Autumn Statement 2015
Discussion
Justayellowbadge said:
As has been pointed to, this won't apply to institutional investors, and they are already heavily investing in the sector.
Any hoovering to be done probably shan't be ftb.
And bearing in mind how much money these institutions pour into political parties (ironic considering the efforts they make not to contribute to the nation) I can't see the government doing anything that will dent their incomes in order to make life easier for the general populous.Any hoovering to be done probably shan't be ftb.
Tannedbaldhead said:
Why, bearing in mind just how skint the country still is should landlords not also bear some of the burden?
Because every day there seems to be a new rule, new regulation, new tax, new little box to tick. HMRC keeps giving me 'help' in the form of additional paperwork requirements. I currently bear more than 'some' of the burden & would like some others to take up their share of the slack.I already jump through hoops in order to pay a huge amount of taxes which seem to be wasted- it's at the point where I (and presumably many others) feel it's not worth making the effort just so the proceeds can be taken from me. It feels as if I might as well go have 27 children, drink Stella all day & have a waster's life funded by benefits instead of the 60+ hour weeks I often work.
Beware the law of unintended consequences.
PurpleMoonlight said:
I am very disappointed that he has abandoned the intention to reduce the free money given to people.
I am sick of paying for scroungers and breeders.
I think you have to be careful when the general media start talking about budgets. I am sick of paying for scroungers and breeders.
Tax credits are being phased out to be replaced by the universal credit which will be less generous. In four years time or so we will be spending the same on in work benefits as was planned before the House of Lords threw out the changes.
JagLover said:
PurpleMoonlight said:
I am very disappointed that he has abandoned the intention to reduce the free money given to people.
I am sick of paying for scroungers and breeders.
I think you have to be careful when the general media start talking about budgets. I am sick of paying for scroungers and breeders.
Tax credits are being phased out to be replaced by the universal credit which will be less generous. In four years time or so we will be spending the same on in work benefits as was planned before the House of Lords threw out the changes.
The permutations regarding what constitutes a "second property" for Stamp Duty purposes will almost definitely be complex and open to interpretation.
We already have a whole string of of regulations regarding second, third, fourth properties etc in place to cover Capital Gains Tax (CGT).
I hope that the new set of rules will shadow those already in place for CGT. If they don't, it will make life very difficult for people to have to hold in their heads two completely separate sets of tax rules in respect of owning multiple properties.
We already have a whole string of of regulations regarding second, third, fourth properties etc in place to cover Capital Gains Tax (CGT).
I hope that the new set of rules will shadow those already in place for CGT. If they don't, it will make life very difficult for people to have to hold in their heads two completely separate sets of tax rules in respect of owning multiple properties.
La Liga said:
Well this makes satire obsolete: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/video/2015/nov...
Did you see this? He's a good 'un.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Co...
turbobloke said:
La Liga said:
Well this makes satire obsolete: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/video/2015/nov...
Did you see this? He's a good 'un.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Co...
anonymous said:
[redacted]
So why do we think CMD or his associates won't rework the system to eliminate exactly that situation?Personally I have no idea and if I had the keys to number 10 there would be some serious changes, like it or not.
I would also suggest that in order to be paid your benefit you must either work a given number of hours in the community (be it cleaning, looking after elderly or whatever) or perhaps work a number of hours for a local business and eitehr way not many, say 16 a week.......just a thought.
One of the results is giving people purpose in life, the experience of actually getting off their arses rather than watching TV all day or necking wife beater and smoking roll-ups and if you're not prepared to give something back, you don't get your money....simples
Perhaps I've not thought this through in a serious fashion but you get the idea and to me it's called 'Being a valuable member of society'
HoHoHo said:
So why do we think CMD or his associates won't rework the system to eliminate exactly that situation?
Personally I have no idea and if I had the keys to number 10 there would be some serious changes, like it or not.
I would also suggest that in order to be paid your benefit you must either work a given number of hours in the community (be it cleaning, looking after elderly or whatever) or perhaps work a number of hours for a local business and eitehr way not many, say 16 a week.......just a thought.
One of the results is giving people purpose in life, the experience of actually getting off their arses rather than watching TV all day or necking wife beater and smoking roll-ups and if you're not prepared to give something back, you don't get your money....simples
Perhaps I've not thought this through in a serious fashion but you get the idea and to me it's called 'Being a valuable member of society'
There are many shades of opinion regarding benefits.Personally I have no idea and if I had the keys to number 10 there would be some serious changes, like it or not.
I would also suggest that in order to be paid your benefit you must either work a given number of hours in the community (be it cleaning, looking after elderly or whatever) or perhaps work a number of hours for a local business and eitehr way not many, say 16 a week.......just a thought.
One of the results is giving people purpose in life, the experience of actually getting off their arses rather than watching TV all day or necking wife beater and smoking roll-ups and if you're not prepared to give something back, you don't get your money....simples
Perhaps I've not thought this through in a serious fashion but you get the idea and to me it's called 'Being a valuable member of society'
Some think they should be nil and the poor, sick and elderly should die in ditches - like they once used to in Britain and still do in many parts of the world.
Some think current benefits are not enough and the above should get far more.
Some think that basic benefits should exist but that they shouldn't encourage indigence and unwillingness to work.
Most people would be in the last category, In their own inefficient and bonkers fashion, that is what the Tax Credit system was all about.
I'm all in favour of something like the Tax Credit system - but the system is cumbersome and has lots of issues. It does need a drastic overhaul.
