As I pointed out, if we just put £10k for each child born in the UK into a DC pension fund the year they are born and they never made a single pension contribution themselves then, in real terms, their projected pension pot at 68 would be £1m if it was invested in a simple global index tracker (based on the average post-inflation growth rate over the last 70 years).

Surely that’s more sensible than paying each pensioner more than this PER YEAR.

This is the problem with the UK as I’ve set out repeatedly. Obvious long-term choices at a small initial cost are not made so we end up crippling our economy with enormous unnecessary costs which prevent tax revenues being spent on what they need to be spent on to create prosperity: education, infrastructure, R&D, a functional justice system, a proper industrial strategy, energy, food and water security, appropriate levels of defence spending, support for business start ups, adult retraining and upskilling, etc.

The problem for all of us is that even when the slow and the professional northerners in the electorate realise they’ve been screwed over, there is nobody competent to take over instead. We have disgraced aConservatives who expelled everyone competent from their party and are now composed of the intellectually challenged just like Labour, but in this case obsessed with culture wars rather than class wars and still so deluded they can’t admit Brexit was an act of gross stupidity and want to blame things like maternity leave or disabled children etc for the UK’s economic woes. 🙄 Or you have Reform or the Greens, whose MPs are so completely insane that it’s debatable whether they should be allowed out in public let alone considered as a viable option to govern a country. It’s like a Monty Python sketch and quite astonishing that such complete idiots have seats in Parliament. Quite embarrassing to be British these days

Yes, there is no party I want to vote for & so many of the electorate think that Reform will fix things. It’s laughable.

Well me too but do you remember Gove and his ‘people have had enough of experts’ - he seemed to tap into a feeling that seems to have ballooned

honestly, it wouldn’t surprise me if we ended up with Harry Redknapp as PM if we ruled out all the politicos!

It would be truly hilarious if they weren’t going to drag the rest of us down with them. It is like living in a Kafka novel. Funny from the outside and I expect when people learn about it in history lessons in the future they will be equally baffled and amused by the stupidity, but for our children and young people it is sadly far from funny because they will have to live with the consequences, which will be dire if we continue to get even worse politicians with every new election/ undemocratically and forcibly installed defacto moronic Prime Minister.

This times a million. I couldn’t have put it better myself.

I’m starting to think what’s the point in being aspirational. It’ll only get taken off me.

That’d be good. Instead we have Phillipson, Rayner and co bitterly kicking anyone successful. And people say fab. Ridiculous.