On my perambulation round East Ham yesterday, I was musing on the empty primary and secondary school buildings and wondering why we couldn't put the illegal asylum seekers in those temporarily during the summer holidays while the "camps" in which everyone seems to want them to be housed (preferably nowhere near them of course) can be quickly constructed on brownfield sites by the military or construction companies.
Then there's all the empty commercial property - why not re-purpose that for asylum seekers so we can all have our four star hotels and "local landmarks" back (so they can stand empty as no one can afford to run them or stay in them)?
I see Rachel from Accounts is doing everything possible to make sure home owners don't vote Labour at the next election. Her and her Party's hideous policies hopefully will screw Labour for generations.
If you are trying to raise funds without going to the market, you need to tax those with assets - homeowners and savers.
If she taxes second homes, btl etc she will probably get away with it.
If she tries touching people's main homes, she will be committing political suicide on a scale not seen since 1945.
Im going to wait and see what the proposal is as the guardian / telegraph articles seem to be from different worlds
Monzo is planning to launch a UK mobile phone service in a move that will intensify competitive pressure on incumbents including VodafoneThree and BT-owned operator EE.
The London-based digital bank is exploring launching its own digital sim and offering monthly contracts, according to people familiar with the matter, which would diversify its revenues away from its core banking services.
Monzo confirmed it was in the “early stages” of developing its proposals.
“When we heard from our customers that mobile contracts can be a pain point, we set out to explore how we could do this the Monzo way,” it said.
Monzo, which has 13mn UK customers, is the third fintech to turn to the mobile sector in search of a new revenue stream. Revolut and Klarna, which each have about 11mn UK customers, have also announced plans this year to offer mobile phone services in Britain and abroad.
Meanwhile, Octopus, the multibillion-pound fund that owns the eponymous energy company, is exploring an offering via a subsidiary, according to people familiar with the matter.
The moves threaten to intensify competition for incumbents EE, Virgin Media O2 and the newly merged VodafoneThree.
Monzo is likely to enter the market as a mobile virtual network operator, which serves customers without building its own underlying infrastructure. MVNOs piggyback on the networks of major telecoms groups and typically then undercut them on price.
Provincial Science Teacher here, but Mobile Company X selling access to its network to Virtual Phone Company Y so they can undercut them...
... I can sort of see that there's a mutually beneficial business there, but it feels like something isn't quite right for that possibility to be possible.
I see Rachel from Accounts is doing everything possible to make sure home owners don't vote Labour at the next election. Her and her Party's hideous policies hopefully will screw Labour for generations.
If you are trying to raise funds without going to the market, you need to tax those with assets - homeowners and savers.
If she taxes second homes, btl etc she will probably get away with it.
If she tries touching people's main homes, she will be committing political suicide on a scale not seen since 1945.
If it's around Council Tax, the main uplift would not be amongst her own votes.
More importantly The Proportional Property Tax modelling says that 80% of people would be better off, and Stamp Duty would go. That's a strong political proposition.
Email from Barclays this morning reducing my overdraft facility from £5000 to £250. No choice. I assume something to do with capital requirements or risk management?
Morning all. 'Theres a paper trail' is such a load of nonsense. Boris Johnson was a remainer ffs. Not predicting Katie Lam gets the gig ever but what she said as a SPAD is so irrelevant to her chances. Look at what anyone on todays cabinet has said versus are saying. As for Jenrick, those who want to use a photo of Bobbins adjacent to someone to demonise him is of course also demonising everyone who attended the protest. Which would be politically 'brave' regardless of what they might think of protests and protectors on this issue
Boris won in the summer of 2019 because a ComRes poll showed he was the only candidate among those standing to succeed Theresa May who could bring in sufficient votes from the (then) Brexit Party to enable a Conservative majority.
That was because he was te only clear "leaver" in a pack of "remain" candidates and for a party which was broadly in support of the UK leaving the EU that was enough.
In the heat of a leadership campaign, what you said can and often is used by your opponents - always has been. If there are things you argued for once but now reject, you need to have a response ready when that is pointed out. It's not wrong to point out the inconsistency - the problem is to a) try to deny it and b) not be prepared when it is pointed out.
I think the 'you said x' stuff has slightly more weight as things said 'as an elected representative' but yes, it can and will be used and should be prepared for. For SPAD stuff like Katie here its very easily rebuffed by some waffle about the reality of experience of serving in the Commons, feedback from Constituents/hearing their concerns etc. Id also think that (let's imagine a Bobbins Jenrick versus Lam fight for a moment just as an example) Jenrick's dark forces attacking what she said as a young SPAD versus her proxies attacking his record and inconsistencies as a minister, the latter carries more weight. Anyway, I'm off to do my weekly shop. Empty pantries are for the hungry
This is suboptimal for Jenrick. On the other hand he is the only Tory who seems to understand social media - in the same way as Farage
He would be a risk but dying men clutch at risky straws
One alternative is Katie Lam. Telegenic. Firmly right wing. Articulate. And - crucially - so young she has no unhelpful backstory. But also so young she could just be another Badenoch
I had lunch with somebody last week who told me Katie Lam's backstory will stop her becoming leader or getting any traction.
She was a Home Office SPAD (and other jobs) during the last Parliament, she was in favour of a lot of the policies she is now criticising. There's a paper trail.
Interesting and depressing for the Tories
She’s the only one of the new intake that seems - seemed - to have potential
Maybe they are totally screwed. Oh well. lol
Classics degree, six years grinding at goldmans and then a spad. Hmm… Xi will be quaking in his boots. Next!
Xi can relax. The Weald of Kent goes Reform in 2029, if I have the maths right, on a 10 point swing.
Its a marginal on current polling, 9.9% swing required, but Tories are defending a higher % than in many of their current seats (39.8%). Tory hold on a national 20% plus would be my guess, Ref gain below that
Tactical voting at the next election might be off the charts. There will be seats where Reform select a total pirate and the Tory vote holds. Others where a split vote risks a Labour or LD gain and the Tories all flip Reform
I see Rachel from Accounts is doing everything possible to make sure home owners don't vote Labour at the next election. Her and her Party's hideous policies hopefully will screw Labour for generations.
Yet the current property taxation system is riddled with inconsistencies. There are people in £8m mansions who pay less than people in £400k semis in other areas.
There needs to be a local element to property taxation (unless the LVT type tax is going to be used to fund social care at a national level). As an example, if I am charged 0.5% of the value of my East London desres, I reckon I'd be about where I am now with Newham's Council Tax so I'm fairly agnostic about it financialy.
So much will depend on where they pitch the valuations of property and how the valuations will be carried out (nice money for some valuers somewhere). If all this can lead to the replacement of Stamp Duty and Council Tax with a single Property Tax, why not?
It is incompetent to fail to revalue property for local taxation purposes for 34 years and continuing. It is also incompetent to run a property tax system which is massively regressive. It is better to tax property properly on an annual liability basis than demand irrational big sums in stamp duty, discouraging a transparent and liquid market.
The fear is that this government in October will further tinker and complicate, and also will do so with IHT, when with IHT what it should do is have a system at a sensible rate (10%?) with more or less universal application to IHT and lifetime gifts.
I see Rachel from Accounts is doing everything possible to make sure home owners don't vote Labour at the next election. Her and her Party's hideous policies hopefully will screw Labour for generations.
If you are trying to raise funds without going to the market, you need to tax those with assets - homeowners and savers.
If she taxes second homes, btl etc she will probably get away with it.
If she tries touching people's main homes, she will be committing political suicide on a scale not seen since 1945.
If it's around Council Tax, the main uplift would not be amongst her own votes.
More importantly The Proportional Property Tax modelling says that 80% of people would be better off, and Stamp Duty would go. That's a strong political proposition.
It may be that they "go timidly" again, though.
The issue with Stamp Duty is a bit like inheritance tax on farmland, it is a dumb tax but one most people don't actually pay (or at least, only at very long and irregular intervals) so there's not much gain in sorting it out.
Council tax in its various iterations goes out ten times a year. And we heard that bit about '80% will be better off' in the 1980s as well (and it wasn't true).
The obvious thing would be to trial it with 2H/BTL first and see if the gremlins could be ironed out, before looking at replacing council tax with it on main properties. Otherwise, I still say Labour would be committing political suicide to even think about it.
I see Rachel from Accounts is doing everything possible to make sure home owners don't vote Labour at the next election. Her and her Party's hideous policies hopefully will screw Labour for generations.
Yet the current property taxation system is riddled with inconsistencies. There are people in £8m mansions who pay less than people in £400k semis in other areas.
There needs to be a local element to property taxation (unless the LVT type tax is going to be used to fund social care at a national level). As an example, if I am charged 0.5% of the value of my East London desres, I reckon I'd be about where I am now with Newham's Council Tax so I'm fairly agnostic about it financialy.
So much will depend on where they pitch the valuations of property and how the valuations will be carried out (nice money for some valuers somewhere). If all this can lead to the replacement of Stamp Duty and Council Tax with a single Property Tax, why not?
Add some allowance for rent moves and I don’t see the problem
Sales down 60% in the UK in July YOY. Those proved more resilient than elsewhere in Europe. Leases offered at 40% discount via third parties. And USA legal actions working through slowly.
That's a Model Y from around £400+ a month, and a Model 3 for £300+ per month. Those numbers look attractive compared to some comparisons.
I know he’s not round much now but our resident Tesla expert, @RochdalePioneers, IIRC, said a while back low Tesla sales are partly due to a model change with a new model due soon.
Morning! Its absolutely true that comparing off sale vs on sale in not like for like - which is what much of the media was doing. It's true that sales resumptions do not make for smooth sales numbers - you get an early adopter spike then in drops then it settles.
We're in the post-sale drop. Need to see the rest of the quarter to see how the settle looks.
But sales are down. And were going to be down. I've been commenting on video about it *before the old car went off sale* earlier this year. Was scorned by the usual fanbois for saying Model Y wouldn't be the best selling car in the world this year.
The month on month comparisons for most of this year haven't been LFL. They are valid, but they tell a false story. Handy if you are pushing that false story, less handy if you are interested in reality. I've spent too many decades reporting on sales performance to waste my time trying to defend half-truths and distorted non-LFL comparisons. Because you have to make something up to explain the false narrative and then get stuck with it once it pans out...
That's a lot of words for 'Tesla are fked'
That isn't what I said. If you want to cling to the non-LFL analysis then be my guest. Doesn't make it factual or actual, but hey.
Tesla’s problem is that there are now a lot of good EV options without facist undertones
Since when was competition a problem for anyone? When you are leading edge you gain massive share - but you always lose it as Tesla have. Competition floods the market - and note how many of these new competitors create clones of Tesla.
So it's hardly a shock that more competition means Tesla sell less vehicles in the market squeeze where we have more choices than consumers. Same in any category, any market.
So you go find the next leading edge. That has been range and ease of charging. It has been simplified cabins with Big Screens. It has been efficient design and construction so that you're not being held up by parts your supplier can't make.
We are in the middle of the AI revolution - and Tesla own an AI company which is integrating into the cars. Which leads onto automated driving which cameras + AI make possible. Whilst I and others have been reassured* repeatedly that cameras are crap and it has to be RADAR/LIDAR lead, the competitive surge of development from China is predominantly camera.
We don't understand this very well in the UK because we have Dumb Autopilot whose software goes through phases of being practically dangerous (as mine is now). But put in a software stack designed this decade and the advances are rapid, and with AI continuing to scale will advance exponentially.
Tesla will be on the leading edge of this, and with the best will in the world many of the newer (and older) competitors won't. Until they catch up, and we go onto the New thing whatever that is.
I can’t currently trust an AI to accurately read and summarise multiple legal documents without hallucinating - now I know my opinion of AI may be different to yours but you can’t throw an LLM at driving a car yet that is what Tesla is trying to do
Also I will believe Tesla have got there when they remove the human part of their robotic taxi service
I am a massive skeptic - again I am saying so repeatedly on videos slagging off Dumb Autopilot. But you're not even considering today's AI - most of what most of us are using is already out of date and they are learning at exponential growth rates.
On the human safety monitors I know that its a weapon to beat them with. Some speculation in Austin about what the passenger seat guy is doing with the open door button they hold. And in California the state mandates a person behind the wheel. Again holding the button not actually driving.
Autonomous cars will kill people and there will be uproar. Then again, human driven cars kill an awful lot more people and we're all used to the carnage. I think the uproar phase won't be very long. And once one major economy licenses it and shows its safe the rest will have to follow because you can't hold back the technological tide for long...
"... and they are learning at exponential growth rates."
