Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Uk Debate Mk 2, the UK's liveliest political and social debate site.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
What price for a roof over your heads?; Who benefits from CAMERON's cuts?
Topic Started: Jan 12 2015, 08:09 PM (170 Views)
Nonsense
Member Avatar
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]

So, who are profiting from the suffering of others through CAMERON's 'cuts' policies?

It's certainly NOT the tenants of 'buy-to-let' landlords, capital & income seems to be increasingly levitated to the aforementioned group, a 'conspiracy' against poorer taxpayers who will pay the price of creating a middle-class that thinks it deserves the hard earned incomes of the poorest no doubt.

What say you MILLIBAND, what will your prescription for re-distribution of wealth be, more of the same?


http://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/landlords-make-%c2%a3177bn-gains-from-rising-house-prices-over-5-years/ar-AA82x5h?ocid=iehp
Landlords have made £177bn profit from capital growth over the past five years according to research which adds fuel to the political debate about rising house prices in the UK.
As well as a rise in the number of tenants this has led to more buy to let landlords, and they have been the biggest beneficiaries of rising house prices according to the figures from property advisers Savills.
Alex Hilton, director of Generation Rent, a campaign for the rights of tenants, said Savills’ figures were “stomach-wrenching”.
As well as a rise in the number of tenants this has led to more buy to let landlords, and they have been the biggest beneficiaries of rising house prices according to the figures from property advisers Savills.
It was wrong that landlords were able to “cream generous tax breaks” at a time when tenants were enduring the effects of government spending cuts, he said.
The total value of privately rented housing in Britain has grown 57 per cent since the financial crisis, topping £1tn this year for the first time, although some of that growth reflects the increasing number of people buying homes to let.
The profit figure of £177bn is an estimate of capital growth alone and excludes income from tenants’ rents — another source of wealth for landlords.
By contrast the total value of UK housing held by owner-occupiers with mortgages rose just 5 per cent in the past five years, Savills found.
Lucian Cook, director of residential research at Savills, said the data showed that “the benefit of recent house price growth has become increasingly concentrated in the hands of private investors.
“In a housing market that is expensive, relative to people’s income, it is difficult to see how this will change, particularly given increased mortgage regulation,” he added.
The findings showed that the rental market was “fundamentally unsupplied”, Mr Cook said. In order to mitigate the situation the government should do more to encourage professional investors to build more new homes for rent, he argued.
Rising house prices are also fuelling Britain’s housing benefit bill, as landlords raise rents in order to pay off their own borrowings. In the 2013-14 financial year the country paid £9.3bn to private landlords to subsidise tenants’ rents — more than a third of the total spent on housing benefit that year.
Private sector tenants live in the country’s poorest quality accommodation and have the highest housing costs, with rents taking up an average 40 per cent of gross income, according to data published in the summer.
Mr Hilton said the figures showed “how landlords have profiteered from the undersupply of housing while tenants struggle with ever higher rents.
“Despite these huge returns, private sector tenants get the worst living conditions, the worst security of tenure and the least affordable housing, often cutting back on food or heating to meet the rent.”
Labour has proposed cracking down on landlords by capping rents and banning buy to let investors from purchasing newly built properties in some new “housing growth areas”.
The Savills figures are likely to prompt closer scrutiny in Westminster of the tax breaks enjoyed by landlords — and not only by leftwing politicians.
Charlie Elphicke, Conservative MP for Dover, said there was a strong case for ministers to call a halt to relief on mortgage interest, for example, and look at other perks such as wear and tear allocations.
“Most people would say that is money which could have gone to people owning their own homes rather than investors,” he said. “It underlines that tax breaks that buy to let investors get would be better off used to help first time buyers to own their own homes.”
Clive Betts, who chairs parliament’s communities committee, said the figures demonstrated the need for more homes to be built. “In the end you can take away tax breaks and other aspects of housing finance but you will never combat the problem of rising rents and rising prices without building more homes,” he said.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
RJD
Member Avatar
Prudence and Thrift
[ *  *  *  * ]
So what is it you want Milliband or Cameron to do?

Note that the UK has the highest Property Taxes in the G20. Do you think that the propose Mansion Tax is a solution? Maybe "British houses for British people".
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
RJD
Jan 13 2015, 09:36 AM
So what is it you want Milliband or Cameron to do?

Note that the UK has the highest Property Taxes in the G20. Do you think that the propose Mansion Tax is a solution? Maybe "British houses for British people".
Not quite true that

The UK has the highest taxes on moving house, Cameron likes to pretend that that counts as a property tax.

What should we do?

Yes a mansion tax/uncapped council tax. No it won't raise £100B a year but it will show that the rich are part of "all in it together".

Add an annual tax on property held in trust purely to avoid inheritance tax

Eliminate both the net migration and the absurd entitlements to housing benefits that drives up housing prices

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
RJD
Member Avatar
Prudence and Thrift
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K: Not quite true that. The UK has the highest taxes on moving house, Cameron likes to pretend that that counts as a property tax.

My statement and I did not limit it to recurring taxation. Stamp Duty is a Purchase Tax and if anything it should inhibit purchasing.

RJD:What should we do?
Steve K: Yes a mansion tax/uncapped council tax. No it won't raise £100B a year but it will show that the rich are part of "all in it together".

The Experts say it will not raise £1b PA. If the silly phrase "all in it together" is to be taken literally then surely you would be opposed to middle income groups taking on such a large share? A silly sound bite which means nothing.

