Please or to access all these features

Property/DIY

Join our Property forum for renovation, DIY, and house selling advice.

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

856 replies

MaureenOHara · 20/09/2026 09:27

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?

OP posts:
Mouldemort · 20/09/2026 16:19

LifeOnEnceladus · 20/09/2026 16:15

Then it should be a tax on actual assets, not a tax levied in many cases on debt which already means that many of those paying it will already have significantly less disposable income than those who live in cheaper areas and often in much more luxurious houses.

You can live where you want, take on whatever debt you want based on your income, and anyone who choses to incur a relatively tiny cost to borrow money to bring themselves into the new bracket has the choice not to do so. It will barely impact them. And the house is an asset, with value, that you own, that you can sell. They will not have "significantly less income," in the example above, it's 0.8% of their income.

KrankyKumquat · 20/09/2026 16:20

@BananaPeels just making stuff up doesn't win the argument.

BananaPeels · 20/09/2026 16:20

KrankyKumquat · 20/09/2026 16:20

@BananaPeels just making stuff up doesn't win the argument.

What have I made up?

SirenScream · 20/09/2026 16:20

Schlossadler · 20/09/2026 14:09

Explain something to me, please.

Let’s take Llloyds Bank - they have a UK residential mortgage book of approx 300bn GBP. Their lending criteria is premised on a LTV of say 60% average.

Now, say property values become further depressed owing to Labours latest wheeze. That means, logically Lloyds mortgage book needs to be revalued - and their LTV rises.

What is Lloyds going to do? Well, its going to increase rate margins (in an already tightening monetary environment), and it will cut lending and/or increase required deposit ratios.

How is that good for potential borrowers, and how is that good for the broader housing market?

if lending is cut then property prices will fall, too much lending is a big part of the reason that property prices have risen disproportionately

bananaobama · 20/09/2026 16:22

Notmycircusnotmyotter · 20/09/2026 16:04

Classic Labour. Politics of envy. Squeeze middle earners in the south until they give up / cut their hours.

Middle earners? Are you quite well?

im a middle earner. I cant afford £1.5m on a house

KrankyKumquat · 20/09/2026 16:22

BananaPeels · 20/09/2026 16:20

What have I made up?

"But it won’t stop at £1.5 million will it?. It will soon drop to £500k- then you will have outliers of people who have equity of £200k being taxed on a £500k property vs someone who owns a £300k property outright paying no tax"

PigletJohn · 20/09/2026 16:22

@HareBrewery "Most older people are living below the poverty line"

I don't believe you.

I have a feeling that most people living below the poverty line do not live in homes worth £1.5 million.

Older people, as a whole, are better off than younger people.

They have more wealth, own more houses, have better pensions.

myjamisbetterthanyours · 20/09/2026 16:24

PigletJohn · 20/09/2026 16:22

@HareBrewery "Most older people are living below the poverty line"

I don't believe you.

I have a feeling that most people living below the poverty line do not live in homes worth £1.5 million.

Older people, as a whole, are better off than younger people.

They have more wealth, own more houses, have better pensions.

Is that feelings that you have?

Not evidence?

LifeOnEnceladus · 20/09/2026 16:24

BananaPeels · 20/09/2026 16:15

The government can pass any law it likes. That is the will of parliament. A wealth tax in itself is very un British but they are going for it anyway. vAT on education goes against everything that we stood for before that education was a public good but they did it anyway. This government will do anything to raise money on ideological grounds.

Edited

My point is that if they decide to pass a law that conflicts with almost all existing UK property laws then they have to rewrite all of those as well in order to make them not conflict. You will see at the end of pieces of legislation a section entitled “consequential amendments” where they have to do this so that a new law is viable.

As I’ve explained, what they are proposing will not be legal because it conflicts with all of our other existing laws about the protection of private property and privacy from the state which doesn’t allow forced entry of the state into private property except where there is significant evidence that a crime has taken place on the premises, and which mean that it is codified in law that transaction prices take precedence over valuation estimates (which also underpins an enormous part of our entire economic and financial system!), and change our entire legal process which puts the burden of proof on the party making the claim not the one defending it. Much international law also prohibits some of what they are proposing. So they either have to change hundreds of UK laws and the entire basis upon which our legal system and the rule of law in the UK functions, and lobby to change international law, and change the fundamental basis of property rights in the UK dating back to Magna Carta in 1215 and all subsequent laws based on these principles, in order to negate them and all of the case law and legal precedents built upon them, or they will find themselves tied up in endless very expensive litigation which they will lose (the cost of which will far outweigh what they hope to raise from this tax).

myjamisbetterthanyours · 20/09/2026 16:26

bananaobama · 20/09/2026 16:22

Middle earners? Are you quite well?

im a middle earner. I cant afford £1.5m on a house

That’s why many living in these houses can’t afford it either and are mortgaged to the hilt.