Are they? And even if they are, what is the limit? Many experts already think the current paradigm has plateaued. Although those sort of stories are not as 'sexy' as the hype ones we all see from the boosters.
Then there's the issue of exactly how to make money out of AI. It will not be easy to convert the current 'spend billions' model to a 'make a profit' model. Although as AI is currently a bubble, perhaps a survivor or two will make some money out of it once the bubble bursts.
And any good environmentalist should be aghast at the environmental cost of the current AI systems.
The problem (well, one of the many problems...) with Tesla's 'Autopilot' is that it is not a driverless car, and they are testing it on open, non-geofenced public roads. In other words, they are testing it on those of us sensible enough not to get a Tesla. We are their crash test dummies.
Email from Barclays this morning reducing my overdraft facility from £5000 to £250. No choice. I assume something to do with capital requirements or risk management?
You’re lucky, Barclaycard reduced my limit from £25,000 to £500 a couple of years ago.
It is usually one of two possibilities, you’re either not using that limit or you’ve been stuck in a high level of debt for a period and they are looking to take action.
I think the last time I used my Barclaycard was back in 2019.
I see Rachel from Accounts is doing everything possible to make sure home owners don't vote Labour at the next election. Her and her Party's hideous policies hopefully will screw Labour for generations.
If you are trying to raise funds without going to the market, you need to tax those with assets - homeowners and savers.
If she taxes second homes, btl etc she will probably get away with it.
If she tries touching people's main homes, she will be committing political suicide on a scale not seen since 1945.
If it's around Council Tax, the main uplift would not be amongst her own votes.
More importantly The Proportional Property Tax modelling says that 80% of people would be better off, and Stamp Duty would go. That's a strong political proposition.
It may be that they "go timidly" again, though.
Go Timidly: the Careful Manifesto (AI)
Go Timidly amidst the noise and haste, and remember: everyone is watching, and probably judging. As far as possible, without surrender, surrender immediately. Speak your truth quietly—preferably into a pillow— and then deny you ever said it.
Avoid loud and aggressive persons, for they are terrifying, and might make eye contact. If you compare yourself with others, you will despair, for always there will be greater and lesser persons than yourself— and both will think you’re weird.
Keep interested in your own career— but never mention it, in case someone asks follow-up questions. Exercise extreme caution in all your affairs; do not jaywalk, do not jay-breathe. Remember: escalators are death machines, and salad bars are petri dishes.
Be yourself—unless that causes trouble, in which case, be whoever they want you to be. Neither be bold, nor original; those paths are fraught with criticism. Instead, cultivate invisibility, for it is the one talent no one resents.
Take kindly the counsel of panic attacks, gracefully surrendering the illusions of composure. Nurture cowardice in your spirit to shield you in sudden misfortune, like when someone says “hi” unexpectedly.
But beyond a wholesome dread, be gentle with yourself. You are a small, quivering mouse in a world full of traps, cats, and unexpected phone calls.
Therefore, creep cautiously, skirting confrontation, conversation, and any situation requiring a firm handshake. And whatever your labors and aspirations, in the noisy confusion of life, remain timid.
With all its sham, drudgery, and suspiciously friendly strangers, it is still a terrifying world.
I see Rachel from Accounts is doing everything possible to make sure home owners don't vote Labour at the next election. Her and her Party's hideous policies hopefully will screw Labour for generations.
If you are trying to raise funds without going to the market, you need to tax those with assets - homeowners and savers.
If she taxes second homes, btl etc she will probably get away with it.
If she tries touching people's main homes, she will be committing political suicide on a scale not seen since 1945.
If it's around Council Tax, the main uplift would not be amongst her own votes.
More importantly The Proportional Property Tax modelling says that 80% of people would be better off, and Stamp Duty would go. That's a strong political proposition.
It may be that they "go timidly" again, though.
The issue with Stamp Duty is a bit like inheritance tax on farmland, it is a dumb tax but one most people don't actually pay (or at least, only at very long and irregular intervals) so there's not much gain in sorting it out.
Council tax in its various iterations goes out ten times a year. And we heard that bit about '80% will be better off' in the 1980s as well (and it wasn't true).
The obvious thing would be to trial it with 2H/BTL first and see if the gremlins could be ironed out, before looking at replacing council tax with it on main properties. Otherwise, I still say Labour would be committing political suicide to even think about it.
Email from Barclays this morning reducing my overdraft facility from £5000 to £250. No choice. I assume something to do with capital requirements or risk management?
You’re lucky, Barclaycard reduced my limit from £25,000 to £500 a couple of years ago.
It is usually one of two possibilities, you’re either not using that limit or you’ve been stuck in a high level of debt for a period and they are looking to take action.
I think the last time I used my Barclaycard was back in 2019.
Oh, I'm not using it. No debts of any kind, not even a mortgage. I just liked having it there.
In the old days when they were allowed to charge a daily fixed fee rather than a percentage interest, it was a quite cheap way to borrow money for a couple of days when moving things around. But the government put an end to that.
Why was Jenrick boasting about opening new hotels every month? Because people did not want potentially illegal immigrants wandering the streets or cluttering the doorways of their shops, I suppose. So he found the solution to one problem, more secure accommodation, by creating another.
The absolute failure, however, for which he bore at least some responsibility (no doubt the Treasury and resources did too) was the grinding to a halt of our immigration assessment system, whether in original determinations, dealing with appeals, actually implementing the decisions made and getting people back on planes where they came from. The only success I can think of from the last government in this area was the deal with Albania. It should have been a model, not unique.
The current government has made modest progress in dealing with appeals and deportations but it is a pale shadow of what is needed. In my view the only realistic approach is an amnesty for most of those who have not been removed in 10 years or more and try to focus resources on the new arrivals/overstayers etc.
Isn't the bigger problem that many-to-most asylum applicants turn out to have a perfectly valid case under the established rules and the last government was terrified of acknowledging that? Hence keeping people in limbo, until they could be magicked away to Africa.
At the heart of the problem is that we - in common with other European governments - have granted a legal right for half the world's population to settle here, provided that they can reach our shores, and claim asylum.
Then, we try to stop them from doing so, because nobody, outside the ranks of Greens, Sultanas, and human rights activists, thinks that this is a good idea.
Matthew Parris has been making this point, since about 2000.
The answer lies in completely rewriting the ECHR, or alternatively, passing primary legislation that disapplies parts of it.
Email from Barclays this morning reducing my overdraft facility from £5000 to £250. No choice. I assume something to do with capital requirements or risk management?
You’re lucky, Barclaycard reduced my limit from £25,000 to £500 a couple of years ago.
It is usually one of two possibilities, you’re either not using that limit or you’ve been stuck in a high level of debt for a period and they are looking to take action.
I think the last time I used my Barclaycard was back in 2019.
Oh, I'm not using it. No debts of any kind, not even a mortgage. I just liked having it there.
In the old days when they were allowed to charge a daily fixed fee rather than a percentage interest, it was a quite cheap way to borrow money for a couple of days when moving things around. But the government put an end to that.
So they think if you’re not using that overdraft means you’re in good financial health but if you do use it means your finances have collapsed so they may not get their money back, so they are reducing their risk.
I see Rachel from Accounts is doing everything possible to make sure home owners don't vote Labour at the next election. Her and her Party's hideous policies hopefully will screw Labour for generations.
If you are trying to raise funds without going to the market, you need to tax those with assets - homeowners and savers.
If she taxes second homes, btl etc she will probably get away with it.
If she tries touching people's main homes, she will be committing political suicide on a scale not seen since 1945.
If it's around Council Tax, the main uplift would not be amongst her own votes.
More importantly The Proportional Property Tax modelling says that 80% of people would be better off, and Stamp Duty would go. That's a strong political proposition.
It may be that they "go timidly" again, though.
The issue with Stamp Duty is a bit like inheritance tax on farmland, it is a dumb tax but one most people don't actually pay (or at least, only at very long and irregular intervals) so there's not much gain in sorting it out.
Council tax in its various iterations goes out ten times a year. And we heard that bit about '80% will be better off' in the 1980s as well (and it wasn't true).
The obvious thing would be to trial it with 2H/BTL first and see if the gremlins could be ironed out, before looking at replacing council tax with it on main properties. Otherwise, I still say Labour would be committing political suicide to even think about it.
They've done 2H, haven't they?
There's extra council tax on 2H in at least some areas, but not a property tax per se afaik although you my well know more.
I see Rachel from Accounts is doing everything possible to make sure home owners don't vote Labour at the next election. Her and her Party's hideous policies hopefully will screw Labour for generations.
If you are trying to raise funds without going to the market, you need to tax those with assets - homeowners and savers.
If she taxes second homes, btl etc she will probably get away with it.
If she tries touching people's main homes, she will be committing political suicide on a scale not seen since 1945.
If it's around Council Tax, the main uplift would not be amongst her own votes.
More importantly The Proportional Property Tax modelling says that 80% of people would be better off, and Stamp Duty would go. That's a strong political proposition.
It may be that they "go timidly" again, though.
The issue with Stamp Duty is a bit like inheritance tax on farmland, it is a dumb tax but one most people don't actually pay (or at least, only at very long and irregular intervals) so there's not much gain in sorting it out.
Council tax in its various iterations goes out ten times a year. And we heard that bit about '80% will be better off' in the 1980s as well (and it wasn't true).
The obvious thing would be to trial it with 2H/BTL first and see if the gremlins could be ironed out, before looking at replacing council tax with it on main properties. Otherwise, I still say Labour would be committing political suicide to even think about it.
1970s, please: [Edit: ignore - on checking it was proposed then, but not in that form]
Of course council tax is in part a property tax but also partly a poll tax anyway - in terms of its assessment, it is partly based on the number of qualifying people per household. That is partly in terms of the *reductions*: that works both ways, e.g. FT students pay zilch, single persons get a discount, and so on. But the link is there, as thje CT was always intended to be a sort of low-tar poll tax.
So it seems odd to have council tax as such on holiday homes, especially as (a) the poll tax has already been paid at the main home, so to speak; (b) second homes are purely optional to own and (c) the costs such as cleansing are the same for 4 students vs 4 adults as far as Prettybay-by-the-Sea Council is concerned. Those should be replaced with a simple property tax, the logic quite possibly runs ...
The other factor with second homes is the renting out element - already used actually or potentially to evade thje changes in local taxation from what I can see. Opportunity to eliminate that anomaly?
Am I being stupid, if you put a tax on house sales over £500k doesn’t that just create an incentive for people above that bracket to cling onto their houses for as long as they possibly can? Isn’t that precisely what we need to avoid (Boomers clogging up the housing ladder with big family properties they no longer need)?
Am I being stupid, if you put a tax on house sales over £500k doesn’t that just create an incentive for people above that bracket to cling onto their houses for as long as they possibly can? Isn’t that precisely what we need to avoid (Boomers clogging up the housing ladder with big family properties they no longer need)?
Does depend how it's graduated. If it's x% of all money *above* 500K then there's much less perverse incentive.
The older stamp duty was stupid because it was stepped - until the Scots brought in graduation, at which E followed suit all of a sudden ISTR.
And moving house does cost money and (increasingly scarce as one gets old) mental energy, quite apart from works to the new house. Of which one may see little benefit time wise.
Why was Jenrick boasting about opening new hotels every month? Because people did not want potentially illegal immigrants wandering the streets or cluttering the doorways of their shops, I suppose. So he found the solution to one problem, more secure accommodation, by creating another.
The absolute failure, however, for which he bore at least some responsibility (no doubt the Treasury and resources did too) was the grinding to a halt of our immigration assessment system, whether in original determinations, dealing with appeals, actually implementing the decisions made and getting people back on planes where they came from. The only success I can think of from the last government in this area was the deal with Albania. It should have been a model, not unique.
The current government has made modest progress in dealing with appeals and deportations but it is a pale shadow of what is needed. In my view the only realistic approach is an amnesty for most of those who have not been removed in 10 years or more and try to focus resources on the new arrivals/overstayers etc.
Isn't the bigger problem that many-to-most asylum applicants turn out to have a perfectly valid case under the established rules and the last government was terrified of acknowledging that? Hence keeping people in limbo, until they could be magicked away to Africa.
At the heart of the problem is that we - in common with other European governments - have granted a legal right for half the world's population to settle here, provided that they can reach our shores, and claim asylum.
Then, we try to stop them from doing so, because nobody, outside the ranks of Greens, Sultanas, and human rights activists, thinks that this is a good idea.
Matthew Parris has been making this point, since about 2000.
The answer lies in completely rewriting the ECHR, or alternatively, passing primary legislation that disapplies parts of it.
