OV9

V8Granite wrote: Fri Aug 29, 2025 1:43 pm Was there even any optimism at the start of Labour getting into power ?
I wonder if they were shocked and then realised oh shit, we’re in charge now
Dave!

240PP wrote: Fri Aug 29, 2025 10:35 am Starmer should be saying “You’ve made the party look really fucking bad, you’ve got to go.”

Jobbo wrote: Fri Aug 29, 2025 12:54 pm Whatever happens I'll be paying more tax, I know that. It's not as if we can do much about it.

Simon wrote: Fri Aug 29, 2025 4:33 pm The more I think and read the more I believe a LVT is the way forward to replace council tax. Upper property thresholds based in values 30+years ago are a nonsense and it's insane that someone in a £million 2 bed flat on Kensington might be paying less than someone in a small 3 bed house worth less than half of that in the suburbs.

GG. wrote: Fri Aug 29, 2025 5:00 pm

Simon wrote: Fri Aug 29, 2025 4:33 pm The more I think and read the more I believe a LVT is the way forward to replace council tax. Upper property thresholds based in values 30+years ago are a nonsense and it's insane that someone in a £million 2 bed flat on Kensington might be paying less than someone in a small 3 bed house worth less than half of that in the suburbs.

Well kind of yes and no - depends how you view the moral justification for council tax doesn't it really. If it is for services rendered then a more valuable house doesn't use any more refuse collection necessarily and garden bins are charged additionally in many cases anyway.

Obviously the issue is that huge disparities arise because essentially it is not the above but just a tax to fund a council's total expenditure and the big costs are social housing and welfare so you're really paying proportional to how many low income households need to be supported in your area and how the local council has managed or mismanged their finances. There would still be discrepancies across the country but now the higher value home will just pay a lot more. In reality all those welfare costs should be paid from central government not fall on the local taxpayer.

I think LVT on the houses we'd be looking at moving to would be into 5 figures - perhaps even £20k annually - perhaps 5x the prevailing council tax rate. There's absolutely fuck all chance some of the elderly (and many of the people living in those houses now) are going to be able to afford that so it'll end up being rolled into the taxes paid on sale or probate which means its an additional CGT in effect, or inheritance tax mk2.

Like anything - governments are incapable of changing the schemes without looking to rake more in.

ETA: this supports my point: https://www.southwark.gov.uk/council-ta ... income-and

Of our local council's total expenditure - as users of roads, refuse collection and parks we need services which amount to 10.2% of their total spend.

GG. wrote: Wed Sep 03, 2025 1:54 pm Whoopsies - turns out big Ange did owe the extra SDLT after all - triple ouch personally, professionally and for the Labour party.

Jobbo wrote: Wed Sep 03, 2025 2:03 pm Looking at the scenario where she did move out of the family home, her ex-husband stayed there and she transferred her interest into trust for her special needs child, I think it's probably her advisers at fault for not pointing out that it was still deemed to be her property for calculating SDLT on the new home. It's not as straightforward as saying 'she used a tax dodge and it failed'.

Of course, politics doesn't care about the facts, just the optics.

Jobbo wrote: Wed Sep 03, 2025 2:03 pm Looking at the scenario where she did move out of the family home, her ex-husband stayed there and she transferred her interest into trust for her special needs child, I think it's probably her advisers at fault for not pointing out that it was still deemed to be her property for calculating SDLT on the new home. It's not as straightforward as saying 'she used a tax dodge and it failed'.

Of course, politics doesn't care about the facts, just the optics.