[Closed] Budget

Don't they have to wait at least a year to dump them or can they have a post-election budget immeadiately if they win and undo this one?

judging by the stonyfaced miserable expressions on the torry front bench when the million pound stamp duty doubling they mat have to wait a year to reverse it!

and no stamp duty up to 250k

For first time buyers

I wonder how much difference that'll make.

Tiering stamp duty properly would have been helpful, to buyers and sellers, though less so to the government...

Darling can promise what he likes* - he's got less than 2 months to go in his current job.

The Conservatives will have to have another budget very soon after the election to start putting the economy right ( you have noticed that we are running at close to Greek levels of government debt, haven't you? ).

* I am sure that Brown will be pressing him to give a solid gold puppy to everyone who might be tempted to vote Labour, in order to be "the party of the many, not of the few" but that doesn't mean that we can afford it.

well he's just lost the tramps vote...

Ohh when does the no stamp duty for <250k come in?

Midnight tonight - for 1st time buyers

Cider up at inflation +10% !!!

Woo Hoo

edit: This is for the stamp duty not the cider 🙁

stamp duty changes midnight tonight 🙂

and yes as a first time buyer currently negotiating a house purchase this helps me massively

and i havent drank cider since a bad experience when i was 14!

and yes as a first time buyer currently negotiating a house purchase this helps me massivel

Maybe, maybe not. If I was selling to you, I'd expect the diference to be split. 😆

well he's just lost the tramps vote...

I liked that one!!! 😆

>its a shame the torries will probably dump these measure straight away!

Why would the tories drop the ISA limit increase (which was announced ages ago) ?

Is Cranberry the new Mark Datz? discuss. 🙄

and no stamp duty up to 250k
For first time buyers
I wonder how much difference that'll make.
Tiering stamp duty properly would have been helpful, to buyers and sellers, though less so to the government...

Would have made a big difference to me. Could have put more capital into our mortgage and thus would be less skint.

Stamp Duty was/is already tiered no?
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/MoneyTaxAndBenefits/Taxes/TaxOnPropertyAndRentalIncome/DG_4015918

The Conservatives will have to have another budget very soon after the election to start putting the economy right

Presumably you mean by plunging us back into recession and dumping another million on the dole? Still as long as it keeps the bankers and the ratings agencies happy, that's the main thing.

And why cider and not other forms of alcohol? Seems a bit arbitrarily random to me.

[b]BELIZE!!!!![/b]

Nakedly political and a bit sad, but still brilliant. 🙂

Blooming stamp duty is up and down more often than a whore's knickers. It was £175k up to December 31st then dropped back to £125k now up to a whopping £250k. Perfect just in time for me closing on my first flat on Friday, a 1 bed after looking for a 2 and being pricked about by stamp duty changing.

Brilliant, fantastic, super, wonderful.

I did like Call-me-Dave's comment about most cabinet ministers being 'mentioned in Dispatches'. Very good

The way things are there is no guarantee that the Tories will win the next election. There is increasing speculation that there will be a hung parliament which may not help anyone. Or it may turn out to be a surprisingly beneficial thing. As long as Brown goes I will feel there is some sense of justice in politics. 🙂

I am not sure that the next government have to keep all budget commitments for a minimum period of time before changing them. The glumness may have been that they feel the stamp duty idea was one of their own and has just been nicked.

I think if I was running for Labour's election campaign I'd be pretty pleased with Darling this afternoon.

History will be much kinder to the man than we are at present.

darling came accross quite well i thought sounded very much like a chancellor than a scotish preacher

one of the torries biggest weaknesses is surely osbornes

who me the 18 th baronetency of Waterford alone in the uk with the purse strings what were they thinking off.

It's cheaper to dump a million unneeded public servants on the dole than it is to keep them managing their carbon targets or whatever bollocks an awful lot of them are doing.

Is the Cider rise to put it on a more level playing field with other alcoholic beverages?

Flaperon - Member

It's cheaper to dump a million unneeded public servants on the dole than it is to keep them managing their carbon targets or whatever bollocks an awful lot of them are doing.

Wrong - its actually more expensive as they then have less money to buy stuff so all the shopkeepers and manufacturers go out of business - this is the lesson from previous Recessions. Result 2 million more people out of work and the economy down the pan big style. Only this time there is no north sea oil bonanza to pay for all the unemployment benefits and increased sickness

Stamp Duty was/is already tiered no?
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/MoneyTaxAndBenefits/Taxes/TaxOnPropertyAndRentalIncome/DG_4015918

No, the duty rate depends on the purchase price of the house, but that rate applies to the whole purchase price.
Imagine if you fell into the top tax bracket, and paid that rate on your whole income, not just the portion over £37k or whatever it is.

this is the lesson from previous Recessions

Countless previous recessions actually...right through the twentieth century.

Brick wall.
Head.
Banging.

No, the duty rate depends on the purchase price of the house, but that rate applies to the whole purchase price.

Ah gotcha. So you'd rather see an income tax type system for stamp duty? Yeah I can see that would be better.