Part of the (harsh) answer is to make the rights of asylum seekers the same anywhere in the world. Treatment if you are strong, clever or wealthy enough to make it to the UK is different from if you make it to Chad. A tent in the desert, three meals a day, primary education for children, basic health care and a passage home as soon as possible would be the minimum.
No, I don't like it either, though I think it may be coming. At the deepest level the failure is that of the United Nations (often called 'the international community' but that doesn't exist) to secure a minimal level of peace and proper governance among its members.
I see Rachel from Accounts is doing everything possible to make sure home owners don't vote Labour at the next election. Her and her Party's hideous policies hopefully will screw Labour for generations.
If you are trying to raise funds without going to the market, you need to tax those with assets - homeowners and savers.
If she taxes second homes, btl etc she will probably get away with it.
If she tries touching people's main homes, she will be committing political suicide on a scale not seen since 1945.
If it's around Council Tax, the main uplift would not be amongst her own votes.
More importantly The Proportional Property Tax modelling says that 80% of people would be better off, and Stamp Duty would go. That's a strong political proposition.
It may be that they "go timidly" again, though.
The issue with Stamp Duty is a bit like inheritance tax on farmland, it is a dumb tax but one most people don't actually pay (or at least, only at very long and irregular intervals) so there's not much gain in sorting it out.
Council tax in its various iterations goes out ten times a year. And we heard that bit about '80% will be better off' in the 1980s as well (and it wasn't true).
The obvious thing would be to trial it with 2H/BTL first and see if the gremlins could be ironed out, before looking at replacing council tax with it on main properties. Otherwise, I still say Labour would be committing political suicide to even think about it.
They've done 2H, haven't they?
There's extra council tax on 2H in at least some areas, but not a property tax per se afaik although you my well know more.
Short term lets should be taxed at 100% and require planning permission.
I’d allow 28 days for what’s otherwise your main residence, to cover people going on holiday and renting their place out when there’s a big event in town (Wimbledon, Silverstone, Ascot, Edinburgh, Glastonbury etc.).
This is suboptimal for Jenrick. On the other hand he is the only Tory who seems to understand social media - in the same way as Farage
He would be a risk but dying men clutch at risky straws
One alternative is Katie Lam. Telegenic. Firmly right wing. Articulate. And - crucially - so young she has no unhelpful backstory. But also so young she could just be another Badenoch
I had lunch with somebody last week who told me Katie Lam's backstory will stop her becoming leader or getting any traction.
She was a Home Office SPAD (and other jobs) during the last Parliament, she was in favour of a lot of the policies she is now criticising. There's a paper trail.
Funny how everyone whose actually governs the country ends up attempting the same stuff. This is a huge advantage for Reform, as long as they never get elected.
Why was Jenrick boasting about opening new hotels every month? Because people did not want potentially illegal immigrants wandering the streets or cluttering the doorways of their shops, I suppose. So he found the solution to one problem, more secure accommodation, by creating another.
The absolute failure, however, for which he bore at least some responsibility (no doubt the Treasury and resources did too) was the grinding to a halt of our immigration assessment system, whether in original determinations, dealing with appeals, actually implementing the decisions made and getting people back on planes where they came from. The only success I can think of from the last government in this area was the deal with Albania. It should have been a model, not unique.
The current government has made modest progress in dealing with appeals and deportations but it is a pale shadow of what is needed. In my view the only realistic approach is an amnesty for most of those who have not been removed in 10 years or more and try to focus resources on the new arrivals/overstayers etc.
For Jenrick, like Farage, this is not about asylum hotels, or even immigration. It's about how they can best promote themselves; they are both populists.
If there weren't any hotels, they would be screaming about "asylum seekers" (whether they are asylum seekers or not) on RAF quarters as we saw in Lincs, or "HMOs", as we have seen in various places as people are moved from hotels.
They don't are about that, any more than they care about whether their hysterics about "asylum seekers will rape your girls" are a lie or not, or the impact their stirring will have on local communities - as long as the people are siloed in to support them. Nothing else matters.
This is suboptimal for Jenrick. On the other hand he is the only Tory who seems to understand social media - in the same way as Farage
He would be a risk but dying men clutch at risky straws
One alternative is Katie Lam. Telegenic. Firmly right wing. Articulate. And - crucially - so young she has no unhelpful backstory. But also so young she could just be another Badenoch
I had lunch with somebody last week who told me Katie Lam's backstory will stop her becoming leader or getting any traction.
She was a Home Office SPAD (and other jobs) during the last Parliament, she was in favour of a lot of the policies she is now criticising. There's a paper trail.
Isn't this an old one, though? Can people not change their minds when they see it doesn't work or the facts change?
I remember Truss being attacked as a Remainer and Starmer as a Corbynite. And Blair once supported Michael Foot.
Not sure it's a dealbreaker.
It is when she doesn’t acknowledge her role in the issue.
See Bobby J and the hotels as an example.
I don’t think being a SPAD whilst policies were being introduced is anywhere near the level of boasting about procuring hotels as an immigration minister. The difference is that Jenrick had responsibility and used it to do things he is now robustly criticising. Lam was a nobody while her seniors were calling the shots
I think she is 4th favourite among Tory MPs now. I didn’t get a bet on at the nice prices, just £3.75. Is Cleverly not a good bet? He more or less won last time and is now 6/1
I see Rachel from Accounts is doing everything possible to make sure home owners don't vote Labour at the next election. Her and her Party's hideous policies hopefully will screw Labour for generations.
If you are trying to raise funds without going to the market, you need to tax those with assets - homeowners and savers.
Yeah guys, Gavin Newsom’s content is ridiculous. But it’s making you uncomfortable because he’s holding up a mirror to what you tolerate on behalf of partisanship. It jolts people out of their passive acceptance of how insane Trump sounds. https://x.com/SarahLongwell25/status/1957650485575618799
Newsom gets to be a jerk, and claim the (relative) high ground of parody. That's a sweet spot for a politician.
Why was Jenrick boasting about opening new hotels every month? Because people did not want potentially illegal immigrants wandering the streets or cluttering the doorways of their shops, I suppose. So he found the solution to one problem, more secure accommodation, by creating another.
The absolute failure, however, for which he bore at least some responsibility (no doubt the Treasury and resources did too) was the grinding to a halt of our immigration assessment system, whether in original determinations, dealing with appeals, actually implementing the decisions made and getting people back on planes where they came from. The only success I can think of from the last government in this area was the deal with Albania. It should have been a model, not unique.
The current government has made modest progress in dealing with appeals and deportations but it is a pale shadow of what is needed. In my view the only realistic approach is an amnesty for most of those who have not been removed in 10 years or more and try to focus resources on the new arrivals/overstayers etc.
Isn't the bigger problem that many-to-most asylum applicants turn out to have a perfectly valid case under the established rules and the last government was terrified of acknowledging that? Hence keeping people in limbo, until they could be magicked away to Africa.
The problem being that the established rules allow more or less anyone, from anywhere, with any dubious complaint to claim asylum
I see Rachel from Accounts is doing everything possible to make sure home owners don't vote Labour at the next election. Her and her Party's hideous policies hopefully will screw Labour for generations.
If you are trying to raise funds without going to the market, you need to tax those with assets - homeowners and savers.
If she taxes second homes, btl etc she will probably get away with it.
If she tries touching people's main homes, she will be committing political suicide on a scale not seen since 1945.
Apparently her new idea is to tax all home sales at £500,000 plus with the seller paying the tax
An excellent example of someone who hasn't a clue how markets work with an immediate increase in £500,000 prices so the buyer is left to pays it on their mortgage
Anyway, this is England only and no doubt will finally end any hope of labour winning southerrn seats
These are always worth reading, and you can see why Labour are trying to push hard on immigration control, although I think they could do their messaging better. The populist right/right-wing media/social media have done a great job at pushing their views, i.e. blaming everything on asylum seekers.
WSJ also reports that, according to their information, during the closed part of the meeting, Finnish President Alexander Stubb called the cities of Kramatorsk and Slavyansk "a Bastion against the Huns"
Why was Jenrick boasting about opening new hotels every month? Because people did not want potentially illegal immigrants wandering the streets or cluttering the doorways of their shops, I suppose. So he found the solution to one problem, more secure accommodation, by creating another.
The absolute failure, however, for which he bore at least some responsibility (no doubt the Treasury and resources did too) was the grinding to a halt of our immigration assessment system, whether in original determinations, dealing with appeals, actually implementing the decisions made and getting people back on planes where they came from. The only success I can think of from the last government in this area was the deal with Albania. It should have been a model, not unique.
The current government has made modest progress in dealing with appeals and deportations but it is a pale shadow of what is needed. In my view the only realistic approach is an amnesty for most of those who have not been removed in 10 years or more and try to focus resources on the new arrivals/overstayers etc.
Isn't the bigger problem that many-to-most asylum applicants turn out to have a perfectly valid case under the established rules and the last government was terrified of acknowledging that? Hence keeping people in limbo, until they could be magicked away to Africa.
The problem being that the established rules allow more or less anyone, from anywhere, with any dubious complaint to claim asylum
That's the line that six dozen misleading Telegraph headlines have tried to push, but I don't see much evidence for it. In the year to March 2025, about half of all claims were rejected. That's not "more or less anyone".
Why was Jenrick boasting about opening new hotels every month? Because people did not want potentially illegal immigrants wandering the streets or cluttering the doorways of their shops, I suppose. So he found the solution to one problem, more secure accommodation, by creating another.
The absolute failure, however, for which he bore at least some responsibility (no doubt the Treasury and resources did too) was the grinding to a halt of our immigration assessment system, whether in original determinations, dealing with appeals, actually implementing the decisions made and getting people back on planes where they came from. The only success I can think of from the last government in this area was the deal with Albania. It should have been a model, not unique.
The current government has made modest progress in dealing with appeals and deportations but it is a pale shadow of what is needed. In my view the only realistic approach is an amnesty for most of those who have not been removed in 10 years or more and try to focus resources on the new arrivals/overstayers etc.
Isn't the bigger problem that many-to-most asylum applicants turn out to have a perfectly valid case under the established rules and the last government was terrified of acknowledging that? Hence keeping people in limbo, until they could be magicked away to Africa.
Exactly what was going through the heads of the last government remains a mystery... but, yes, there seemed to be a strategy of not resolving cases, increasing the backlog.
WSJ also reports that, according to their information, during the closed part of the meeting, Finnish President Alexander Stubb called the cities of Kramatorsk and Slavyansk "a Bastion against the Huns"
I see Rachel from Accounts is doing everything possible to make sure home owners don't vote Labour at the next election. Her and her Party's hideous policies hopefully will screw Labour for generations.
If you are trying to raise funds without going to the market, you need to tax those with assets - homeowners and savers.
If she taxes second homes, btl etc she will probably get away with it.
If she tries touching people's main homes, she will be committing political suicide on a scale not seen since 1945.
Apparently her new idea is to tax all home sales at £500,000 plus with the seller paying the tax
An excellent example of someone who hasn't a clue how markets work with an immediate increase in £500,000 prices so the buyer is left to pays it on their mortgage
I don't see that. My parents sold their house worth £500-550k, and the Estate Agent advice was that there was a dead band above the Stamp Duty threshold, and there was no point in being above £499,999 because that is what offers would be - if anyone came to us rather than prices that were advertised at £499,999 rather than say £525,000.
Market conditions might make a difference, but prices a little over the threshold have always resulted in offers just below it.
We did that on the current one - on the market at £275k, where the seller had started at "Offers over £300k" and we had waited for some time for reality to dawn. We went in with "won't pay over £250k", and they caved, just demanding £2k for carpets etc.
TBF both were in 2013, which was a difficult market.
On the proposal, I think they are flying flags and working out what to do.
Yeah guys, Gavin Newsom’s content is ridiculous. But it’s making you uncomfortable because he’s holding up a mirror to what you tolerate on behalf of partisanship. It jolts people out of their passive acceptance of how insane Trump sounds. https://x.com/SarahLongwell25/status/1957650485575618799
Newsom gets to be a jerk, and claim the (relative) high ground of parody. That's a sweet spot for a politician.
He’s wrestling with a pig, there’s no way he can keep it up for more than a few weeks, and the policy he’s talking about is a blatant and unpopular exercise in Gerrymandering, to make California worse than it is already.
Meanwhile, as he’s playing Twitter games with Texas and the president, his own State is a total mess. Make America California Again really isn’t a popular message.
Why was Jenrick boasting about opening new hotels every month? Because people did not want potentially illegal immigrants wandering the streets or cluttering the doorways of their shops, I suppose. So he found the solution to one problem, more secure accommodation, by creating another.