Because they work in the area and want a reasonably peaceful area.

PigletJohn · 20/09/2026 16:26

Notmycircusnotmyotter · 20/09/2026 16:04

Classic Labour. Politics of envy. Squeeze middle earners in the south until they give up / cut their hours.

I have great difficulty in believing that middle earners have two million pound houses.

What do you imagine is the UK median earnings?
(Of people should pay tax)

Mouldemort · 20/09/2026 16:29

myjamisbetterthanyours · 20/09/2026 16:24

Is that feelings that you have?

Not evidence?

We've actually plumbed the depths and reached "poor little old lady in a mansion" discourse!

If a pensioner living in a £1.5m is income-poor, that's a high-class problem, easily solved and not a reason not to introduce a wealth tax. In fact, this proposal deals with this issue.

While I am sad for the tiny handful of little old ladies on low income living in the 1% of properties in the UK which will be hit by this tax, it's not a reason not to introduce it.

Vanillaicelatte · 20/09/2026 16:29

caringcarer · 20/09/2026 16:03

Thin end of the wedge. I think before long Labour will want the tax on anyone with a house worth 1 million. I hope Labour get voted out. They are overtaxing everyone.

i agree but who are you going to vote for

EasternStandard · 20/09/2026 16:31

Mouldemort · 20/09/2026 16:29

We've actually plumbed the depths and reached "poor little old lady in a mansion" discourse!

If a pensioner living in a £1.5m is income-poor, that's a high-class problem, easily solved and not a reason not to introduce a wealth tax. In fact, this proposal deals with this issue.

While I am sad for the tiny handful of little old ladies on low income living in the 1% of properties in the UK which will be hit by this tax, it's not a reason not to introduce it.

Why so keen for ever more taxes? Did you buy into Labour’s lines at the GE re fully funded?

Their policies mean they keep having to introduce more, they don’t get what the issue is.

bananaobama · 20/09/2026 16:31

@PigletJohn

people moaning dont realise how well off they are

saying thwy are middle earners but probably earn £100k

Mouldemort · 20/09/2026 16:31

PigletJohn · 20/09/2026 16:26

I have great difficulty in believing that middle earners have two million pound houses.

What do you imagine is the UK median earnings?
(Of people should pay tax)

2.2% of properties are captured by this, and they aren't remotely "middle earners" and at the very least they are wealthy beyond the dreams of most people even if they are.

If you live in a £2m house and you can't afford an extra £2500 a year, move to a slightly more modest house, or leave Kensington and move to Zone 2.

myjamisbetterthanyours · 20/09/2026 16:32

Mouldemort · 20/09/2026 16:29

We've actually plumbed the depths and reached "poor little old lady in a mansion" discourse!

If a pensioner living in a £1.5m is income-poor, that's a high-class problem, easily solved and not a reason not to introduce a wealth tax. In fact, this proposal deals with this issue.

While I am sad for the tiny handful of little old ladies on low income living in the 1% of properties in the UK which will be hit by this tax, it's not a reason not to introduce it.

Tax the old lady so we give more benefits?

Who was it that says that? Or words to that effect?

Someone in the cabinet, wasn’t it?

KrankyKumquat · 20/09/2026 16:33

@PigletJohn
About £39k, even less if you include part timers.

To buy a £2 million house with a standard 10% deposit, you'd need a household income of over £300k. Not exactly poverty line or even middle class.

EasternStandard · 20/09/2026 16:34

myjamisbetterthanyours · 20/09/2026 16:32

Tax the old lady so we give more benefits?

Who was it that says that? Or words to that effect?

Someone in the cabinet, wasn’t it?

They’re definitely on the who can we tax next part of that line.

Araminta1004 · 20/09/2026 16:34

So a 1,500,000 house sale currently gets them over 93,500. Depressing it to £1400000 get them 83750 instead so a loss of almost 10000. As the mansion tax is relatively minor cash now for councils, but the sovereign debt is huge, deliberately depressing the biggest money spinning of stamp duty at that level for an envy tax is just going to lose money. Buyers always factor in the time value of money. Stamp duty is 10% and 12% at highest levels, more for additional properties. On sale, the Government is already making a wealth tax killing anyway.

