Forum menu
Under a new system presumably I's pay CGT on £150k?But then what If I've had the house 20 years and redecorated several times, do I keep all the receipts for 20 years to offset against CGT?
Yes
What if I'm not that organised?
Well you wouldn't get any tax relief.
Does every homeowner then have to do an annual tax return, estimate the rise in property value, offset that years DIY bills, and stump up the cash like a business would on it's assets/investments?
A tax return would only be needed when the house was sold, i.e. the gain was realised just like every other capital gain. Basically exactly the same rules that apply to second/third/fourth properties.
I thought this budget seemed OK but after Corbyn said 'failed' I started to doubt it and then by the 10th time he said failed I was convinced it wasn't...
A tax return would only be needed when the house was sold
So don't move then. Better to just tax on death - is there a tax for that?
Theres going to be a new tea urn in the relocated offices of the Northern Powerhouse, in Bracknall.
slightly distracted by Teresa May's tits
Pukes.
tea urn
Just milk , ta!
[img] 
[/img]
slightly distracted by Teresa May's titsPukes.
Misread this and wondered how low cut her blouse really was.
What happens when interest rates go up to 2, 5 or say 8%
That isn't going to happen. We are going Japanese, I'm afraid, except our housing bubble hasn't popped as yet.
It's going to be QE to infinity and beyond.
Well you wouldn't get any tax relief.
Think how thick the average person is, now remember that half of them are worse than that. It'd be a nightmare! and we'd be back here soon enough saying how regressive it was because it favored those who could afford home improvements and accountants to offset those costs.
I'm not against the idea entirely, I think Stamp Duty puts an incentive on not moving which is an odd thing to discourage and CGT would solve that in a way. But using it as a method to control house prices seems a bit blunt, and might backfire, people trying to sell their houses for more to offset it, and buyers being prepared to pay more because they no longer have to pay Stamp Duty?
The fundamental issue is under-supply of housing. If there were enough houses we wouldn't have price inflation, and we wouldn't have people housesharing into their 30's as the norm, and they wouldn't be such a good investment.
The fundamental issue is under-supply of housing.
I agree, but the really fundamental issue is population density, thanks to years of mass immigration.
[quote=perchypanther said]slightly distracted by Teresa May's tits
Pukes.
Misread this and wondered how low cut her blouse really was.
Lolz.
and more pu[b]k[/b]es
I'm not against the idea entirely, I think Stamp Duty puts an incentive on not moving which is an odd thing to discourage and CGT would solve that in a way.
no it wouldn't - both are an incentive not to move.
If I sell my main house I should be able to move to a similar house in the same area without financial loss, which is what both cause.
If you sold your bike on the classifieds for £1500 you would expect to be able to buy a replacement bike 2nd hand for £1500, but with SD (GCT not applicable as bikes depreciate) you wouldn't as you would have to stump up a load more to pay the tax.
Hence you wouldn't sell your bike unless desperate, or if you were moving up north where bikes where cheaper and you could get one from the bloke in the pub for £1200 which would give you money to pay the tax.
From a quick google it looks like Teresa May's tits have suffered from inflation over the years...
TurnerGuy - MemberFrom a quick google it looks like Teresa May's tits have suffered from inflation over the years...
I rather look at Teresa May than the walrus Diane Abbott tbh coz the latter is minging in street lingo innit! 😆
edit: did not watch the budget speech btw so did not see either the above but will catch up later during news hour.
Think how thick the average person is, now remember that half of them are worse than that. It'd be a nightmare! and we'd be back here soon enough saying how regressive it was because it favored those who could afford home improvements and accountants to offset those costs.
Oh it's far from perfect but it's not as regressive as it might first appear. Say someone spent £50k on house improvements just before selling the house. That would have one of three impact on the price of the house, assuming it was to be sold. Increase by more than £50k, increase by exactly £50k increase by less than £50k. In case one the spending would result in more CGT going into the UK coffers than if the money hadn't been spent. In case two it would result in the same CGT as if the money weren't spent. In case three the person has actually lost money so the only reason they would pay less CGT is because they have less rather than it bieing some sort of avoidance.
It would also allow the country to redistribute wealth across the generations as those who have benefited from the huge house price inflation would contribute some of that money back.
or just use death tax.
I rather look at Teresa May then the walrus Diane Abbott tbh,
I think Teresa May, even with inflated tits, is better to look at than either Diane Abbot or Theresa May...
