Stamp Duty

[whelk]

On a separate note house prices rose 20% or something last year. Why on earth was there a tax break in reducing stamp duty? Why the fuck do we care about house prices when tax receipts so massively down and we are in a pandemic? To keep the middle classes happy. 

[Turkish]

16 minutes ago, whelk said:

On a separate note house prices rose 20% or something last year. Why on earth was there a tax break in reducing stamp duty? Why the fuck do we care about house prices when tax receipts so massively down and we are in a pandemic? To keep the middle classes happy. 

Huge exaggeration. It was 7%. You still have to pay stamp duty on houses over £500k so the biggest beneficiaries are the working class, but let’s not let that get in the way of a chance to bash the tories 

[AlexLaw76]

5 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Huge exaggeration. It was 7%. You still have to pay stamp duty on houses over £500k so the biggest beneficiaries are the working class, but let’s not let that get in the way of a chance to bash the tories 

Plus is it generally first time buyers that can tap into 95% mortgages.  Not the so-called property hording middle classes.

[whelk]

32 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Huge exaggeration. It was 7%. You still have to pay stamp duty on houses over £500k so the biggest beneficiaries are the working class, but let’s not let that get in the way of a chance to bash the tories 

Can you make a case for the principle of it?  

[Turkish]

1 hour ago, whelk said:

Can you make a case for the principle of it?  

Yes to keep the house market moving during a lockdown. Quite simple really 

[whelk]

38 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Yes to keep the house market moving during a lockdown. Quite simple really 

You think it wouldn’t be moving without being subsidised? Do you think it was furloughed staff taking advantage? I like many other have far more money as result of Covid limiting how I use my disposable income. It is people in similar situations buying homes for rent or helping children out. Natural market forces should be allowed to work. Tories just love giving away cash these days and moving house prices further away from youngsters. 

[Whitey Grandad]

4 minutes ago, whelk said:

You think it wouldn’t be moving without being subsidised? Do you think it was furloughed staff taking advantage? I like many other have far more money as result of Covid limiting how I use my disposable income. It is people in similar situations buying homes for rent or helping children out. Natural market forces should be allowed to work. Tories just love giving away cash these days and moving house prices further away from youngsters. 

So not charging someone tax counts as subsidising them? 

[whelk]

Just now, Whitey Grandad said:

So not charging someone tax counts as subsidising them? 

Relatively yes. If you removed VAT completely does that subsidise goods?

 

[buctootim]

1 hour ago, Whitey Grandad said:

So not charging someone tax counts as subsidising them? 

Yes if you are making some people pay the tax and not others.   

It was a stupid idea anyway because its been shown that all subsidising house purchase does is push up house prices - thereby still costing money but negating any benefit. Its exactly the reason Mortgage Interest Relief at Source was abolished in 1988. How come we keep making the same costly mistakes?   

  

[Turkish]

8 hours ago, whelk said:

You think it wouldn’t be moving without being subsidised? Do you think it was furloughed staff taking advantage? I like many other have far more money as result of Covid limiting how I use my disposable income. It is people in similar situations buying homes for rent or helping children out. Natural market forces should be allowed to work. Tories just love giving away cash these days and moving house prices further away from youngsters. 

Good point. If you were going to find another way to screw young people wanting to get on the the property ladder it would be to come up with a away to save them thousands of pounds in taxes paid up front when you buy a house 

Edited 24 April, 2021 by Turkish

[whelk]

13 hours ago, Turkish said:

Good point. If you were going to find another way to screw young people wanting to get on the the property ladder it would be to come up with a away to save them thousands of pounds in taxes paid up front when you buy a house 

To illustrate on a £300k property say I would have paid 5% stamp duty. Costs me £315k

£300k house has gone up by 8% though so now costs me £324k.  How much have I saved? 

Buyer loses 9k

HNRC loses £15k

Seller gains £24k 

[Turkish]

20 minutes ago, whelk said:

To illustrate on a £300k property say I would have paid 5% stamp duty. Costs me £315k

£300k house has gone up by 8% though so now costs me £324k.  How much have I saved? 

Buyer loses 9k

HNRC loses £15k

Seller gains £24k 

£24k paid back over 25 years invested into an asset that will only increase in value during that period  v £15k up front in full for no ROI. 

What’s the problem? Sounds like a cracking deal to me. 

[whelk]

9 minutes ago, Turkish said:

£24k paid back over 25 years invested into an asset that will only increase in value during that period  v £15k up front in full for no ROI. 

What’s the problem? Sounds like a cracking deal to me. 

