[Politics] Should Stamp Duty be scrapped altogether?

[The Antikythera Mechanism]

I will take that as a yes then. Trying to argue we all cover these different elements individually is a fantastic effort though. Well played.

What exactly was your business, if you don’t mind me asking. I am just curious how you funded the entire infrastructure. I have a friend who has a haulage firm and he used to argue he funded the infrastructure for his business when he was talking about vehicles and storage mostly. He overlooked the roads.

I’m not arguing, just stating facts. There are, of course, those that don’t contribute to the state, for whatever reasons, but still rightfully benefit from it. My business specialised in controlled demolition. The DfT is funded by the taxpayer.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I’m not arguing, just stating facts. There are, of course, those that don’t contribute to the state, for whatever reasons, but still rightfully benefit from it. My business specialised in controlled demolition. The DfT is funded by the taxpayer.

I remember reading an article many years ago that stated the majority of people are takers when you consider everything they have taken. Makes sense if you start from the hospital people were born in, the years of schooling, to the roads, armed, emergency services etc etc etc etc. It was only when earnings, and all inputs, got above quite a high level people are net givers. Same article said London subsidises the rest of the nation as well. so next time you hear some scrote from some northern shit hole going on about benefit scroungers or foreigners on the take, tell them to have a look in the mirror.

 

[Hugo Rune]

Replace it with an annual property tax based on value of property, double rate for second homes.

And triple rate for third home, quadruple for the fourth etc.

 

[Sid and the Sharknados]

so next time you hear some scrote from some northern shit hole going on about benefit scroungers or foreigners on the take, tell them to have a look in the mirror.

Like Crawley?

 

[Seagull27]

As for IHT - a tax of envy is what it is. I work hard not just for myself but to provide for my family. I want to provide for them not just in my lifetime but also after it.

Of course you do, everyone wants to help their children as much as possible. But without IHT, the result is a widening class difference that increases over multiple generations.

Consider 2 children growing up in current times: Child A who has a £50k inheritance and Child B who has none.

Ignoring any differences in childhood, let's say both leave uni with an identical degree and get jobs with the same salary, and then have a parent/grandparent who passes away. Child A puts down a deposit on a house using their inheritance, whole Child B continues to rent. Child A pays monthly mortgage repayments that are significantly cheaper than Child B.

In 10 years time, Child B has finally saved enough for a deposit for their house. In the meantime, Child A has not only seen an increase in house value, but has also saved hundreds a month more than Child B with their monthly outgoings. They're able to buy a bigger house, or pay off significant amounts of their mortgage.

Child A then pays off their mortgage at the age of 50 and for the next 15 years, is able to save a huge amount extra per month. They save/invest this money. Child B meanwhile, only pays off their mortgage shortly before they retire.

Both children retire and then go into a care home. Child A funds this from their savings/investment, whereas Child B has to sell their house to fund their care home.

Both then die. Child A passes on their house to their own children, whereas Child B has little to hand down.

And the cycle continues.

 

[Husty]

No it's not. An annual tax on the value of a property takes no account of the abillity to pay. It would hit those that have retired forcing them to downsize ( assuming they can ). Why should they be forced to sell the family home they have owned for decades to be able to afford a property tax ? Stamp duty has it's issues but people at least can decide to not pay it by not moving. The best change to it would be to scrap it for first time buyers - up to say £500k.

As for IHT - a tax of envy is what it is. I work hard not just for myself but to provide for my family. I want to provide for them not just in my lifetime but also after it.

What a test you are.

Point one: Yea they’d have to downsize, and then the housing stock of big houses gets passed onto people that need it. Simples.

Point two: This country utterly fails to tax wealth, see above point. Everyone deserves an equal chance in this country and the best way to achieve that is for inter generational wealth to be better spread around through IHT.

You call it a tax of envy - actually to oppose such is simply a tax of small minded greed.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Their parents would’ve paid for their education through the taxes THEY paid.

Unlikely. See my post above.

 

[beorhthelm]

Of course you do, everyone wants to help their children as much as possible. But without IHT, the result is a widening class difference that increases over multiple generations.

Consider 2 children growing up in current times: Child A who has a £50k inheritance and Child B who has none.

Ignoring any differences in childhood, let's say both leave uni with an identical degree and get jobs with the same salary, and then have a parent/grandparent who passes away. Child A puts down a deposit on a house using their inheritance, whole Child B continues to rent. Child A pays monthly mortgage repayments that are significantly cheaper than Child B.