The absolute failure, however, for which he bore at least some responsibility (no doubt the Treasury and resources did too) was the grinding to a halt of our immigration assessment system, whether in original determinations, dealing with appeals, actually implementing the decisions made and getting people back on planes where they came from. The only success I can think of from the last government in this area was the deal with Albania. It should have been a model, not unique.
The current government has made modest progress in dealing with appeals and deportations but it is a pale shadow of what is needed. In my view the only realistic approach is an amnesty for most of those who have not been removed in 10 years or more and try to focus resources on the new arrivals/overstayers etc.
Isn't the bigger problem that many-to-most asylum applicants turn out to have a perfectly valid case under the established rules and the last government was terrified of acknowledging that? Hence keeping people in limbo, until they could be magicked away to Africa.
The problem being that the established rules allow more or less anyone, from anywhere, with any dubious complaint to claim asylum
That's the line that six dozen misleading Telegraph headlines have tried to push, but I don't see much evidence for it. In the year to March 2025, about half of all claims were rejected. That's not "more or less anyone".
Monzo is planning to launch a UK mobile phone service in a move that will intensify competitive pressure on incumbents including VodafoneThree and BT-owned operator EE.
The London-based digital bank is exploring launching its own digital sim and offering monthly contracts, according to people familiar with the matter, which would diversify its revenues away from its core banking services.
Monzo confirmed it was in the “early stages” of developing its proposals.
“When we heard from our customers that mobile contracts can be a pain point, we set out to explore how we could do this the Monzo way,” it said.
Monzo, which has 13mn UK customers, is the third fintech to turn to the mobile sector in search of a new revenue stream. Revolut and Klarna, which each have about 11mn UK customers, have also announced plans this year to offer mobile phone services in Britain and abroad.
Meanwhile, Octopus, the multibillion-pound fund that owns the eponymous energy company, is exploring an offering via a subsidiary, according to people familiar with the matter.
The moves threaten to intensify competition for incumbents EE, Virgin Media O2 and the newly merged VodafoneThree.
Monzo is likely to enter the market as a mobile virtual network operator, which serves customers without building its own underlying infrastructure. MVNOs piggyback on the networks of major telecoms groups and typically then undercut them on price.
Yeah guys, Gavin Newsom’s content is ridiculous. But it’s making you uncomfortable because he’s holding up a mirror to what you tolerate on behalf of partisanship. It jolts people out of their passive acceptance of how insane Trump sounds. https://x.com/SarahLongwell25/status/1957650485575618799
Newsom gets to be a jerk, and claim the (relative) high ground of parody. That's a sweet spot for a politician.
He’s wrestling with a pig, there’s no way he can keep it up for more than a few weeks, and the policy he’s talking about is a blatant and unpopular exercise in Gerrymandering, to make California worse than it is already.
Meanwhile, as he’s playing Twitter games with Texas and the president, his own State is a total mess. Make America California Again really isn’t a popular message.
You say California is a mess. Let's look at some numbers...
GDP: CA #1 GDP per capita: CA #4 Growth rate (2024): CA #8 Proportion of population with higher degrees: CA #16 Happiness score: CA #13
I see Rachel from Accounts is doing everything possible to make sure home owners don't vote Labour at the next election. Her and her Party's hideous policies hopefully will screw Labour for generations.
If you are trying to raise funds without going to the market, you need to tax those with assets - homeowners and savers.
If she taxes second homes, btl etc she will probably get away with it.
If she tries touching people's main homes, she will be committing political suicide on a scale not seen since 1945.
Apparently her new idea is to tax all home sales at £500,000 plus with the seller paying the tax
An excellent example of someone who hasn't a clue how markets work with an immediate increase in £500,000 prices so the buyer is left to pays it on their mortgage
Anyway, this is England only and no doubt will finally end any hope of labour winning southerrn seats
No, the Guardian article is very, very confused about this proposal. As I said yesterday, it really looks like the journalist asked ChatGPT for a summary and then copy & pasted its confused output into their article.
The Guardian is reporting that the Treasury is considering this plan
which is to levy an annual property tax of ~0.5% of the value of property over £500k to replace stamp duty: When you buy a house you’ll pay no stamp duty but instead pay 0.5% of the value > £500k every year in perpetuity. Just like stamp duty it’s a tax on the buyer, not the seller.
The author of the plan also proposes replacing council tax with a % annual tax on the property value < £500k, with a floor of £800. These constructed as two distinct proposals, which could be implemented separately by the government if they chose to implement either or both of them.
These are always worth reading, and you can see why Labour are trying to push hard on immigration control, although I think they could do their messaging better. The populist right/right-wing media/social media have done a great job at pushing their views, i.e. blaming everything on asylum seekers.
I suspect they've peaked too early. This asylum stuff will as is the nature of these things drift down the leader board. Labour will show they've got rid of most of them and they'll find an alternative to hotels. The dogs'ill bark and the caravans will move on and then what happens to the Farages and the Jenricks?
My expectation is that Europe becomes the next big thing. Starmer has been handling things in that department with an adroitness few expected. Anyone watching last nights performance could not fail to have been impressed. He's a much shrewder operator than most of us thought
Yeah guys, Gavin Newsom’s content is ridiculous. But it’s making you uncomfortable because he’s holding up a mirror to what you tolerate on behalf of partisanship. It jolts people out of their passive acceptance of how insane Trump sounds. https://x.com/SarahLongwell25/status/1957650485575618799
Newsom gets to be a jerk, and claim the (relative) high ground of parody. That's a sweet spot for a politician.
He’s wrestling with a pig, there’s no way he can keep it up for more than a few weeks, and the policy he’s talking about is a blatant and unpopular exercise in Gerrymandering, to make California worse than it is already.
Meanwhile, as he’s playing Twitter games with Texas and the president, his own State is a total mess. Make America California Again really isn’t a popular message.
The Twitter games are very funny though. Trump has ceased posting in ALL CAPS (I believe) since Newsom’s team started this particular campaign: I suspect it has struck a nerve.
I see Rachel from Accounts is doing everything possible to make sure home owners don't vote Labour at the next election. Her and her Party's hideous policies hopefully will screw Labour for generations.
If you are trying to raise funds without going to the market, you need to tax those with assets - homeowners and savers.
If she taxes second homes, btl etc she will probably get away with it.
If she tries touching people's main homes, she will be committing political suicide on a scale not seen since 1945.
If it's around Council Tax, the main uplift would not be amongst her own votes.
More importantly The Proportional Property Tax modelling says that 80% of people would be better off, and Stamp Duty would go. That's a strong political proposition.
It may be that they "go timidly" again, though.
Done properly both Council Tax and Stamp Duty should go.
My worry is they'll try and make it a tax rise by replacing Council Tax but keeping Stamp Duty, which would largely defeat the point of the reform.
Yeah guys, Gavin Newsom’s content is ridiculous. But it’s making you uncomfortable because he’s holding up a mirror to what you tolerate on behalf of partisanship. It jolts people out of their passive acceptance of how insane Trump sounds. https://x.com/SarahLongwell25/status/1957650485575618799
Newsom gets to be a jerk, and claim the (relative) high ground of parody. That's a sweet spot for a politician.
He’s wrestling with a pig, there’s no way he can keep it up for more than a few weeks, and the policy he’s talking about is a blatant and unpopular exercise in Gerrymandering, to make California worse than it is already.
Meanwhile, as he’s playing Twitter games with Texas and the president, his own State is a total mess. Make America California Again really isn’t a popular message.
The Twitter games are very funny though. Trump has ceased posting in ALL CAPS (I believe) since Newsom’s team started this particular campaign: I suspect it has struck a nerve.
WSJ also reports that, according to their information, during the closed part of the meeting, Finnish President Alexander Stubb called the cities of Kramatorsk and Slavyansk "a Bastion against the Huns"
Email from Barclays this morning reducing my overdraft facility from £5000 to £250. No choice. I assume something to do with capital requirements or risk management?
You’re lucky, Barclaycard reduced my limit from £25,000 to £500 a couple of years ago.
It is usually one of two possibilities, you’re either not using that limit or you’ve been stuck in a high level of debt for a period and they are looking to take action.
I think the last time I used my Barclaycard was back in 2019.
They are reducing overdrafts because they are counted in risk - you could potentially take the whole overdraft in a single transaction. So an overdraft, unused, costs the bank money.
Yeah guys, Gavin Newsom’s content is ridiculous. But it’s making you uncomfortable because he’s holding up a mirror to what you tolerate on behalf of partisanship. It jolts people out of their passive acceptance of how insane Trump sounds. https://x.com/SarahLongwell25/status/1957650485575618799
Newsom gets to be a jerk, and claim the (relative) high ground of parody. That's a sweet spot for a politician.
He’s wrestling with a pig, there’s no way he can keep it up for more than a few weeks, and the policy he’s talking about is a blatant and unpopular exercise in Gerrymandering, to make California worse than it is already.
Meanwhile, as he’s playing Twitter games with Texas and the president, his own State is a total mess. Make America California Again really isn’t a popular message.
I see Rachel from Accounts is doing everything possible to make sure home owners don't vote Labour at the next election. Her and her Party's hideous policies hopefully will screw Labour for generations.
If you are trying to raise funds without going to the market, you need to tax those with assets - homeowners and savers.
If she taxes second homes, btl etc she will probably get away with it.
If she tries touching people's main homes, she will be committing political suicide on a scale not seen since 1945.
If it's around Council Tax, the main uplift would not be amongst her own votes.
More importantly The Proportional Property Tax modelling says that 80% of people would be better off, and Stamp Duty would go. That's a strong political proposition.
It may be that they "go timidly" again, though.
Done properly both Council Tax and Stamp Duty should go.
My worry is they'll try and make it a tax rise by replacing Council Tax but keeping Stamp Duty, which would largely defeat the point of the reform.
It’s time to revisit a local income tax. However, if someone owns a second home or short term let, they should pay on both properties. Rental income should be included in total income, with expenses deducted so that there are tax advantages in maintaining the properties. Each local authority should set their own income tax rates. It can be calculated and administered national, in the same way that HMRC can handle different Scottish tax rates.
I see Rachel from Accounts is doing everything possible to make sure home owners don't vote Labour at the next election. Her and her Party's hideous policies hopefully will screw Labour for generations.
If you are trying to raise funds without going to the market, you need to tax those with assets - homeowners and savers.
If she taxes second homes, btl etc she will probably get away with it.
If she tries touching people's main homes, she will be committing political suicide on a scale not seen since 1945.
If it's around Council Tax, the main uplift would not be amongst her own votes.
More importantly The Proportional Property Tax modelling says that 80% of people would be better off, and Stamp Duty would go. That's a strong political proposition.
It may be that they "go timidly" again, though.
The issue with Stamp Duty is a bit like inheritance tax on farmland, it is a dumb tax but one most people don't actually pay (or at least, only at very long and irregular intervals) so there's not much gain in sorting it out.
Council tax in its various iterations goes out ten times a year. And we heard that bit about '80% will be better off' in the 1980s as well (and it wasn't true).
The obvious thing would be to trial it with 2H/BTL first and see if the gremlins could be ironed out, before looking at replacing council tax with it on main properties. Otherwise, I still say Labour would be committing political suicide to even think about it.
They should do the right thing and sort it out, because frankly what do they have to lose?
Mess it up and they'll be unpopular, but wait they already are.
Do it well and they could benefit.
And it at least secures them a legacy of some meaningful reform achieved.
From my point of view the biggest weakness is that he is looking through Usonian cultural spectacles. And he does not address the way conflict is partly maintained by the place that the recreation Israel has in the theological politics of major groups in the USA, for one thing (nor have I analysed this much myself).
He wisely does not attempt a full account of the history of Israel since 1948, but some assumptions are obvious.
I like the idea of replacing stamp duty over time with an annual surcharge. It’s the kind of incrementalism I could get behind.
The government’s land tax reforms should not raise additional tax, but rather be designed to remove the current perverse incentives which jam up the market, creating a block on productivity, and - separately - destroy local community agency by leaving councils underfunded and essentially unaccountable.
Flatlander Sr died last week. I am both sad and relieved as he'd been poorly for quite some time and most definitely wasn't having any fun. I propped him up at home for many years and have no regrets on that score.
Thanks to the current stock market bubble, and no doubt much to HYUFD's disgust, his estate will attract IHT, although it won't be a vast amount in the grand scheme of things. He was not one to plan and as POA there was a limit to what I could do about it.
Do I:
a) Make a deed of variation to set up a charitable organisation to buy a few fields to grow moss / newts / trees or distribute to other organisations doing the same.
b) Pay the government
On the one hand, Rachel from Accounts is desperate and over the last 6 months he definitely incurred costs to the NHS and the local council. And it won't be a Bill Gates style legacy that could make a big difference.