Maths not your strong point. And ‘only increase in value’. - be careful with that one.

[Turkish]

51 minutes ago, whelk said:

Maths not your strong point. And ‘only increase in value’. - be careful with that one.

obvious there is a 9k hit up front but 1. You’re not paying the £15k up front in a lump sum 2. You’re putting £24k into your own asset not handing £15k to the government and getting nothing 3. You can use that £15k for a bigger deposit and there for get an improved mortgage rate

So you don’t think a house will increase in value over the 25 years period you’re paying back this fictitious £24k?  Okay then. 
 

i know you’re desperate to criticise the tories every chance you get as is fashionable on here but it’s quite pathetic how you’re trying to make out saving thousands of pounds in tax on lower end market housing is only been done to keep their posh friends happy. 

Edited 25 April, 2021 by Turkish

[whelk]

40 minutes ago, Turkish said:

obvious there is a 9k hit up front but 1. You’re not paying the £15k up front in a lump sum 2. You’re putting £24k into your own asset not handing it to the government and getting nothing 

So you don’t think a house will increase in value over the 25 years period you’re paying back this fictitious £24k?  Okay then. 
 

i know you’re desperate to criticise the tories every chance you get as is fashionable on here but it’s quite pathetic how you’re trying to make out saving thousands of pounds in tax on lower end market housing is only been done to keep their posh friends happy. 

You always want to put people in camps. Why the fuck do you think my thoughts on stamp duty is anything to do with the party doing it? Very lazy and naive way to debate.

As for the economic argument  - really don’t know where to start at you laughable model. I am happy to pay more as it will go up in value. I don’t want to pay less because……that will not go up in value? Okay then.

[RedArmy]

2 minutes ago, whelk said:

You always want to put people in camps. Why the fuck do you think my thoughts on stamp duty is anything to do with the party doing it? Very lazy and naive way to debate.

 

It is though isn’t it?! 

[Turkish]

32 minutes ago, whelk said:

You always want to put people in camps. Why the fuck do you think my thoughts on stamp duty is anything to do with the party doing it? Very lazy and naive way to debate.

As for the economic argument  - really don’t know where to start at you laughable model. I am happy to pay more as it will go up in value. I don’t want to pay less because……that will not go up in value? Okay then.

Your first post where you laughably claimed house prices had gone up 20% then went on to say it was only done  “to keep the middle class happy” No dig at the tories at all!
 

If you don’t like my suggestion fine, you’d rather give 15 grand up front to government and get nothing for it. I’d rather put the money into my own property and make the money work for me. But then it’s not me that isn’t sure if house prices are going to increase by 2046. And your numbers are wrong you wouldn’t  pay £15k stamp duty on a £300k house. But other than all that your posts have been bang on the money on this thread
 

 

Edited 25 April, 2021 by Turkish

[Whitey Grandad]

1 hour ago, whelk said:

To illustrate on a £300k property say I would have paid 5% stamp duty. Costs me £315k

£300k house has gone up by 8% though so now costs me £324k.  How much have I saved? 

Buyer loses 9k

HNRC loses £15k

Seller gains £24k 

Seller gains £24k to spend on the next house up the chain.

And there is a surge in house prices.

[buctootim]

6 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

Seller gains £24k to spend on the next house up the chain.

And there is a surge in house prices.

Which means everybody who buys after the introduction of the ‘affordability’ scheme had to pay more so is poorer than they would have otherwise been. 
 

People in the UK generally will pay the maximum if what they can afford for their housing, largely because the UK’s housing stock is so crap they will stretch themselves to get somewhere half decent. If you make the costs of buying lower then people will just aim a little bit higher, as does everybody else, which causes house price inflation. No one gains apart from the seller. You can even find prices drop back once incentivising schemes end - meaning the people you were trying to help actually end up in negative equity.

[Whitey Grandad]

1 hour ago, buctootim said:

Which means everybody who buys after the introduction of the ‘affordability’ scheme had to pay more so is poorer than they would have otherwise been. 
 

People in the UK generally will pay the maximum if what they can afford for their housing, largely because the UK’s housing stock is so crap they will stretch themselves to get somewhere half decent. If you make the costs of buying lower then people will just aim a little bit higher, as does everybody else, which causes house price inflation. No one gains apart from the seller. You can even find prices drop back once incentivising schemes end - meaning the people you were trying to help actually end up in negative equity.

Indeed.

I also blame Stamp Duty as partly responsible for the high cost of moving house and indirectly increasing traffic congestion. Back in the 1970s when we were young buyers it was much easier to move. People who changed jobs would relocate rather than commute.