In 10 years time, Child B has finally saved enough for a deposit for their house. In the meantime, Child A has not only seen an increase in house value, but has also saved hundreds a month more than Child B with their monthly outgoings. They're able to buy a bigger house, or pay off significant amounts of their mortgage.

Child A then pays off their mortgage at the age of 50 and for the next 15 years, is able to save a huge amount extra per month. They save/invest this money. Child B meanwhile, only pays off their mortgage shortly before they retire.

Both children retire and then go into a care home. Child A funds this from their savings/investment, whereas Child B has to sell their house to fund their care home.

Both then die. Child A passes on their house to their own children, whereas Child B has little to hand down.

And the cycle continues.

should have 100% IHT then right, make sure no one benefits from someone else. probably want to tax gifts/loans too.

or we could have tax based around need to fund services, not to equalise contrived life experiences. child A could just as easy spaff the 50k on a car and holidays while child B gets a good job, mortgage free by 50 and has money to help their kids/grandkids.

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

Stamp Duty can put a hand brake on the housing market. When Sunak scrapped it during Covid, unnesessarily, it caused a ridiculous spike in property prices

 

[drew]

Inheritance Tax is unfair as it penalises hard working parents that wish to leave property to their children . The have every right to do so , why should children get penalised for having hard working and business savvy parents , they shouldn’t .

Business savvy!! The vast majority of people that die won't get anywhere near the threshold for paying inheritance tax. As I posted earlier, in 2019 there were only 23k deaths out of 500k that resulted in IHT being paid. You also make it sound like the Government take the lot, they don't.

Problem with IHT it's a headline grabbing story but few have any clue how it is applied.

 

[Sid and the Sharknados]

child A could just as easy spaff the 50k on a car and holidays while child B gets a good job, mortgage free by 50 and has money to help their kids/grandkids.

 

[WATFORD zero]

should have 100% IHT then right, make sure no one benefits from someone else. probably want to tax gifts/loans too.

or we could have tax based around need to fund services, not to equalise contrived life experiences. child A could just as easy spaff the 50k on a car and holidays while child B gets a good job, mortgage free by 50 and has money to help their kids/grandkids.

No need to throw your toys out the pram

Similar to @The Antikythera Mechanism I made money through running and owning companies and appreciate fully the stress and pressure of having a significant number of people and their dependants depending on you and your decisions, together with the risk of taking loans and personal financial risk in order to ensure those people are well rewarded and to invest so that these companies proved successful and grew.

And this isn't an attempt to garner sympathy as I was (as was I suspect @The Antikythera Mechanism), well rewarded for that over a number of years. As a result there is no doubt that my children have benefited greatly through their upbringing and education and are now in far better positions than they may have been otherwise.

Also, when me and Mrs Wz go, after IHT they will still get significant inheritances. But where I differ, is that I think that if IHT were increased and possibly stepped, it would be a good thing. My children would still have an inheritance and would still have benefited from my endeavours, but they don't need it all as, hopefully by the time we go, they will have made their own ways (and already have to a large degree).

I can't help but wonder if my own experience of inheritance (£50 in premium bonds) may have coloured my opinion somewhat and maybe if I had inherited a few properties and a couple of mill, which I wanted to keep all to myself, I might also think it was a tax of Envy

 

[The Antikythera Mechanism]

Unlikely. See my post above.

Perhaps I should’ve prefaced my comment with “In an ideal world”

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I know plasters , plumbers etc that earn £3k a week

Perhaps I should’ve prefaced my comment with “In an ideal world”

I don’t care anyone more. Money is immaterial to me as I’m changing profession to become a plumber.

 

[Sid and the Sharknados]

I don’t care anyone more. Money is immaterial to me as I’m changing profession to become a plumber.

Being a "plaster" doesn't appeal to you then?

 

[WATFORD zero]

I don’t care anyone more. Money is immaterial to me as I’m changing profession to become a plumber.

No wonder NSC's plumbers spend so much time on here

 

[Mustafa II]

OP here... just popping in to give my two pennies' worth.

Stamp Duty is a prohibitive tax. It favours the wealthy. It creates a barrier and acts as a deterrent for people that want/need to move home, for whatever reason.

In the South East, people most affected by it are regular working people. The highest tax burdens should be for those who can afford it.

Stamp Duty results in fewer properties on the market - thus higher property prices... and we desperately need a more competitive property market in the South East, a buyers market rather than a sellers market.

I don't think it should be scrapped completely... But I would raise the threshhold not to just £250k - which is a typical price for a below-par flat in the South East - but to £500k... and at a lower percentage as well.