As someone on here said, one TM is a soft porn star, and the other is pure filth...
WT actual F?
I dropped in to read some financial chat only to find things have taken a quite unlikely turn.
Err - so how does this new CGT work then?
Is it only on 2nd homes/investment properties or does everyone have to pay now?
We paid 50k for our house 18 years ago, its now worth £180k. I may have to start leaving old cars on the drive, let the grass grow and have a half-wild mongrel dog on a chain to bring the value down!
Northwind - Member
WT actual F?
TurnerGuy is going to get into trouble ... 😆
TurnerGuy would with TM? 😛
It won't have to work, because it's a complete flight of fantasy that has been made up here.Err - so how does this new CGT work then?
[img] 
[/img]
Jesus, P.S. don't google Theresa May's Tits, seems there's more than one Theresa May with a large web following...
NSFW 🙁
or any other time.
Err - so how does this new CGT work then?
It was a purely hypothetical discussion.
Devolution for the West Country! The return of Avon
[i]“Some may not understand the rules but it’s clear others are using them as a way to minimise their tax bills. You have situations where someone working in a public body pays thousands of pounds less in tax than someone doing exactly the same job alongside them who’s taxed as an employee. [/i]
Yes, but it is the employer who is creating the issue, not the contractor/employee - what are you going to do George, offer them employment (and employee benefits as well) instead?
Are they only concerned with this tax dodge when used within the public service framework? That is how it is being presented, its not tax avoidance they are concerned with, just tax avoidance by the wrong types.
It's the same tax dodge they were trying to bludgeon to death with IR35, but with that they weren't target the main exploiters.
When contracting at Fidelity a secretary mistakenly copied to everyone (or a lot of people) a mail to an agent coordinating the swapping of two permie and two contractors, which I think happened regularly.
Beer
Fagz
Petrol
Wotz da outcome? 🙄
So they just voted to cut disability payments by £30 a week and then a week later are happy to raise the 40% tax threshold so that those earning twice the national average get a tax cut....
They're obviously not banking on the Disabled vote.
[I]They're obviously not banking on the Disabled vote. [/I]
A lot of votes...
Apparently 1 in 10 of the working population is disabled, seems an awful lot?
http://www.dlf.org.uk/content/key-facts
Do we need to tighten this definition?!
Apparently 1 in 10 of the working population is disabled, seems an awful lot?
Most of the estate agents around here hbe disability badges.
Does anyone know what the justification is for cutting disabled benefit? Do they just think less-abled people are faking it and should be trying harder to get a job? Or are they just hoping less-abled people will die of poverty earlier , thereby keeping tbe welfare budget diwn?
The Indie has a list of all the Tory MPs who support the disability cuts (some of whom are patrons of disability charities).
It would have been easier to list the ones who didn't.
Next budget - tax breaks for euthanasia clinics.
Does anyone know what the justification is for cutting disabled benefit?
I don't think they can be bothered to even try to spin this one.
Do we need to tighten this definition?
No, but we could probably do with raising understanding of why people receive the benefit.
No, but we could probably do with raising understanding of why people receive the benefit.
Well, obviously, they're mostly lazy workshy ****ers swinging the lead - the benefit is for fags booze and cable/sky tv. If you can walk 20m unaided, then you're good for a zero hours contract at your nearest Amazon warehouse for christ's sake. We need strivers, not skivers.
Or are they just hoping less-abled people will die of poverty earlier , thereby keeping tbe welfare budget diwn?
Basically this, plus they probably did a focus group and found they voted Labour, so thought **** em.
We need strivers, not skivers.
Do you have any evidence that most disabled people are skivers, or are you just libelling the disabled for kicks?
He was making a rather obvious sarcastic point, or gideon has hacked his logon (then again DD and gideon are never seen at the same coke and hooker orgies... makes you think!)
edenvalleyboy - MemberDoes anyone know what the justification is for cutting disabled benefit?
Apparently it's fairer. They keep using that word...
A true blue Tory budget .
Take money from the disabled to fund tax cuts for the rich .
I do find it amazing that between the two biggest social channels I'm exposed to - here and facebook - there is so much hate for the Tories yet that won by a clear majority in the last election.
Are peoples memories really so short that they forgot the mis-trust they had in the other parties that most likely lead to that majority?