Chatting with Godfrey Olson once upon a time he told me that estate agents saw the threshold as 40minutes of commuting. Nowadays it is quite common for people to drive an hour and a half.

[buctootim]

52 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

Chatting with Godfrey Olson once upon a time he told me that estate agents saw the threshold as 40minutes of commuting. Nowadays it is quite common for people to drive an hour and a half.

I read a couple of years ago that the number of people commuting daily from York to London had increased ten fold in 20 years. From York! about 2 hours 15 on average  - plus say 20 minutes from home to station each way and 20 minutes station to office. Five hours 40 commute, every day 

[whelk]

4 hours ago, Turkish said:

Your first post where you laughably claimed house prices had gone up 20% then went on to say it was only done  “to keep the middle class happy” No dig at the tories at all!
 

If you don’t like my suggestion fine, you’d rather give 15 grand up front to government and get nothing for it. I’d rather put the money into my own property and make the money work for me. But then it’s not me that isn’t sure if house prices are going to increase by 2046. And your numbers are wrong you wouldn’t  pay £15k stamp duty on a £300k house. But other than all that your posts have been bang on the money on this thread
 

 

You don’t get economics that’s fine. Lots of things pass you by but it doesn’t stop you getting involved which is sweet. 
 

[Plastic]

On 24/04/2021 at 10:10, Turkish said:

Yes to keep the house market moving during a lockdown. Quite simple really 

Not just moving, it’s on fire. Incredible amounts of people moving, including around half the people in my small office. Interestingly, most of these are youngish (early 30s) either buying their first or second property.

Edited 25 April, 2021 by Plastic

[Turkish]

14 minutes ago, Plastic said:

Not just moving, it’s on fire. Incredible amounts of people moving, including around half the people in my small office. Interestingly, most of these are youngish (early 30s) either buying their first or second property.

This can’t be true. Whelk said it’s only to keep the middle class happy

[Turkish]

4 hours ago, whelk said:

You don’t get economics that’s fine. Lots of things pass you by but it doesn’t stop you getting involved which is sweet. 
 

Coming from the guy who claimed house prices have gone up by 20% that’s pretty hilarious 

[Fan The Flames]

3 hours ago, Turkish said:

This can’t be true. Whelk said it’s only to keep the middle class happy

You're getting middle class and middle aged mixed up, classic.

[whelk]

11 hours ago, Turkish said:

Coming from the guy who claimed house prices have gone up by 20% that’s pretty hilarious 

I think you would be surprised if we compared jobs and salaries. Don’t think we’d need to bring academic achievement into it as quite apparent you’re more an ‘effort guy’ with limitations. But you have your 20% moment as that is probably how you would best define intellect.

 

[whelk]

12 hours ago, Plastic said:

Not just moving, it’s on fire. Incredible amounts of people moving, including around half the people in my small office. Interestingly, most of these are youngish (early 30s) either buying their first or second property.

Clearly needed subsidising to avoid an inert market.  

[Turkish]

20 minutes ago, whelk said:

I think you would be surprised if we compared jobs and salaries. Don’t think we’d need to bring academic achievement into it as quite apparent you’re more an ‘effort guy’ with limitations. But you have your 20% moment as that is probably how you would best define intellect.

 

What an arrogant twat

[Lord Duckhunter]

16 hours ago, Plastic said:

Not just moving, it’s on fire. Incredible amounts of people moving, including around half the people in my small office. Interestingly, most of these are youngish (early 30s) either buying their first or second property.

One of my sons is an estate agent and it’s the busiest he’s ever known it.A lot of houses  are literally being sold the day they are marketed and nearly all are getting full asking price. 

Edited 26 April, 2021 by Lord Duckhunter

[RedArmy]

4 hours ago, whelk said:

I think you would be surprised if we compared jobs and salaries. Don’t think we’d need to bring academic achievement into it as quite apparent you’re more an ‘effort guy’ with limitations. But you have your 20% moment as that is probably how you would best define intellect.

 

You’ve turned into another Shurlock, trying to wave your dick around and talk down to people. It’s not a good look. 
 

Speaking of shurlock, is he still alive? He disappeared off the face of the internet between Christmas and New Years. 

[whelk]

1 hour ago, RedArmy said:

You’ve turned into another Shurlock, trying to wave your dick around and talk down to people. It’s not a good look. 
 

Speaking of shurlock, is he still alive? He disappeared off the face of the internet between Christmas and New Years. 