There are still plenty of multi-million pound houses being bought and sold, so doing this wouldn't bankrupt the country or anything... but it would make home ownership significantly easier and cheaper for regular people.

 

[Seagull27]

should have 100% IHT then right, make sure no one benefits from someone else. probably want to tax gifts/loans too.

or we could have tax based around need to fund services, not to equalise contrived life experiences. child A could just as easy spaff the 50k on a car and holidays while child B gets a good job, mortgage free by 50 and has money to help their kids/grandkids.

Or we could find something in between - allow people to hand down some cash to their kids, but bring in a high tax rate at a certain amount, or increasing percentages the higher the value. At the moment, IHT is only applied if your estate is worth over £325k, or over £500k if giving it to your children or grandchildren.

The problem mainly lies with property imo. I'm 32, and I don't think I know any couples who were able to buy a house before the age of 30 without getting help from parents or grandparents (and much harder for single people). And most of them have well above average household incomes. Nearly all of our parents were able to buy houses in their early 20s with little help from their parents. With increasing rents and house values, this situation will get worse and worse unless something changes.

Inheritance is intrinsically linked to this - it wasn't such an issue in the past, so I can understand why older generations don't see it as much. But for younger generations, it will increasingly be the case that the only way to buy a house is through inheritance.

Oh, and Child B wouldn't be mortgage free before 50 because they'd have been paying rent for the first 10 years (minimum) of their career. Unless they'd manage to get a significantly higher wage than Child A, but then it's not a like-for-like comparison.

 

[zefarelly]

No it's not. An annual tax on the value of a property takes no account of the abillity to pay. It would hit those that have retired forcing them to downsize ( assuming they can ). Why should they be forced to sell the family home they have owned for decades to be able to afford a property tax ? Stamp duty has it's issues but people at least can decide to not pay it by not moving. The best change to it would be to scrap it for first time buyers - up to say £500k.

As for IHT - a tax of envy is what it is. I work hard not just for myself but to provide for my family. I want to provide for them not just in my lifetime but also after it.

I lost my step father earlier this year, he's left a house to my brother and I . . . . £500k tax free is a considerable lump, if you think it's not then you're probably comfortable anyway. Half each means my brother ( different lifestyle) can get on the ladder and look forward to retiring in his own home in 15-20 years . . . For me, after 35 years working and 30 years paying a mortgage I could be completely debt free in a nice home. I will obviously leave it to my son . . . of course I want to help him in the same way I got a small deposit loan from my Gran 30 odd years ago ( early inheritance) but I wouldn't want to hand it all on a plate, it

Of course you do, everyone wants to help their children as much as possible. But without IHT, the result is a widening class difference that increases over multiple generations.

Consider 2 children growing up in current times: Child A who has a £50k inheritance and Child B who has none.

Ignoring any differences in childhood, let's say both leave uni with an identical degree and get jobs with the same salary, and then have a parent/grandparent who passes away. Child A puts down a deposit on a house using their inheritance, whole Child B continues to rent. Child A pays monthly mortgage repayments that are significantly cheaper than Child B.

In 10 years time, Child B has finally saved enough for a deposit for their house. In the meantime, Child A has not only seen an increase in house value, but has also saved hundreds a month more than Child B with their monthly outgoings. They're able to buy a bigger house, or pay off significant amounts of their mortgage.

Child A then pays off their mortgage at the age of 50 and for the next 15 years, is able to save a huge amount extra per month. They save/invest this money. Child B meanwhile, only pays off their mortgage shortly before they retire.

Both children retire and then go into a care home. Child A funds this from their savings/investment, whereas Child B has to sell their house to fund their care home.

Both then die. Child A passes on their house to their own children, whereas Child B has little to hand down.

And the cycle continues.

One migh also add personal choices, my 2 cousins and my brother all got the same £15k Inheritance from my Gran 20 years ago. My gran lent me half that 30 years ago as I wanted to buy a flat . . . I got the other half when she died. My brother still hsn't got on the ladder, neither has one of my cousins. . . . I've never been on a world tour holiday.

 

[Seagull27]

One migh also add personal choices, my 2 cousins and my brother all got the same £15k Inheritance from my Gran 20 years ago. My gran lent me half that 30 years ago as I wanted to buy a flat . . . I got the other half when she died. My brother still hsn't got on the ladder, neither has one of my cousins. . . . I've never been on a world tour holiday.

But you all had that choice to make. If you have inheritance and choose not to use it towards property, that's your problem (or not, depending how you look at it - a world tour holiday is worth more to some).

If you don't have inheritance, you are less likely to be able to do either, through no fault of your own