On the other hand, it is the government, isn't it?
Assume that the difference in inheritance won't really change my cheap lifestyle.
I see Rachel from Accounts is doing everything possible to make sure home owners don't vote Labour at the next election. Her and her Party's hideous policies hopefully will screw Labour for generations.
If you are trying to raise funds without going to the market, you need to tax those with assets - homeowners and savers.
If she taxes second homes, btl etc she will probably get away with it.
If she tries touching people's main homes, she will be committing political suicide on a scale not seen since 1945.
If it's around Council Tax, the main uplift would not be amongst her own votes.
More importantly The Proportional Property Tax modelling says that 80% of people would be better off, and Stamp Duty would go. That's a strong political proposition.
It may be that they "go timidly" again, though.
Done properly both Council Tax and Stamp Duty should go.
My worry is they'll try and make it a tax rise by replacing Council Tax but keeping Stamp Duty, which would largely defeat the point of the reform.
Yes, just as with the failure to move to zoned electricity pricing I expect them to bottle this change as well.
Yeah guys, Gavin Newsom’s content is ridiculous. But it’s making you uncomfortable because he’s holding up a mirror to what you tolerate on behalf of partisanship. It jolts people out of their passive acceptance of how insane Trump sounds. https://x.com/SarahLongwell25/status/1957650485575618799
Newsom gets to be a jerk, and claim the (relative) high ground of parody. That's a sweet spot for a politician.
He’s wrestling with a pig, there’s no way he can keep it up for more than a few weeks, and the policy he’s talking about is a blatant and unpopular exercise in Gerrymandering, to make California worse than it is already.
Meanwhile, as he’s playing Twitter games with Texas and the president, his own State is a total mess. Make America California Again really isn’t a popular message.
A week or 2 ago you were claiming that California was already gerrymandered to the max by Dems, despite the fact that redistricting is done by an independent commission in California.
Californians seem to like their independent redistricting, so Newsom's proposed map starts off at a disadvantage. If he can frame it as retaliation for Republican dirty tricks, and a referendum on Trump, I guess he can win the vote on the proposition - so it makes sense to get as much attention for this framing as possible, as early as possible.
Flatlander Sr died last week. I am both sad and relieved as he'd been poorly for quite some time and most definitely wasn't having any fun. I propped him up at home for many years and have no regrets on that score.
Thanks to the current stock market bubble, and no doubt much to HYUFD's disgust, his estate will attract IHT, although it won't be a vast amount in the grand scheme of things. He was not one to plan and as POA there was a limit to what I could do about it.
Do I:
a) Make a deed of variation to set up a charitable organisation to buy a few fields to grow moss / newts / trees or distribute to other organisations doing the same.
b) Pay the government
On the one hand, Rachel from Accounts is desperate and over the last 6 months he definitely incurred costs to the NHS and the local council. And it won't be a Bill Gates style legacy that could make a big difference.
On the other hand, its the government, isn't it?
Assume that the difference in inheritance won't really change my cheap lifestyle.
We’re there any charitable causes that mattered to him personally? If so, then sure. Otherwise I think I’d probably pay the IHT.
Flatlander Sr died last week. I am both sad and relieved as he'd been poorly for quite some time and most definitely wasn't having any fun. I propped him up at home for many years and have no regrets on that score.
Thanks to the current stock market bubble, and no doubt much to HYUFD's disgust, his estate will attract IHT, although it won't be a vast amount in the grand scheme of things. He was not one to plan and as POA there was a limit to what I could do about it.
Do I:
a) Make a deed of variation to set up a charitable organisation to buy a few fields to grow moss / newts / trees or distribute to other organisations doing the same.
b) Pay the government
On the one hand, Rachel from Accounts is desperate and over the last 6 months he definitely incurred costs to the NHS and the local council. And it won't be a Bill Gates style legacy that could make a big difference.
On the other hand, its the government, isn't it?
Assume that the difference in inheritance won't really change my cheap lifestyle.
I'd go deed of variation route. Know that his money will do some good rather than be eaten up by interest on government incompetence in handling the economy. And my condolences.
Flatlander Sr died last week. I am both sad and relieved as he'd been poorly for quite some time and most definitely wasn't having any fun. I propped him up at home for many years and have no regrets on that score.
Thanks to the current stock market bubble, and no doubt much to HYUFD's disgust, his estate will attract IHT, although it won't be a vast amount in the grand scheme of things. He was not one to plan and as POA there was a limit to what I could do about it.
Do I:
a) Make a deed of variation to set up a charitable organisation to buy a few fields to grow moss / newts / trees or distribute to other organisations doing the same.
b) Pay the government
On the one hand, Rachel from Accounts is desperate and over the last 6 months he definitely incurred costs to the NHS and the local council. And it won't be a Bill Gates style legacy that could make a big difference.
On the other hand, its the government, isn't it?
Assume that the difference in inheritance won't really change my cheap lifestyle.
We’re there any charitable causes that mattered to him personally? If so, then sure. Otherwise I think I’d probably pay the IHT.
I would just pay the tax to be fair
And many condolences - losing your father is quite a moment and time to remember the happy times
Yeah guys, Gavin Newsom’s content is ridiculous. But it’s making you uncomfortable because he’s holding up a mirror to what you tolerate on behalf of partisanship. It jolts people out of their passive acceptance of how insane Trump sounds. https://x.com/SarahLongwell25/status/1957650485575618799
Newsom gets to be a jerk, and claim the (relative) high ground of parody. That's a sweet spot for a politician.
He’s wrestling with a pig, there’s no way he can keep it up for more than a few weeks, and the policy he’s talking about is a blatant and unpopular exercise in Gerrymandering, to make California worse than it is already.
Meanwhile, as he’s playing Twitter games with Texas and the president, his own State is a total mess. Make America California Again really isn’t a popular message.
Flatlander Sr died last week. I am both sad and relieved as he'd been poorly for quite some time and most definitely wasn't having any fun. I propped him up at home for many years and have no regrets on that score.
Thanks to the current stock market bubble, and no doubt much to HYUFD's disgust, his estate will attract IHT, although it won't be a vast amount in the grand scheme of things. He was not one to plan and as POA there was a limit to what I could do about it.
Do I:
a) Make a deed of variation to set up a charitable organisation to buy a few fields to grow moss / newts / trees or distribute to other organisations doing the same.
b) Pay the government
On the one hand, Rachel from Accounts is desperate and over the last 6 months he definitely incurred costs to the NHS and the local council. And it won't be a Bill Gates style legacy that could make a big difference.
On the other hand, it is the government, isn't it?
Assume that the difference in inheritance won't really change my cheap lifestyle.
My condolences. (I have no advice to offer on your query.)
Flatlander Sr died last week. I am both sad and relieved as he'd been poorly for quite some time and most definitely wasn't having any fun. I propped him up at home for many years and have no regrets on that score.
Thanks to the current stock market bubble, and no doubt much to HYUFD's disgust, his estate will attract IHT, although it won't be a vast amount in the grand scheme of things. He was not one to plan and as POA there was a limit to what I could do about it.
Do I:
a) Make a deed of variation to set up a charitable organisation to buy a few fields to grow moss / newts / trees or distribute to other organisations doing the same.
b) Pay the government
On the one hand, Rachel from Accounts is desperate and over the last 6 months he definitely incurred costs to the NHS and the local council. And it won't be a Bill Gates style legacy that could make a big difference.
On the other hand, it is the government, isn't it?
Assume that the difference in inheritance won't really change my cheap lifestyle.
From my point of view the biggest weakness is that he is looking through Usonian cultural spectacles. And he does not address the way conflict is partly maintained by the place that the recreation Israel has in the theological politics of major groups in the USA, for one thing (nor have I analysed this much myself).
He wisely does not attempt a full account of the history of Israel since 1948, but some assumptions are obvious.
"so I picked up my arm in my right hand and I get up and I start walking with my arm it's still attached but crap hanging out of it bones sticking out and I'm walking and I walk and probably every 200 yards or so I sit down and I put my arm down and I reach into my pocket find my phone and I check for his signal."
edit: which reminds me: a primary schoolfriend of mine was from a farming family. Her dad lost his arm in a bailer, and walked half a mile to the farmhouse, carrying his arm, to get help. I'd just be a snivelling wreck on the ground...
Yeah guys, Gavin Newsom’s content is ridiculous. But it’s making you uncomfortable because he’s holding up a mirror to what you tolerate on behalf of partisanship. It jolts people out of their passive acceptance of how insane Trump sounds. https://x.com/SarahLongwell25/status/1957650485575618799
Newsom gets to be a jerk, and claim the (relative) high ground of parody. That's a sweet spot for a politician.
He’s wrestling with a pig, there’s no way he can keep it up for more than a few weeks, and the policy he’s talking about is a blatant and unpopular exercise in Gerrymandering, to make California worse than it is already.
Meanwhile, as he’s playing Twitter games with Texas and the president, his own State is a total mess. Make America California Again really isn’t a popular message.
A week or 2 ago you were claiming that California was already gerrymandered to the max by Dems, despite the fact that redistricting is done by an independent commission in California.
Californians seem to like their independent redistricting, so Newsom's proposed map starts off at a disadvantage. If he can frame it as retaliation for Republican dirty tricks, and a referendum on Trump, I guess he can win the vote on the proposition - so it makes sense to get as much attention for this framing as possible, as early as possible.
I believe the referendum is for a temporary redistricting, conditional on Texas going ahead with their unprecedented midterm redistricting ? It would then revert back to the independent commission for the next cycle.
Yeah guys, Gavin Newsom’s content is ridiculous. But it’s making you uncomfortable because he’s holding up a mirror to what you tolerate on behalf of partisanship. It jolts people out of their passive acceptance of how insane Trump sounds. https://x.com/SarahLongwell25/status/1957650485575618799
Newsom gets to be a jerk, and claim the (relative) high ground of parody. That's a sweet spot for a politician.
He’s wrestling with a pig, there’s no way he can keep it up for more than a few weeks, and the policy he’s talking about is a blatant and unpopular exercise in Gerrymandering, to make California worse than it is already.
Meanwhile, as he’s playing Twitter games with Texas and the president, his own State is a total mess. Make America California Again really isn’t a popular message.
A week or 2 ago you were claiming that California was already gerrymandered to the max by Dems, despite the fact that redistricting is done by an independent commission in California.
Californians seem to like their independent redistricting, so Newsom's proposed map starts off at a disadvantage. If he can frame it as retaliation for Republican dirty tricks, and a referendum on Trump, I guess he can win the vote on the proposition - so it makes sense to get as much attention for this framing as possible, as early as possible.
'Independent' California - Dem 43 GOP 9 'Gerrymandered' Texas - GOP25 Dem 13
Judge an organisation by its actions not its name.
California has an independent commission in the same way that East Germany was a Democratic Republic.
Off topic: Just had a spam sales call. Flogging some energy stuff or whatever. Hung up halfway through the spiel - but I'm not sure it was a real person - just something about the delivery. I reckon firms are using AI bots to do this now.
Some brilliant news to cheer everyone up - some of Scotland's most stunning landscapes (heart of the Cairngorms at Luibeg and Ryvoan, Glencoe, Torridon etc) have been saved from bespoilment by 25m phone masts. We don't put enough value on these areas and forget that people come here to enjoy them, not scroll through TikTok.
(The issue was it was measured by landmass coverage rather than residents, so we were spending millions to install generators and masts in the middle of nowhere)
Latest favourability polling from YG, slightly improvements for Ed, Nigel and Kemi. Starmer flat as a pancake. Labour nearly underneath the evil Toreez in party favourability. Polanski barely known but not significantly preferred to Ramsey or Chowns.
Yeah guys, Gavin Newsom’s content is ridiculous. But it’s making you uncomfortable because he’s holding up a mirror to what you tolerate on behalf of partisanship. It jolts people out of their passive acceptance of how insane Trump sounds. https://x.com/SarahLongwell25/status/1957650485575618799
Newsom gets to be a jerk, and claim the (relative) high ground of parody. That's a sweet spot for a politician.
He’s wrestling with a pig, there’s no way he can keep it up for more than a few weeks, and the policy he’s talking about is a blatant and unpopular exercise in Gerrymandering, to make California worse than it is already.
Meanwhile, as he’s playing Twitter games with Texas and the president, his own State is a total mess. Make America California Again really isn’t a popular message.
A week or 2 ago you were claiming that California was already gerrymandered to the max by Dems, despite the fact that redistricting is done by an independent commission in California.