I rest my case, this is 100% a North South divide envy tax as it will lose money.

LifeOnEnceladus · 20/09/2026 16:39

Mouldemort · 20/09/2026 16:19

You can live where you want, take on whatever debt you want based on your income, and anyone who choses to incur a relatively tiny cost to borrow money to bring themselves into the new bracket has the choice not to do so. It will barely impact them. And the house is an asset, with value, that you own, that you can sell. They will not have "significantly less income," in the example above, it's 0.8% of their income.

Oh dear. You don’t seem to understand that the amount of income someone has is not a percentage of their gross salary, because there is this thing called “tax” which is deducted first.

Your view epitomises the lack of economic understanding which is evident in the current cabinet. The country needs the people who earn the salaries in stressful jobs with a lot of responsibility, who pay the vast majority of tax revenues which fund the services for everyone else in the country. The UK now has the most top heavy tax system of any country in the developed world. Meanwhile, economic studies have shown that people who earn these salaries have less disposable income on average than those who earn far less and live in cheaper areas. Often they have to live in expensive areas in order to earn these salaries which mean that they can fund the rest of the country. Only London and the South East make a net contribution in tax revenue. They are already penalised by the punitive taxes and high housing costs, having to pay far more for a modest family home. They then don’t receive lots of the freebies like child benefit, childcare funding etc, so fund these services for everyone else but don’t even get to use them. When housing and tax is taken into account people earning £100k and living in London or the SE are on average poorer than those earning the average UK salary and living in an area with cheap housing, while often working longer hours/ studying for years to become skilled professionals etc, in jobs that we really need people to do to make the country function/ to raise enough tax revenue for the services everyone else demands.

You clearly resent people who earn more than you do but if you penalise them any more than they are being penalised already more and more will conclude it’s not worth the effort. This is why we have a brain drain of skilled professionals and business people emigrating, people retiring early or cutting their working hours. If you remove all incentive and keep hammering them for their hard work then eventually a significant proportion stop bothering. It’s no surprise that there’s an annual announcement of another “black hole” because people obviously respond to incentives and penalties and adapt their behaviour accordingly.

So continue to be spiteful if you wish but it’s bad economics, as the last two years have already proved and if our politicians are incompetent enough that they double down on this approach they will simply accelerate the declining living standards for everyone. This is an economic fact which has been proven in many countries around the world every time this approach has been tried.

It’s called “biting the hand that feeds you”, or “killing the goose that lays the golden egg”, although in this case the goose largely seems to have either decided to retire early, work part time or migrate. This isn’t theory, there is data demonstrating this which was presented by economists to Rachel Reeves and Jeremy Hunt before her. Sadly we have such an economically illiterate electorate that they lap up this class war nonsense, just like with the Brexit bullshit and the idiots who proclaimed that “they didn’t care if it made them poorer”. Now they’ve got exactly what they wished for exactly like they were warned they would but are still full of excuses and blaming everyone else. I presume this will be the same and they will go through some deluded mental contortions when their living standards continue to collapse in order to try to blame everybody else for the obvious outcome of them supporting tax policies which were proposed as a joke by Count Binface and not something that any remotely competent Government would actually try to implement because it’s economic suicide.

BeardySchnauzer · 20/09/2026 16:39

Yes it is not thought through and they really need to do a cost benefit analysis.

they need to start looking big picture because all this tinkering is just making the black hole bigger as it makes the borrowers jittery

MsGreying · 20/09/2026 16:49

£2M last week
£1.5 M this week
tomorrow all property.

They're coming for your money.

labourisnowdivisive · 20/09/2026 16:49

This announcement is so disappointing. Yet again we’re being punished for the high living costs in the SE. I work in the public sector and have to physically be in London for my job. I literally can’t magic more money out of thin air. Why is labour punishing me? I worked hard saving up for years to get on property ladder and this is the final straw. If it goes ahead I will stop being a life long labour voter. Enough is enough. Focus on creating some growth not making everyone poorer….

MsGreying · 20/09/2026 16:50

@labourisnowdivisive
You're right - without them building opportunities for growth then we are doomed in a dead spiral of taxation.

Swipe left for the next trending thread