There is a lot of talking down and insults being thrown around in this place. 
Far from exceptional and is dog eat dog place where a lot of arrogance is on display.

no idea what happened to Sherlock - he did post something a few weeks back. Maybe it is like losing a loved and  completed by Wes T

Edited 26 April, 2021 by whelk

[whelk]

So house prices rising fastest since 2004 due to Stamp Duty holiday. Here’s a thought why don’t we give any buyer £10,000 back and then we can beat 2004 figures and really focus on what is key in a pandemic.

[Matthew Le God]

On 30/04/2021 at 12:48, whelk said:

really focus on what is key in a pandemic

Redecorating with items not from John Lewis?

[Jonnyboy]

All I can say is that I feel sorry for Turkish's wife. 

[whelk]

Fucking brilliant news eh

 

 

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-57171683

[Turkish]

29 minutes ago, whelk said:

Fucking brilliant news eh

 

 

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-57171683

if this doesn't encourage the poor little snowflakes to stop doing media studies degrees and take saturday jobs instead of going on virtue signalling protests not much will

[ChrisPY]

5 hours ago, whelk said:

Fucking brilliant news eh

 

 

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-57171683

It’s a load of bollocks that young people can’t afford to buy a house.

Making a choice to prioritise other spending and not be willing to go without certain luxuries is the main reason but some people will claim it’s ‘impossible’ to get on the housing ladder despite there being plenty of examples proving it can be achieved.

[CB Fry]

15 minutes ago, ChrisPY said:

It’s a load of bollocks that young people can’t afford to buy a house.

Making a choice to prioritise other spending and not be willing to go without certain luxuries is the main reason but some people will claim it’s ‘impossible’ to get on the housing ladder despite there being plenty of examples proving it can be achieved.

This is absolute horseshit.

[ChrisPY]

25 minutes ago, CB Fry said:

This is absolute horseshit.

Having done it in the last couple of years, without any financial support, having to pay rent and earning below the UK average, I can assure you it’s not.

I‘ve got family and friends who have done the same more recently than I have, again without receiving any support. 

I’m not saying it is possible for everyone (it never has or will be) but it’s nowhere near as difficult as being made out and a lot of those complaining would be able to afford to save for a deposit if they gave up a few luxuries.

[CB Fry]

14 minutes ago, ChrisPY said:

Having done it in the last couple of years, without any financial support, having to pay rent and earning below the UK average, I can assure you it’s not.

I‘ve got family and friends who have done the same more recently than I have, again without receiving any support. 

I’m not saying it is possible for everyone (it never has or will be) but it’s nowhere near as difficult as being made out and a lot of those complaining would be able to afford to save for a deposit if they gave up a few luxuries.

Yes, what you've done there is a "my uncle smoked 40-a-day all his life and lived until he was 95". So what.

Well done you on buying a house on about £700 weekly wage and paying rent too. Takes some doing with zero help at all.

But that doesn't negate the basic social economic facts of the matter: wages to house price ratio, rising rents higher than mortgages, house prices driving up deposits, and so on.

Average house price is 8 times average earnings.

The average age of a first time buyer is now 34, and they need a average deposit of £46 grand. If you've saved up that much by yourself with no help good for you.

The facts show it is incredibly difficult and pretty much fuck all to do with "people need to do without some luxuries". It's a structural societal problem where a generation is trapped.

 

[buctootim]

21 minutes ago, CB Fry said:

Yes, what you've done there is a "my uncle smoked 40-a-day all his life and lived until he was 95". So what.

Well done you on buying a house on about £700 weekly wage and paying rent too. Takes some doing with zero help at all.

But that doesn't negate the basic social economic facts of the matter: wages to house price ratio, rising rents higher than mortgages, house prices driving up deposits, and so on.

Average house price is 8 times average earnings.

The average age of a first time buyer is now 34, and they need a average deposit of £46 grand. If you've saved up that much by yourself with no help good for you.

The facts show it is incredibly difficult and pretty much fuck all to do with "people need to do without some luxuries". It's a structural societal problem where a generation is trapped.

 

Exactly. In 1997 I thought about buying a big 1 bed flat in Dover street Mayfair for £81,000 when I was earning £34,000, so about 2.5 times income. Now £34,000 income inflation adjusted is about £63,000pa and that exact same flat is on the market for £1.9 million, about 30 times income

Edited 19 May, 2021 by buctootim

[Weston Super Saint]

22 minutes ago, CB Fry said:

Average house price is 8 times average earnings.

The average age of a first time buyer is now 34, and they need a average deposit of £46 grand. If you've saved up that much by yourself with no help good for you.

 

 

How do those figures look if you take out London?

[buctootim]

3 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

How do those figures look if you take out London?