Californians seem to like their independent redistricting, so Newsom's proposed map starts off at a disadvantage. If he can frame it as retaliation for Republican dirty tricks, and a referendum on Trump, I guess he can win the vote on the proposition - so it makes sense to get as much attention for this framing as possible, as early as possible.
'Independent' California - Dem 43 GOP 9 'Gerrymandered' Texas - GOP25 Dem 13
Judge an organisation by its actions not its name.
California has an independent commission in the same way that East Germany was a Democratic Republic.
Ignoring the fact that in California the Democrats beat the GOP by more than the GOP beat the Democrats in Texas, so all else being equal you should expect the Democrats to win a higher proportion of seats in California.
Oh and I believe the gerrymandered districts being proposed in Texas weren't in play last time, so that's also not an apt comparison.
Flatlander Sr died last week. I am both sad and relieved as he'd been poorly for quite some time and most definitely wasn't having any fun. I propped him up at home for many years and have no regrets on that score.
Thanks to the current stock market bubble, and no doubt much to HYUFD's disgust, his estate will attract IHT, although it won't be a vast amount in the grand scheme of things. He was not one to plan and as POA there was a limit to what I could do about it.
Do I:
a) Make a deed of variation to set up a charitable organisation to buy a few fields to grow moss / newts / trees or distribute to other organisations doing the same.
b) Pay the government
On the one hand, Rachel from Accounts is desperate and over the last 6 months he definitely incurred costs to the NHS and the local council. And it won't be a Bill Gates style legacy that could make a big difference.
On the other hand, it is the government, isn't it?
Assume that the difference in inheritance won't really change my cheap lifestyle.
My condolences.
From memory, inheritance tax is 36% if you leave >10% of the estate to charity, compared to 40% if you don't so as it's a relatively small amount I'd say the charitable route is unlikely to be worth it from a strictly financial point if view. In addition there will be costs of setting up an organisation and organising a deed.
Without knowing the numbers I'd say it's probably best to shell out. But obviously dyor.
Sorry for your loss @Flatlander - a couple of years since my dad died and I'm happy that the estate is now well managed (by me) with my mum quite comfortably off.
Email from Barclays this morning reducing my overdraft facility from £5000 to £250. No choice. I assume something to do with capital requirements or risk management?
Presume you haven’t been using it? For various reasons I have had more credit card use recently and bingo Lloyds just increased my limit with it me asking.
This is suboptimal for Jenrick. On the other hand he is the only Tory who seems to understand social media - in the same way as Farage
He would be a risk but dying men clutch at risky straws
One alternative is Katie Lam. Telegenic. Firmly right wing. Articulate. And - crucially - so young she has no unhelpful backstory. But also so young she could just be another Badenoch
Off topic: Just had a spam sales call. Flogging some energy stuff or whatever. Hung up halfway through the spiel - but I'm not sure it was a real person - just something about the delivery. I reckon firms are using AI bots to do this now.
They usually start off with some rubbish about responding to my (non-existent) query. Interrupting the spiel with something irrelevant usually triggers a 'sorry to trouble you' line.
Flatlander Sr died last week. I am both sad and relieved as he'd been poorly for quite some time and most definitely wasn't having any fun. I propped him up at home for many years and have no regrets on that score.
Thanks to the current stock market bubble, and no doubt much to HYUFD's disgust, his estate will attract IHT, although it won't be a vast amount in the grand scheme of things. He was not one to plan and as POA there was a limit to what I could do about it.
Do I:
a) Make a deed of variation to set up a charitable organisation to buy a few fields to grow moss / newts / trees or distribute to other organisations doing the same.
b) Pay the government
On the one hand, Rachel from Accounts is desperate and over the last 6 months he definitely incurred costs to the NHS and the local council. And it won't be a Bill Gates style legacy that could make a big difference.
On the other hand, its the government, isn't it?
Assume that the difference in inheritance won't really change my cheap lifestyle.
We’re there any charitable causes that mattered to him personally? If so, then sure. Otherwise I think I’d probably pay the IHT.
He showed no inclination to give money away, although one thing he did do was visit the local WT reserve a lot.
I have no immediate heirs and what I can't spend will end up with such causes anyway, so it would be nice to do something now.
However, my dilemma is that doing so would be at least partially for me, and a deed of variation should be done acting as him.
My mum, on the other hand, did not even like visiting National Trust properties because they were the product of punitive IHT, and some of the legacy would have been originally hers. I'm not sure why she had that attitude as the owner of an average semi-detached but she definitely did. So perhaps that's how I justify it.
Another illustration of IHT as voluntary, and why it should perhaps be abolished. I could do without this nonsense...
Why was Jenrick boasting about opening new hotels every month? Because people did not want potentially illegal immigrants wandering the streets or cluttering the doorways of their shops, I suppose. So he found the solution to one problem, more secure accommodation, by creating another.
The absolute failure, however, for which he bore at least some responsibility (no doubt the Treasury and resources did too) was the grinding to a halt of our immigration assessment system, whether in original determinations, dealing with appeals, actually implementing the decisions made and getting people back on planes where they came from. The only success I can think of from the last government in this area was the deal with Albania. It should have been a model, not unique.
The current government has made modest progress in dealing with appeals and deportations but it is a pale shadow of what is needed. In my view the only realistic approach is an amnesty for most of those who have not been removed in 10 years or more and try to focus resources on the new arrivals/overstayers etc.
Isn't the bigger problem that many-to-most asylum applicants turn out to have a perfectly valid case under the established rules and the last government was terrified of acknowledging that? Hence keeping people in limbo, until they could be magicked away to Africa.
The rules are a load of bollox from from 70+ years ago , be as well saying we should bring back deportation. They are economic immigrants , illegally entering Britain and abusing the lax rules. You shoudl not just be able to travel through a shedload of safe countries to the one of your choice and say you want to live here free on state subsidies. Anyone who thinks that is sensible is not right in the head. Bigger problem is the state largesse they get from UK and hence the stampede to get here.
Yeah guys, Gavin Newsom’s content is ridiculous. But it’s making you uncomfortable because he’s holding up a mirror to what you tolerate on behalf of partisanship. It jolts people out of their passive acceptance of how insane Trump sounds. https://x.com/SarahLongwell25/status/1957650485575618799
Newsom gets to be a jerk, and claim the (relative) high ground of parody. That's a sweet spot for a politician.
He’s wrestling with a pig, there’s no way he can keep it up for more than a few weeks, and the policy he’s talking about is a blatant and unpopular exercise in Gerrymandering, to make California worse than it is already.
Meanwhile, as he’s playing Twitter games with Texas and the president, his own State is a total mess. Make America California Again really isn’t a popular message.
A week or 2 ago you were claiming that California was already gerrymandered to the max by Dems, despite the fact that redistricting is done by an independent commission in California.
Californians seem to like their independent redistricting, so Newsom's proposed map starts off at a disadvantage. If he can frame it as retaliation for Republican dirty tricks, and a referendum on Trump, I guess he can win the vote on the proposition - so it makes sense to get as much attention for this framing as possible, as early as possible.
'Independent' California - Dem 43 GOP 9 'Gerrymandered' Texas - GOP25 Dem 13
Judge an organisation by its actions not its name.
California has an independent commission in the same way that East Germany was a Democratic Republic.
Ignoring the fact that in California the Democrats beat the GOP by more than the GOP beat the Democrats in Texas, so all else being equal you should expect the Democrats to win a higher proportion of seats in California.
Oh and I believe the gerrymandered districts being proposed in Texas weren't in play last time, so that's also not an apt comparison.
The more I read about the so-called 'democratic process' in the USA, the more I realise they have no idea what the words mean.
Yeah guys, Gavin Newsom’s content is ridiculous. But it’s making you uncomfortable because he’s holding up a mirror to what you tolerate on behalf of partisanship. It jolts people out of their passive acceptance of how insane Trump sounds. https://x.com/SarahLongwell25/status/1957650485575618799
Newsom gets to be a jerk, and claim the (relative) high ground of parody. That's a sweet spot for a politician.
He’s wrestling with a pig, there’s no way he can keep it up for more than a few weeks, and the policy he’s talking about is a blatant and unpopular exercise in Gerrymandering, to make California worse than it is already.
Meanwhile, as he’s playing Twitter games with Texas and the president, his own State is a total mess. Make America California Again really isn’t a popular message.
A week or 2 ago you were claiming that California was already gerrymandered to the max by Dems, despite the fact that redistricting is done by an independent commission in California.
Californians seem to like their independent redistricting, so Newsom's proposed map starts off at a disadvantage. If he can frame it as retaliation for Republican dirty tricks, and a referendum on Trump, I guess he can win the vote on the proposition - so it makes sense to get as much attention for this framing as possible, as early as possible.
'Independent' California - Dem 43 GOP 9 'Gerrymandered' Texas - GOP25 Dem 13
Judge an organisation by its actions not its name.
California has an independent commission in the same way that East Germany was a Democratic Republic.
I suppose you think Scotland was gerrymandered when the SNP won 56 seats out of 57 in the 2015 general election?
Flatlander Sr died last week. I am both sad and relieved as he'd been poorly for quite some time and most definitely wasn't having any fun. I propped him up at home for many years and have no regrets on that score.
Thanks to the current stock market bubble, and no doubt much to HYUFD's disgust, his estate will attract IHT, although it won't be a vast amount in the grand scheme of things. He was not one to plan and as POA there was a limit to what I could do about it.
Do I:
a) Make a deed of variation to set up a charitable organisation to buy a few fields to grow moss / newts / trees or distribute to other organisations doing the same.
b) Pay the government
On the one hand, Rachel from Accounts is desperate and over the last 6 months he definitely incurred costs to the NHS and the local council. And it won't be a Bill Gates style legacy that could make a big difference.
On the other hand, it is the government, isn't it?
Assume that the difference in inheritance won't really change my cheap lifestyle.
This is a betting website. A real question for yourself is when do you expect this government to fall. If you think that is imminent then you should vacillate. It is likely that the next goverment will just about abolish inheritance tax in such a way as it cannot be reimplemented in the future. I know the promise will be to repay anything due to Reeves, i.e. restore the situation pre July 2025. If it is implemented as per Reeves's cast iron promises then IHT will not raise a single penny after next May. I assume she will break that promise too. Accountants who I know cannot believe the changes are so incompetently worded.
If goverments fall it tends to be in late September when the traders come back from their summer holidays. So, wait six weeks, which you will have to do in any case and see if the government falls. If the government is still in situ by the end of October you must assume it will survive until May 2028.
Yeah guys, Gavin Newsom’s content is ridiculous. But it’s making you uncomfortable because he’s holding up a mirror to what you tolerate on behalf of partisanship. It jolts people out of their passive acceptance of how insane Trump sounds. https://x.com/SarahLongwell25/status/1957650485575618799
Newsom gets to be a jerk, and claim the (relative) high ground of parody. That's a sweet spot for a politician.
He’s wrestling with a pig, there’s no way he can keep it up for more than a few weeks, and the policy he’s talking about is a blatant and unpopular exercise in Gerrymandering, to make California worse than it is already.
Meanwhile, as he’s playing Twitter games with Texas and the president, his own State is a total mess. Make America California Again really isn’t a popular message.
A week or 2 ago you were claiming that California was already gerrymandered to the max by Dems, despite the fact that redistricting is done by an independent commission in California.
Californians seem to like their independent redistricting, so Newsom's proposed map starts off at a disadvantage. If he can frame it as retaliation for Republican dirty tricks, and a referendum on Trump, I guess he can win the vote on the proposition - so it makes sense to get as much attention for this framing as possible, as early as possible.
'Independent' California - Dem 43 GOP 9 'Gerrymandered' Texas - GOP25 Dem 13
Judge an organisation by its actions not its name.
California has an independent commission in the same way that East Germany was a Democratic Republic.
I suppose you think Scotland was gerrymandered when the SNP won 56 seats out of 57 in the 2015 general election?
In a way it was because it was 'fixed' for FPTP. The SNP have never managed that proportion of directly elected seats in Scottish elections.
Off topic: Just had a spam sales call. Flogging some energy stuff or whatever. Hung up halfway through the spiel - but I'm not sure it was a real person - just something about the delivery. I reckon firms are using AI bots to do this now.
They usually start off with some rubbish about responding to my (non-existent) query. Interrupting the spiel with something irrelevant usually triggers a 'sorry to trouble you' line.
Flatlander Sr died last week. I am both sad and relieved as he'd been poorly for quite some time and most definitely wasn't having any fun. I propped him up at home for many years and have no regrets on that score.