Steve K: Add an annual tax on property held in trust purely to avoid inheritance tax.

How much is this?

Steve K: Eliminate both the net migration and the absurd entitlements to housing benefits that drives up housing prices.

I think you will find a lot of objectors.


Is the strategy to garner more revenue or reduce property prices. If the latter then Purchase Taxes are the most effective.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
Purchase taxes on property are a drag on workforce mobility. I don't accept your £1B figure. We did this before when I showed from published property figures that we'd get a serous multiple of that just by uncapping council tax. It would not raise £10B but it would show that the non working rich are making an appropriate contribution.

Right now we by and large just clobber the middle classes
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
RJD
Member Avatar
Prudence and Thrift
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Jan 13 2015, 12:12 PM
Purchase taxes on property are a drag on workforce mobility. I don't accept your £1B figure. We did this before when I showed from published property figures that we'd get a serous multiple of that just by uncapping council tax. It would not raise £10B but it would show that the non working rich are making an appropriate contribution.

Right now we by and large just clobber the middle classes
I see your £100b has now been reduced to <£10b. Not my figures as I have none, but those that represent the industry claim that based on the £2m value threshold the revenues are likely to be <£1b. Labour claim £2.5b PA which based on history is likely to be optimistic, none the less still small beer.
I fundamentally object to singling out property wealth for taxation and do not accept the premise that because property is not mobile then this differentiates it from all other assets and as a consequence allows taxation on it. Are taxes to be based on principle or opportunism? It has long been our practice here in the UK to tax income and expenditure. Once you establish a tax on assets I am not sure where it will stop and I do not see the ethical justification. Because they live in high value houses is not in itself a justification for such taxation or singling this out as the only measure of wealth.
My impression is that those countries that have applied such taxes are now reversing them. I wonder why?



Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
I work in the building trade and I can state categorically that the six big house builders in the UK simply do not have the capacity to build enough houses to significantly dent prices, planning laws are the biggest hurdle to smaller developers who could make up the shortfall, Milliband for his numerous faults has claimed he will act to sort out the problem, no surprise then that the share price of all these firms has dropped recently. Under supply is entirely intentional.

The traditional Tory response to badly performing sectors of industry is to de regulate and invite in foreign competition, plus set lofty goals and start removing the various subsidies, except when it comes to housing where the exact opposite is the case!

Not hard to see what is going on here is it?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
RJD
Jan 13 2015, 12:37 PM
Steve K
Jan 13 2015, 12:12 PM
Purchase taxes on property are a drag on workforce mobility. I don't accept your £1B figure. We did this before when I showed from published property figures that we'd get a serous multiple of that just by uncapping council tax. It would not raise £10B but it would show that the non working rich are making an appropriate contribution.

Right now we by and large just clobber the middle classes
I see your £100b has now been reduced to <£10b. Not my figures as I have none, but those that represent the industry claim that based on the £2m value threshold the revenues are likely to be <£1b. Labour claim £2.5b PA which based on history is likely to be optimistic, none the less still small beer.
I fundamentally object to singling out property wealth for taxation and do not accept the premise that because property is not mobile then this differentiates it from all other assets and as a consequence allows taxation on it. Are taxes to be based on principle or opportunism? It has long been our practice here in the UK to tax income and expenditure. Once you establish a tax on assets I am not sure where it will stop and I do not see the ethical justification. Because they live in high value houses is not in itself a justification for such taxation or singling this out as the only measure of wealth.
My impression is that those countries that have applied such taxes are now reversing them. I wonder why?



More politics of envy right wing style.

Shift the tax burden away from actual productive work and onto assets, overpriced assets act as a form of hidden tax and increase the price of just about everything, protecting assets like land, housing and other property just encourages rent seeking and the avoidance of honest toil. Many folks avoid a lot of property taxes anyway by registering the property in a tax haven or even worse by "investing" in agricultural land which attracts virtually no tax.

Make asset hoarding expensive because it is anti social, and I could not give a toss about a poor widow living in a mansion she'll be dead soon and life is for the young and the living.
Edited by Tigger, Jan 13 2015, 10:56 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
papasmurf
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tigger
Jan 13 2015, 10:44 PM
I work in the building trade and I can state categorically that the six big house builders in the UK simply do not have the capacity to build enough houses to significantly dent prices,
There would be a major problem with materials supply as well. To increase production of some building materials has a longish lead time. (It would also need the confidence of the suppliers , to invest in increased production, plus many building materials require high energy inputs and with UK electricity generation hanging by a thread, that is a problem as well.

It is not one elephant in the room when it comes to increasing house building enough to make a difference it is several.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
RJD
Jan 13 2015, 12:37 PM
Steve K
Jan 13 2015, 12:12 PM
Purchase taxes on property are a drag on workforce mobility. I don't accept your £1B figure. We did this before when I showed from published property figures that we'd get a serous multiple of that just by uncapping council tax. It would not raise £10B but it would show that the non working rich are making an appropriate contribution.

Right now we by and large just clobber the middle classes
I see your £100b has now been reduced to <£10b. . . .
When did I ever claim we could raise £100B year from a mansion tax? Oh look I didn't and you just made that up for cheap false effect.

Go on Here's the search URL you'd need

Here's a useful link for you.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Fully Featured & Customizable Free Forums
« Previous Topic · Politics · Next Topic »
Add Reply