Just plain extortionate as opposed to ludicrous 

Interestingly I saw a couple of days ago a billionaire businessman is planning to build 11,000 homes for permanent rent in Scotland . He reckons he can build a 1,500 square foot 4 bed house to a high standard and still cover costs at £700 pm. 

 

Edited 19 May, 2021 by buctootim

[CB Fry]

15 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

How do those figures look if you take out London?

Derbyshire where I live the average house price is £222k against an average wage of £28k, so 8 times ratio.

15% deposit is 33k so let's try saving that across five years, six grand a year or 550 every single month. Which is pretty much an average rent. So already more than half of your average take home pay gone on rent and saving up for a deposit.

But yeah, its just skipping a few luxuries.

ChrisPY did that with no help and I admire him.

Edited 19 May, 2021 by CB Fry

[Lord Duckhunter]

2 hours ago, ChrisPY said:

It’s a load of bollocks that young people can’t afford to buy a house.

Making a choice to prioritise other spending and not be willing to go without certain luxuries is the main reason but some people will claim it’s ‘impossible’ to get on the housing ladder despite there being plenty of examples proving it can be achieved.

There are examples, people living with parents and paying fuck all rent. People who inherit money or get given money, or people with exceptionally well paid jobs. The average joe can’t pay rent and save for a deposit, what ever they go without. It’s disingenuous to claim otherwise. 

[ChrisPY]

3 minutes ago, CB Fry said:

Derbyshire where I live the average house price is £222k against an average wage of £28k, so 8 times ratio.

15% deposit is 33k so let's try saving that across five years, six grand a year or 550 every single month. Which is pretty much an average rent. So already more than half of your average take home pay gone on rent and saving up for a deposit.

But yeah, its just skipping a few luxuries.

ChrisPY did that with no help and I admire him.

Why does a first time buyer need ‘the average house’? Surely you’d expect them to join the housing market on the lower end.

Why does a first time buyer need a 15% deposit? There’s plenty of 5% deals with lenders offering at least 4 times salary in loan.

The argument was never what you’d need on average but what is needed as a minimum to make it possible to own a home. It might not always have the perfect features or be in the perfect location but it’s nowhere near impossible if compromises are made. 

[CB Fry]

17 minutes ago, ChrisPY said:

Why does a first time buyer need ‘the average house’? Surely you’d expect them to join the housing market on the lower end.

Why does a first time buyer need a 15% deposit? There’s plenty of 5% deals with lenders offering at least 4 times salary in loan.

The argument was never what you’d need on average but what is needed as a minimum to make it possible to own a home. It might not always have the perfect features or be in the perfect location but it’s nowhere near impossible if compromises are made. 

4 x £28k gets you £112k which don't get you much, even in Derbyshire.

And still a stretching loan to pay back on a salary that low. And if you don't like averages, then obviously for a younger person the salary is lower.

You can say what you like, but it is very very difficult for young people - and borderline impossible in many areas and at many ages: the average first time buyer is 34, so not even young people in the game now.

You've done it with no financial help from anyone at all. Well done.

You're not typical.

Edited 19 May, 2021 by CB Fry

[aintforever]

25 minutes ago, ChrisPY said:

Why does a first time buyer need ‘the average house’? Surely you’d expect them to join the housing market on the lower end.

Why does a first time buyer need a 15% deposit? There’s plenty of 5% deals with lenders offering at least 4 times salary in loan.

The argument was never what you’d need on average but what is needed as a minimum to make it possible to own a home. It might not always have the perfect features or be in the perfect location but it’s nowhere near impossible if compromises are made. 

It’s obviously not impossible but it is much much harder than when I got on the ladder, to say otherwise is complete bollocks.

When I brought my first house I barely had a penny to my name and my mortgage was 101%, I didn’t have to give up any luxuries whatsoever. Buying was actually easier than renting because I didn’t have to find a deposit in advance.

Edited 19 May, 2021 by aintforever

[egg]

7 minutes ago, aintforever said:

It’s obviously not impossible but it is much much harder than when I got on the ladder, to say otherwise is complete bollocks.

When I brought my first house I barely had a penny to my name and my mortgage was 101%, I didn’t have to give up any luxuries whatsoever. Buying was actually easier than renting because I didn’t have to find a deposit in advance.

Yep, same experience for me. Getting on the ladder is significantly harder now. I bought my first house at 19 with no savings. Buying that house now, with the same salary but inflation adjusted, wouldn't be possible even with a 10-15% deposit. The situation is ridiculous and I cannot see how my kids will be able to buy without a huge handouts, and even then it'll be difficult.