Personally I just want to see these "stamps" I've apparently paid for. They better be really nice!

Countless previous recessions actually...right through the twentieth century.

silly economists eh? chuh!

Youd have thought they would all have noticed how obvious it all is if a scottish nurse and bristolian tiler can have got it licked!

just to help a little...if the state maintains public employment on the daft premise that keeping all those Equal Opportunities Compliance Officers employed keeps up consumption then it must be funded. Since the net tax income on such consumption is less than 100% that means taking funds from the private sector economy OR from the future economy to do it.

The former will stifle the more productive method of growing an economy, the latter would be an insult to our children in having them pay for Gordon's profligacy.

EDIT: as it happens Im not necessarily against Keynesian economic stimuli (I favour a smaller state purely for libertarian reasons), but it's not even remotely as simple as thinking you can just increase the state wage bill to create economic growth.

Graham - I think he means marginal increase in the rate of duty is applied to each tranche not to the whole. Which would be sensible and avoid the silly buggering around at the threshold levels of price.

Since the net tax income on such consumption is less than 100% that means taking funds from the private sector economy OR from the future economy to do it.

its not just about the direct tax reclaimed on the wages of these public sector workers, surely their modest injection of cash into private sector business will help stimulate the growth and expansion of the private sector, leading to higher tax returns

although 'equal opportunity compliance officers'-(obvious daily mail pc gone mad intimations aside) may not be the most efficient use of public employment im sure there are some worthy public sector jobs

bristolian tiler

Wrong on both accounts, but I suspect you knew that anyway...don't be such a patronising twit Stoner.

as it happens Im not necessarily against Keynesian economic stimuli

No, nor me, and as it happens, that's more or less what I should have said, i.e. that I'm more in favour of economic stimuli rather than slash and burn style cuts.

no stamp duty up to 250k and doubling it on houses over a million

Double? Are you sure about that?

don't be such a patronising twit Stoner.

yeah, alright. Ill remember my 🙂 next time

kimbers - im not just referring to the direct tax take on the employment to fund the consumption but I do agree with you, However, initially the revenue gap is large and the argument goes that the time it takes to repay the state stimulus is longer and deeper than if the private sector is fiscally incentivised instead.

Stoner - I'd get money into the private sector - we need to earn money as a country not just shovel it round in circle - however cutting public sector is a poor idea as it would not save much money overall. Increasing it for the sake of it is not what I suggested in my very oversimplified critique of a very oversimplified "slash and burn" post

I'd be looking at investment in infrastructure - most of the money spent would be in wages in the UK so the money stays here and we get something out of it as well as devaluing the pound to improve exports ( at he cost of inflation)

The former will stifle the more productive method of growing an economy, the latter would be an insult to our children in having them pay for Gordon's profligacy.

Come on all this hysteria about the deficit and public debt is just Tory scaremongering to give them the excuse to slash and burn the public sector and finish off what Thatcher started. Yes the deficit and public debt is large. But it's perfectly sustainable provided the recovery is supported and continues.

The tories have one agenda, and that's to make sure the poor and middle classes pay for the mess that's been created by their friends in the city.

The figures for where they're cutting costs.... oh, sorry.... making 'efficiency savings' are laughable.

It seems to amount to: We're going to save 100 squillion pounds a year by buying the Whitehall biscuits from Aldi instead of Waitrose, and.....erm.... erm..... probably using less pens and stuff

They must think we've all just fallen out of a ****ing tree

Geesh, this stamp duty thing is all headlines and no trousers. How many people really fall into the strict guidelines? Let's see:-

1) Must be a first time buyer
2) If two purchasers, BOTH must be first time buyers
3) Must be buying between £125,000 and £250,000 (a fair chunk of 1st time buyers will be below £125,000 anyway).
4) Must be main residence

I wish this government would stop buggering about with figures and simplify things. I wonder how much it cost the economy to change the VAT rate, and then change if back? I bet it was a major headache for many small shops.

SDLT would be much simpler if it was just a flat 2% on everything above a de minimis level (e.g £10,000). This would stop properties around the threshold being restricted in value, struggling to sell etc. I'm all in favour of a simpler tax system rather than this guddle to try to grab headlines.

I got all excited for a minute, until the FTB bit was added. 🙁 Just about to exchange and since I had a mortgage 12 years ago (for less than a year) we can't get the relief.

Ho hum. You win some, you lose some.

Geesh, this stamp duty thing is all headlines and no trousers. How many people really fall into the strict guidelines?

I would have. Bought my first house with my wife a few years ago. Both first time buyers. Paid 245k so we would have saved two and a half grand in stamp duty.

I don't think those guidelines sound particularly difficult to be honest.

Geesh, this stamp duty thing is all headlines and no trousers. How many people really fall into the strict guidelines? Let's see:-

1) Must be a first time buyer
2) If two purchasers, BOTH must be first time buyers
3) Must be buying between £125,000 and £250,000 (a fair chunk of 1st time buyers will be below £125,000 anyway).
4) Must be main residence

1) Tick
2) Tick
3) Tick
4) Tick.

Thanks Darling.