Thanks to the current stock market bubble, and no doubt much to HYUFD's disgust, his estate will attract IHT, although it won't be a vast amount in the grand scheme of things. He was not one to plan and as POA there was a limit to what I could do about it.
Do I:
a) Make a deed of variation to set up a charitable organisation to buy a few fields to grow moss / newts / trees or distribute to other organisations doing the same.
b) Pay the government
On the one hand, Rachel from Accounts is desperate and over the last 6 months he definitely incurred costs to the NHS and the local council. And it won't be a Bill Gates style legacy that could make a big difference.
On the other hand, it is the government, isn't it?
Assume that the difference in inheritance won't really change my cheap lifestyle.
I think there is a cap on charitable donations which are free of IHT. Is it 10% of estate? So you may end up paying some anyway.
My motto with charitable organisations is always to make it focused enough to see the difference if possible. A permanent impact is good (eg buy a woodland for the local trust), but shorter term things of a couple of decades are also great - at present I'm quite taken with "friendship benches". We have one locally, which is labelled "sit on this bench if you are happy for people to stop for a chat". And also with benches spaced more often so that less fit or more frail people can take a break.
If it's a local WT, then another torch I currently carry is to get them to identify and publicise accessible walks; there exist standards such as a set called "Mile without Stiles" used by National Parks, and woodland and wildlife trusts need to be on board with this area. Potentially it is easier where the highest hill is about 3ft.
Some brilliant news to cheer everyone up - some of Scotland's most stunning landscapes (heart of the Cairngorms at Luibeg and Ryvoan, Glencoe, Torridon etc) have been saved from bespoilment by 25m phone masts. We don't put enough value on these areas and forget that people come here to enjoy them, not scroll through TikTok.
(The issue was it was measured by landmass coverage rather than residents, so we were spending millions to install generators and masts in the middle of nowhere)
Anyone desperately needing a signal at Luibeg should use a satellite phone.
If we are allowing pollution of the night sky with temporary space junk, we might as well use it.
I do worry that political parties are made up of mostly made up of people concerned entirely with the urban. I think it goes with being a 'people' person.
Yeah guys, Gavin Newsom’s content is ridiculous. But it’s making you uncomfortable because he’s holding up a mirror to what you tolerate on behalf of partisanship. It jolts people out of their passive acceptance of how insane Trump sounds. https://x.com/SarahLongwell25/status/1957650485575618799
Newsom gets to be a jerk, and claim the (relative) high ground of parody. That's a sweet spot for a politician.
He’s wrestling with a pig, there’s no way he can keep it up for more than a few weeks, and the policy he’s talking about is a blatant and unpopular exercise in Gerrymandering, to make California worse than it is already.
Meanwhile, as he’s playing Twitter games with Texas and the president, his own State is a total mess. Make America California Again really isn’t a popular message.
A week or 2 ago you were claiming that California was already gerrymandered to the max by Dems, despite the fact that redistricting is done by an independent commission in California.
Californians seem to like their independent redistricting, so Newsom's proposed map starts off at a disadvantage. If he can frame it as retaliation for Republican dirty tricks, and a referendum on Trump, I guess he can win the vote on the proposition - so it makes sense to get as much attention for this framing as possible, as early as possible.
'Independent' California - Dem 43 GOP 9 'Gerrymandered' Texas - GOP25 Dem 13
Judge an organisation by its actions not its name.
California has an independent commission in the same way that East Germany was a Democratic Republic.
It’s fine when the Democrats do it as they’re the good guys here.
Email from Barclays this morning reducing my overdraft facility from £5000 to £250. No choice. I assume something to do with capital requirements or risk management?
You’re lucky, Barclaycard reduced my limit from £25,000 to £500 a couple of years ago.
It is usually one of two possibilities, you’re either not using that limit or you’ve been stuck in a high level of debt for a period and they are looking to take action.
I think the last time I used my Barclaycard was back in 2019.
There's another possibility, someone has done some identity fraud and there has been a default in your name. I would check your credit reference.
This happened to me, the first I knew of it was letters drastically cutting overdrafts and credit card limits.
Someone had managed to transfer my mortgage to a new address and then used it as security to open a Santander bank account and take out a loan, which they promptly defaulted on. Took a while to sort out, but being able to look up my credit reference helped me to understand what was going on.
Off topic: Just had a spam sales call. Flogging some energy stuff or whatever. Hung up halfway through the spiel - but I'm not sure it was a real person - just something about the delivery. I reckon firms are using AI bots to do this now.
Yes. I have received several spam calls from AI. The marginal cost of making spam AI calls must be low enough that I imagine a real tsunami of them is building up.
I'm guessing the only solution ultimately will be to have an AI answer my phone for me and only ring my phone when it's been convinced I'll be interested in taking it.
Commiserations on your loss. Went through the same in 2022 although as my Dad was a car worker he didn’t leave much and the estate was quite easy for me to deal with, apart from his BMW pension. An organisation with a Frank Spencer like approach to dealing with people.
Just be wary of relatives and money grabbers after a piece of the pie.
I like the idea of replacing stamp duty over time with an annual surcharge. It’s the kind of incrementalism I could get behind.
The government’s land tax reforms should not raise additional tax, but rather be designed to remove the current perverse incentives which jam up the market, creating a block on productivity, and - separately - destroy local community agency by leaving councils underfunded and essentially unaccountable.
They have a real,window of opportunity to do something truly reformative here and make a proper reform.
Yeah guys, Gavin Newsom’s content is ridiculous. But it’s making you uncomfortable because he’s holding up a mirror to what you tolerate on behalf of partisanship. It jolts people out of their passive acceptance of how insane Trump sounds. https://x.com/SarahLongwell25/status/1957650485575618799
Newsom gets to be a jerk, and claim the (relative) high ground of parody. That's a sweet spot for a politician.
He’s wrestling with a pig, there’s no way he can keep it up for more than a few weeks, and the policy he’s talking about is a blatant and unpopular exercise in Gerrymandering, to make California worse than it is already.
Meanwhile, as he’s playing Twitter games with Texas and the president, his own State is a total mess. Make America California Again really isn’t a popular message.
A week or 2 ago you were claiming that California was already gerrymandered to the max by Dems, despite the fact that redistricting is done by an independent commission in California.
Californians seem to like their independent redistricting, so Newsom's proposed map starts off at a disadvantage. If he can frame it as retaliation for Republican dirty tricks, and a referendum on Trump, I guess he can win the vote on the proposition - so it makes sense to get as much attention for this framing as possible, as early as possible.
'Independent' California - Dem 43 GOP 9 'Gerrymandered' Texas - GOP25 Dem 13
Judge an organisation by its actions not its name.
California has an independent commission in the same way that East Germany was a Democratic Republic.
I suppose you think Scotland was gerrymandered when the SNP won 56 seats out of 57 in the 2015 general election?
In a way it was because it was 'fixed' for FPTP. The SNP have never managed that proportion of directly elected seats in Scottish elections.
Sure, I'm all in favour of more proportional systems, but you can't just point at numbers of seats won as evidence of gerrymandering.
Here's an article on JD Vance's claim that California is more gerrymandered that Texas:
If fits with the general pattern that "things that Vance says are likely to be false"
California's independent redistricting commission is generally held up as an example of best practice; it's not part of their job to try and make artificial districts to try and counteract the somewhat inefficient Republican vote in California. Comparing them to the former East Germany is just ignorant.
"David Cameron’s “bonfire of the quangos” decision to abolish England’s council spending watchdog has left a broken system that is costing taxpayers more money than it was promised to save.
In a highly critical report, academics at the University of Sheffield said the coalition government of the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats had promised savings of £100m a year by abolishing the Audit Commission.
However, replacing the public body with a private-sector model had resulted in “chaos” and soaring costs to audit councils amid the financial crisis hitting England’s town halls."
Yeah guys, Gavin Newsom’s content is ridiculous. But it’s making you uncomfortable because he’s holding up a mirror to what you tolerate on behalf of partisanship. It jolts people out of their passive acceptance of how insane Trump sounds. https://x.com/SarahLongwell25/status/1957650485575618799
Newsom gets to be a jerk, and claim the (relative) high ground of parody. That's a sweet spot for a politician.
He’s wrestling with a pig, there’s no way he can keep it up for more than a few weeks, and the policy he’s talking about is a blatant and unpopular exercise in Gerrymandering, to make California worse than it is already.
Meanwhile, as he’s playing Twitter games with Texas and the president, his own State is a total mess. Make America California Again really isn’t a popular message.
A week or 2 ago you were claiming that California was already gerrymandered to the max by Dems, despite the fact that redistricting is done by an independent commission in California.
Californians seem to like their independent redistricting, so Newsom's proposed map starts off at a disadvantage. If he can frame it as retaliation for Republican dirty tricks, and a referendum on Trump, I guess he can win the vote on the proposition - so it makes sense to get as much attention for this framing as possible, as early as possible.
'Independent' California - Dem 43 GOP 9 'Gerrymandered' Texas - GOP25 Dem 13
Judge an organisation by its actions not its name.
California has an independent commission in the same way that East Germany was a Democratic Republic.
It’s fine when the Democrats do it as they’re the good guys here.
Comments
Then there's all the empty commercial property - why not re-purpose that for asylum seekers so we can all have our four star hotels and "local landmarks" back (so they can stand empty as no one can afford to run them or stay in them)?
As Thatcher found out the hard way with the poll tax, er, community charge.
Taxes on property are a stupid mess but any meddling with them needs to be done exceedingly carefully.
... I can sort of see that there's a mutually beneficial business there, but it feels like something isn't quite right for that possibility to be possible.
More importantly The Proportional Property Tax modelling says that 80% of people would be better off, and Stamp Duty would go. That's a strong political proposition.
It may be that they "go timidly" again, though.
Id also think that (let's imagine a Bobbins Jenrick versus Lam fight for a moment just as an example) Jenrick's dark forces attacking what she said as a young SPAD versus her proxies attacking his record and inconsistencies as a minister, the latter carries more weight.
Anyway, I'm off to do my weekly shop. Empty pantries are for the hungry
The fear is that this government in October will further tinker and complicate, and also will do so with IHT, when with IHT what it should do is have a system at a sensible rate (10%?) with more or less universal application to IHT and lifetime gifts.
Council tax in its various iterations goes out ten times a year. And we heard that bit about '80% will be better off' in the 1980s as well (and it wasn't true).
The obvious thing would be to trial it with 2H/BTL first and see if the gremlins could be ironed out, before looking at replacing council tax with it on main properties. Otherwise, I still say Labour would be committing political suicide to even think about it.
Are they? And even if they are, what is the limit? Many experts already think the current paradigm has plateaued. Although those sort of stories are not as 'sexy' as the hype ones we all see from the boosters.
https://futurism.com/scientists-worried-ai-pleateau
Then there's the issue of exactly how to make money out of AI. It will not be easy to convert the current 'spend billions' model to a 'make a profit' model. Although as AI is currently a bubble, perhaps a survivor or two will make some money out of it once the bubble bursts.
And any good environmentalist should be aghast at the environmental cost of the current AI systems.
The problem (well, one of the many problems...) with Tesla's 'Autopilot' is that it is not a driverless car, and they are testing it on open, non-geofenced public roads. In other words, they are testing it on those of us sensible enough not to get a Tesla. We are their crash test dummies.
It is usually one of two possibilities, you’re either not using that limit or you’ve been stuck in a high level of debt for a period and they are looking to take action.
I think the last time I used my Barclaycard was back in 2019.
Go Timidly
amidst the noise and haste, and remember: everyone is watching, and probably judging.
As far as possible, without surrender, surrender immediately.
Speak your truth quietly—preferably into a pillow—
and then deny you ever said it.
Avoid loud and aggressive persons,
for they are terrifying, and might make eye contact.
If you compare yourself with others, you will despair,
for always there will be greater and lesser persons than yourself—
and both will think you’re weird.
Keep interested in your own career—
but never mention it, in case someone asks follow-up questions.
Exercise extreme caution in all your affairs;
do not jaywalk, do not jay-breathe.
Remember: escalators are death machines,
and salad bars are petri dishes.
Be yourself—unless that causes trouble,
in which case, be whoever they want you to be.
Neither be bold, nor original;
those paths are fraught with criticism.
Instead, cultivate invisibility,
for it is the one talent no one resents.
Take kindly the counsel of panic attacks,
gracefully surrendering the illusions of composure.
Nurture cowardice in your spirit
to shield you in sudden misfortune,
like when someone says “hi” unexpectedly.
But beyond a wholesome dread,
be gentle with yourself.
You are a small, quivering mouse
in a world full of traps, cats, and unexpected phone calls.