Tannedbaldhead said:
13m said:
Tannedbaldhead said:
The answer to all these anecdotes is "we agree it is unfair but the country is skint. there isn't a magic money tree". The government tells us we are all in this together. I'm on half the money I was on in 2007 and my company BMW 525 is now a company Astra. I'm working just as hard and efficiently as I did pre-recession and am in no way to blame for my predicament. Why, bearing in mind just how skint the country still is should landlords not also bear some of the burden?
Weren't you telling us earlier that all landlords are actually skint? There's a good reason.I bought my first bungalow when I was 24 and not on a particularly big wage. That's the way it should be.
Chasing BTL out of the market will not solve the house price issue. BTL is just the way a home is financed. If I turned all my BTL's over to my tenants, there would be no more or less homes available on the market. If I evict my tenants and sell them on the open market I've added x number house, plus the same number of families onto the market. Which ever way you finance a home you cannot fit more families into the same number of houses.
To out it another way, if BTL is causing the issue, the how much of an issue is shared ownership? Does it make a difference to the market if someone buys with a 50% share, and rents the other 50%? Have they removed 50% of a house from the open market? The answer is of course no, because it makes no difference how they finance the house, its still one family, one house.
I actually stand to gain very nicely from house price inflation, but like you I don't want houses to be so expensive. I would like my kids to be able to buy a modest home on an average salary (that's not a lot to ask is it?). I would like people to have the choice to buy if they want to, and rent if they want to. I would like to grow a business as a decent landlord but it makes no sense any more.
The problem as ever is that we don't build enough houses to meet the demand. If we could do that we would be back to a truly free market, and house would be sensible prices (both to rent or buy)
Unfortunately we have a market with a limited supply, and the government thinks it will help by adding further costs to the supply chain. Unfortunately one way or another those costs will end up back with the consumer. They always do.
98elise said:
Unfortunately we have a market with a limited supply, and the government thinks it will help by adding further costs to the supply chain. Unfortunately one way or another those costs will end up back with the consumer. They always do.
Will they?Rent's will be dictated by the market, and only a very small proportion of the market will have suffered the additional SDLT.
I suspect for the foreseeable future at least, it will be landlords that pick up the cost.
Elroy Blue said:
La Liga said:
t's important to have a strong opposition, and I am not really seeing one at the moment.
This is the most important point. We simply don't have a viable opposition at he moment and that is not good for democracy. 
but has its limitations.Due to Party disunity the Conservatives didn't offer a viable opposition for some time after Bliar's snake oil landslide, we then had 13 disastrous years of government incompetence ending in a worse pickle than we needed or wanted to be in as Gordon had turned the taps on ca 2001.
Even so, an Opposition can do little more than rearrange hot air in fancy-sounding packets. There's no responsibility attached, they don't have to actually do anything, they're effectively impotent. A sitting government needs to start imploding, or appear to, for the Opposition to get an
Even though the Labour hangover isn't fully cured yet, at least on this occasion the Party in office knows a lot more about running a successful national economy, the platform needed for a higher tax take without punishment for success by tax rate (the latter being Labour style). All public services have a better long-term future from tax monies rather than borrowing and debt.
June 2015 UK deficit at lowest in seven years with tax receipts growing as a strong jobs market delivers high employment and wage growth which are boosting the Government tax take
Snips:
Article said:
A jump in receipts increased the Government's total tax take to £11.5bn in June, the highest level since records began in 1997.
Improvements in revenues meant that the deficit dropped to its lowest level in seven years this June.
Great news. If Labour remains in opposition for a couple of General Elections we may never see them devastate the country again...at the very least for a very long time. The real problem isn'y so much that Corbyn and McDonnell are a laughing stock now, it's that they may not last to 2015 and if they do, may not be around afterwards.Improvements in revenues meant that the deficit dropped to its lowest level in seven years this June.
Tannedbaldhead said:
I wouldn't mind if it finished the types I describe. Chase BTL out of the market and the combination of a huge drop in demand and an increase in supply as they are force to punt their stock will re-introduce affordable owner occupation to the young and the less well off.
Sorry, but you're completely deluded if you think that's the case.Firstly, the really big investors will be buying the "FTB" type homes - they are already doing so.
Secondly, if BTL are "chased out of the market", where do you suggest the people live who can't get a mortgage? The councils aren't building enough properties to satisfy demand as it is. A lot of my tenants wouldn't qualify (or would have an incredibly long wait) for a council house, they would never get a mortgage but would still like somewhere to live.
So what's your solution?
Outside of London and the Home Counties, the "property bubble" is a myth. Ask people on here with properties (whether BTL or their own) in most areas of the Midlands, North West, North East etc. if their houses are increasing rapidly in value & you'd be surprised. Sure, there are areas which are very "hot" but on the whole, they aren't.
Also, anyone thinking that there is anyway properties in London are going to be "affordable" for a FTB ever again needs help.
Eric Mc said:
Most people would be in the last category, In their own inefficient and bonkers fashion, that is what the Tax Credit system was all about.
I'm all in favour of something like the Tax Credit system - but the system is cumbersome and has lots of issues. It does need a drastic overhaul.
ThisI'm all in favour of something like the Tax Credit system - but the system is cumbersome and has lots of issues. It does need a drastic overhaul.
In principle there isn't anything particularly wrong about the government subsidising the wages of low earners. The problem is the system used to do so and the way it both subsidises lifestyle choices and discourages working more than a set number of hours in a job with few opportunities for progression.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff