mansion tax

[crankedup]

Alex said:

The money raised, if any, will be peanuts. It is the pure politics of envy.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2853524/Fa...

I wouldn't call it envy, unless you mean it just may appeal to those voters who have a disliking of people living in ultra expensive homes who might pay almost as much council tax as themselves who may live in home valued at less than one million (most).

[RYH64E]

crankedup said:

I wouldn't call it envy, unless you mean it just may appeal to those voters who have a disliking of people living in ultra expensive homes who might pay almost as much council tax as themselves who may live in home valued at less than one million (most).

It might appeal to those voters who want more and more free stuff paid for by anyone but themselves.

[Diderot]

Balls is a thick, inarticulate, economically illiterate scumbag. This isn't even politics of envy, this simple ery devised by a thick .

If these labour fkers had any intelligence, backbone, or indeed any sense of public duty, they would repeal the Climate Change Act that they introduced and save £18bn per year for the next 3 decades.

Mansion tax my arse.

[Burwood]

legzr1 said:

Well said.

We all know that £2,000,000+ home owners are actually on the bread line...

By all means vote labour-just dont come crying when they apply it to all properties,. even 200k

[98elise]

RYH64E said:

crankedup said:

I wouldn't call it envy, unless you mean it just may appeal to those voters who have a disliking of people living in ultra expensive homes who might pay almost as much council tax as themselves who may live in home valued at less than one million (most).

It might appeal to those voters who want more and more free stuff paid for by anyone but themselves.

Agreed. My view is that people should pay for what they use like everything else. Do people moan that they pay the same for their electricity/food/beer etc than someone in a more expensive house?

I doubt I will ever own a £2m house, but the notion of extra taxes on main homes worry me. Tax always creeps, once we have an additional value based tax, it won't be long before nothing other than the cheapest properties are exempt.

[legzr1]

Burwood said:

By all means vote labour-just dont come crying when they apply it to all properties,. even 200k

Thanks.

When the time comes, I'll choose wisely.


In the meantime, please don't try and convince people that owners of £2M homes are some kind of unfortunate minimum wage earners.

[Burwood]

legzr1 said:

Burwood said:

By all means vote labour-just dont come crying when they apply it to all properties,. even 200k

Thanks.

When the time comes, I'll choose wisely.


In the meantime, please don't try and convince people that owners of £2M homes are some kind of unfortunate minimum wage earners.

i know several and some live largely off of state pension and that's it. But im guessing you would have them sell the house and move or accrue the debt until they die.

[Impasse]

From the above link:

[turbobloke]

Article previously linked said:

Mr Miliband would fail to raise his target of £1.2billion a year. The CEBR said only £162million a year would be raised from the 54,000 homes worth £2million to £3million. The remaining £1.04billion would have to be found from the 43,000 homes worth over £3million, an average of £24,000 (per year). Miss Skero (of CEBR) who analysed Land Registry data, said: ‘It seems unlikely they will be able to enforce a tax payment that high.’

CEBR’s findings also showed that 46% of houses hit by the tax would be terraced homes.

Somebody without a PPE degree who made Miliband look amateurish and oafish on TV recently said "you can't just point at things and tax them" yet that's what passes as Labour 'thinking' when appealing to their envyist rump.

[sidicks]

legzr1 said:

Well said.

We all know that £2,000,000+ home owners are actually on the bread line...

1. Just because someone can afford something doesn't mean that it is fair for them to pay it
2. Particularly when (in this case) it has been purchased with income which has already been taxed.

But as has been widely acknowledged on here, this isn't about a credible, fair or economically rationale policy, it's an envy tax designed to appeal to the hard of thinking.

Edited by sidicks on Tuesday 23 December 23:07

[jonah35]

I think it's much fairer than income tax.

[sugerbear]

Fingers crossed they also introduce capital gains tax on residential properties as well.

[sidicks]

sugerbear said:

Fingers crossed they also introduce capital gains tax on residential properties as well.

Are you from the 'if it moves, tax it' school of thought (although little actual thought has gone into it)?

[sidicks]

jonah35 said:

I think it's much fairer than income tax.

Happy for it to replace income tax...

[Burwood]

sidicks said:

sugerbear said:

Fingers crossed they also introduce capital gains tax on residential properties as well.

Are you from the 'if it moves, tax it' school of thought (although little actual thought has gone into it)?

i'll take a stab. SB wants to buy a property, not any property but one he wants but can't do so.

[mikees]

So, what if I have a £2m house and sell it and buy a 500k flat.

What next?

Labour tax cash savings? fking socialist scum idiots.


What next? 60% tax?


Mike

[Diderot]

jonah35 said:

I think it's much fairer than income tax.

In what way? It's a postcode tax. Dreamt up by unimaginative, brainless fkwits.

Let me give you an example. My aunt - 74 next year - lives in a house that's probably worth over £2.5 mill. Her and her husband bought it 35 or so years ago. It was located in a sthole in North London when they bought it (still is really but I guess it's a trendy area now).. My uncle basically rebuilt it as it was dilapidated. iIRC they paid something like £25k for it. It has 4 bedrooms, a tiny garden, is on 3 floors and is end of terraced. So your average mansion then.

Trouble is of course, she's a pensioner and how exactly do you imagine she is going to stump up this tax? She's obviously a multi-millionaire which is why she struggles with paying the eye watering council tax (typical Labour borough) and is very glad of her bus pass. Plenty of her neighbours are in exactly the same position.

[037]

I've only read the last page of comments on this topic so forgive me if it's been mentioned before: All the people I know who live in massive houses are the ones who employ 100s of people. Who in turn are more of a financial chip in the economy, right? Why p#€s them off further!

[Burwood]

Diderot said:

jonah35 said:

I think it's much fairer than income tax.

In what way? It's a postcode tax. Dreamt up by unimaginative, brainless fkwits.

Let me give you an example. My aunt - 74 next year - lives in a house that's probably worth over £2.5 mill. Her and her husband bought it 35 or so years ago. It was located in a sthole in North London when they bought it (still is really but I guess it's a trendy area now).. My uncle basically rebuilt it as it was dilapidated. iIRC they paid something like £25k for it. It has 4 bedrooms, a tiny garden, is on 3 floors and is end of terraced. So your average mansion then.

Trouble is of course, she's a pensioner and how exactly do you imagine she is going to stump up this tax? She's obviously a multi-millionaire which is why she struggles with paying the eye watering council tax (typical Labour borough) and is very glad of her bus pass. Plenty of her neighbours are in exactly the same position.

[Alex]

Arthur Laffer said:

The basic argument was this. If the tax rate was set at zero, then obviously you collected nothing. Likewise, if you set the tax rate at 100pc, you also collected nothing, since no one would have any incentive to earn anything. Between zero and zero, there was a curve, because for quite a long time revenues rose as taxes went up, but then at some point they started to decline until you ended up with nothing again. What Laffer emphatically did not say was that every tax cut generated more revenue. It just depended on where you were on the curve. Where any particular tax might be on the curve at any time is open to debate. What you can’t dispute is that there is a curve.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/1130876...