Therefore, creep cautiously,
skirting confrontation, conversation,
and any situation requiring a firm handshake.
And whatever your labors and aspirations,
in the noisy confusion of life,
remain timid.
With all its sham, drudgery,
and suspiciously friendly strangers,
it is still a terrifying world.
Be careful.
Strive always to remain unnoticed.
https://x.com/sturdyAlex/status/1957716010229805349
In the old days when they were allowed to charge a daily fixed fee rather than a percentage interest, it was a quite cheap way to borrow money for a couple of days when moving things around. But the government put an end to that.
Then, we try to stop them from doing so, because nobody, outside the ranks of Greens, Sultanas, and human rights activists, thinks that this is a good idea.
Matthew Parris has been making this point, since about 2000.
The answer lies in completely rewriting the ECHR, or alternatively, passing primary legislation that disapplies parts of it.
Of course council tax is in part a property tax but also partly a poll tax anyway - in terms of its assessment, it is partly based on the number of qualifying people per household. That is partly in terms of the *reductions*: that works both ways, e.g. FT students pay zilch, single persons get a discount, and so on. But the link is there, as thje CT was always intended to be a sort of low-tar poll tax.
So it seems odd to have council tax as such on holiday homes, especially as (a) the poll tax has already been paid at the main home, so to speak; (b) second homes
are purely optional to own and (c) the costs such as cleansing are the same for 4 students vs 4 adults as far as Prettybay-by-the-Sea Council is concerned. Those should be replaced with a simple property tax, the logic quite possibly runs ...
The other factor with second homes is the renting out element - already used actually or potentially to evade thje changes in local taxation from what I can see. Opportunity to eliminate that anomaly?
The older stamp duty was stupid because it was stepped - until the Scots brought in graduation, at which E followed suit all of a sudden ISTR.
And moving house does cost money and (increasingly scarce as one gets old) mental energy, quite apart from works to the new house. Of which one may see little benefit time wise.
No, I don't like it either, though I think it may be coming. At the deepest level the failure is that of the United Nations (often called 'the international community' but that doesn't exist) to secure a minimal level of peace and proper governance among its members.
I’d allow 28 days for what’s otherwise your main residence, to cover people going on holiday and renting their place out when there’s a big event in town (Wimbledon, Silverstone, Ascot, Edinburgh, Glastonbury etc.).
If there weren't any hotels, they would be screaming about "asylum seekers" (whether they are asylum seekers or not) on RAF quarters as we saw in Lincs, or "HMOs", as we have seen in various places as people are moved from hotels.
They don't are about that, any more than they care about whether their hysterics about "asylum seekers will rape your girls" are a lie or not, or the impact their stirring will have on local communities - as long as the people are siloed in to support them. Nothing else matters.
I think she is 4th favourite among Tory MPs now. I didn’t get a bet on at the nice prices, just £3.75. Is Cleverly not a good bet? He more or less won last time and is now 6/1
https://x.com/SarahLongwell25/status/1957650485575618799
Newsom gets to be a jerk, and claim the (relative) high ground of parody.
That's a sweet spot for a politician.
https://x.com/tomastell/status/1957051432722411813
An excellent example of someone who hasn't a clue how markets work with an immediate increase in £500,000 prices so the buyer is left to pays it on their mortgage
Anyway, this is England only and no doubt will finally end any hope of labour winning southerrn seats
For a couple of months. But then...
WSJ also reports that, according to their information, during the closed part of the meeting, Finnish President Alexander Stubb called the cities of Kramatorsk and Slavyansk "a Bastion against the Huns"
According to the publication's sources, this impressed Trump.
https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1957693681076445382
TRUMP: President Stubb of Finland. He's uh, somebody that, where are we here? Huh?
STUBB: I'm right here
TRUMP: Oh.
https://x.com/atrupar/status/1957517026647249326
Market conditions might make a difference, but prices a little over the threshold have always resulted in offers just below it.
We did that on the current one - on the market at £275k, where the seller had started at "Offers over £300k" and we had waited for some time for reality to dawn. We went in with "won't pay over £250k", and they caved, just demanding £2k for carpets etc.
TBF both were in 2013, which was a difficult market.
On the proposal, I think they are flying flags and working out what to do.
The Telegraph calls it a "Labour Tax Raid"
Meanwhile, as he’s playing Twitter games with Texas and the president, his own State is a total mess. Make America California Again really isn’t a popular message.
GDP: CA #1
GDP per capita: CA #4
Growth rate (2024): CA #8
Proportion of population with higher degrees: CA #16
Happiness score: CA #13
Homicide rate per capita (2022): #30
The Guardian is reporting that the Treasury is considering this plan
https://www.ukonward.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Onward-A-Fairer-Property-Tax.pdf
which is to levy an annual property tax of ~0.5% of the value of property over £500k to replace stamp duty: When you buy a house you’ll pay no stamp duty but instead pay 0.5% of the value > £500k every year in perpetuity. Just like stamp duty it’s a tax on the buyer, not the seller.
The author of the plan also proposes replacing council tax with a % annual tax on the property value < £500k, with a floor of £800. These constructed as two distinct proposals, which could be implemented separately by the government if they chose to implement either or both of them.
My expectation is that Europe becomes the next big thing. Starmer has been handling things in that department with an adroitness few expected. Anyone watching last nights performance could not fail to have been impressed. He's a much shrewder operator than most of us thought
My worry is they'll try and make it a tax rise by replacing Council Tax but keeping Stamp Duty, which would largely defeat the point of the reform.
this is where Stubb was sitting when Trump couldn't see him btw
https://bsky.app/profile/atrupar.com/post/3lwp4dst7522d
ALMOST A WEEK IN AND THEY STILL DON'T GET IT
https://x.com/GovPressOffice/status/1957593773120303461
Mess it up and they'll be unpopular, but wait they already are.
Do it well and they could benefit.
And it at least secures them a legacy of some meaningful reform achieved.
From my point of view the biggest weakness is that he is looking through Usonian cultural spectacles. And he does not address the way conflict is partly maintained by the place that the recreation Israel has in the theological politics of major groups in the USA, for one thing (nor have I analysed this much myself).
He wisely does not attempt a full account of the history of Israel since 1948, but some assumptions are obvious.
Worth a listen imo:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgUzVZiint0
The government’s land tax reforms should not raise additional tax, but rather be designed to remove the current perverse incentives which jam up the market, creating a block on productivity, and - separately - destroy local community agency by leaving councils underfunded and essentially unaccountable.
Flatlander Sr died last week. I am both sad and relieved as he'd been poorly for quite some time and most definitely wasn't having any fun. I propped him up at home for many years and have no regrets on that score.
Thanks to the current stock market bubble, and no doubt much to HYUFD's disgust, his estate will attract IHT, although it won't be a vast amount in the grand scheme of things. He was not one to plan and as POA there was a limit to what I could do about it.
Do I:
a) Make a deed of variation to set up a charitable organisation to buy a few fields to grow moss / newts / trees or distribute to other organisations doing the same.
b) Pay the government
On the one hand, Rachel from Accounts is desperate and over the last 6 months he definitely incurred costs to the NHS and the local council. And it won't be a Bill Gates style legacy that could make a big difference.
On the other hand, it is the government, isn't it?
Assume that the difference in inheritance won't really change my cheap lifestyle.
Californians seem to like their independent redistricting, so Newsom's proposed map starts off at a disadvantage. If he can frame it as retaliation for Republican dirty tricks, and a referendum on Trump, I guess he can win the vote on the proposition - so it makes sense to get as much attention for this framing as possible, as early as possible.
And many condolences - losing your father is quite a moment and time to remember the happy times
Just one step of logic...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRbIEK0t2Zw
"so I picked up my arm in my right hand and I get up and I start walking with my arm it's still attached but crap hanging out of it bones sticking out and I'm walking and I walk and probably every 200 yards or so I sit down and I put my arm down and I reach into my pocket find my phone and I check for his signal."
edit: which reminds me: a primary schoolfriend of mine was from a farming family. Her dad lost his arm in a bailer, and walked half a mile to the farmhouse, carrying his arm, to get help. I'd just be a snivelling wreck on the ground...
It would then revert back to the independent commission for the next cycle.
I think he'll win the vote more likely than not.
'Gerrymandered' Texas - GOP25 Dem 13
Judge an organisation by its actions not its name.
California has an independent commission in the same way that East Germany was a Democratic Republic.
(The issue was it was measured by landmass coverage rather than residents, so we were spending millions to install generators and masts in the middle of nowhere)
Map here: https://www.ukclimbing.com/news/2025/07/big_win_for_highland_phone_mast_campaign-74003
Latest favourability polling from YG, slightly improvements for Ed, Nigel and Kemi. Starmer flat as a pancake. Labour nearly underneath the evil Toreez in party favourability. Polanski barely known but not significantly preferred to Ramsey or Chowns.
Oh and I believe the gerrymandered districts being proposed in Texas weren't in play last time, so that's also not an apt comparison.
From memory, inheritance tax is 36% if you leave >10% of the estate to charity, compared to 40% if you don't so as it's a relatively small amount I'd say the charitable route is unlikely to be worth it from a strictly financial point if view. In addition there will be costs of setting up an organisation and organising a deed.
Without knowing the numbers I'd say it's probably best to shell out. But obviously dyor.
And yes, I agree; most of these are AI bots.
I have no immediate heirs and what I can't spend will end up with such causes anyway, so it would be nice to do something now.
However, my dilemma is that doing so would be at least partially for me, and a deed of variation should be done acting as him.
My mum, on the other hand, did not even like visiting National Trust properties because they were the product of punitive IHT, and some of the legacy would have been originally hers. I'm not sure why she had that attitude as the owner of an average semi-detached but she definitely did. So perhaps that's how I justify it.
Another illustration of IHT as voluntary, and why it should perhaps be abolished. I could do without this nonsense...
Bigger problem is the state largesse they get from UK and hence the stampede to get here.
If goverments fall it tends to be in late September when the traders come back from their summer holidays. So, wait six weeks, which you will have to do in any case and see if the government falls. If the government is still in situ by the end of October you must assume it will survive until May 2028.
My motto with charitable organisations is always to make it focused enough to see the difference if possible. A permanent impact is good (eg buy a woodland for the local trust), but shorter term things of a couple of decades are also great - at present I'm quite taken with "friendship benches". We have one locally, which is labelled "sit on this bench if you are happy for people to stop for a chat". And also with benches spaced more often so that less fit or more frail people can take a break.
If it's a local WT, then another torch I currently carry is to get them to identify and publicise accessible walks; there exist standards such as a set called "Mile without Stiles" used by National Parks, and woodland and wildlife trusts need to be on board with this area. Potentially it is easier where the highest hill is about 3ft.
If we are allowing pollution of the night sky with temporary space junk, we might as well use it.
I do worry that political parties are made up of mostly made up of people concerned entirely with the urban. I think it goes with being a 'people' person.
I await the wind turbines in Fisherfield.
This happened to me, the first I knew of it was letters drastically cutting overdrafts and credit card limits.
Someone had managed to transfer my mortgage to a new address and then used it as security to open a Santander bank account and take out a loan, which they promptly defaulted on. Took a while to sort out, but being able to look up my credit reference helped me to understand what was going on.
I'm guessing the only solution ultimately will be to have an AI answer my phone for me and only ring my phone when it's been convinced I'll be interested in taking it.
Commiserations on your loss. Went through the same in 2022 although as my Dad was a car worker he didn’t leave much and the estate was quite easy for me to deal with, apart from his BMW pension. An organisation with a Frank Spencer like approach to dealing with people.
Just be wary of relatives and money grabbers after a piece of the pie.
Here's an article on JD Vance's claim that California is more gerrymandered that Texas:
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/08/15/us/politics/california-texas-gerrymandering-redistricting.html
If fits with the general pattern that "things that Vance says are likely to be false"
California's independent redistricting commission is generally held up as an example of best practice; it's not part of their job to try and make artificial districts to try and counteract the somewhat inefficient Republican vote in California. Comparing them to the former East Germany is just ignorant.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2025/aug/19/scrapping-of-audit-commission-england-councils-soaring-costs-chaos-report
"David Cameron’s “bonfire of the quangos” decision to abolish England’s council spending watchdog has left a broken system that is costing taxpayers more money than it was promised to save.
In a highly critical report, academics at the University of Sheffield said the coalition government of the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats had promised savings of £100m a year by abolishing the Audit Commission.
However, replacing the public body with a private-sector model had resulted in “chaos” and soaring costs to audit councils amid the financial crisis hitting England’s town halls."
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/08/15/us/politics/california-texas-gerrymandering-redistricting.html