The sellers having made a five hundred percent profit on their home after 25 years coughing up would be more equitable than the poor old buyer having to front stamp duty at purchase.
It will just be added to the asking price and the buyer pays it in higher mortgage charges
Stamp duty is a ridiculous tax.
Bear in mind at the moment this proposal is simply kite flying which has been taken as gospel government policy, although I suspect the government will venture down that avenue regardless.
All these proposals are just tinkering around the edges. In opposition the Labour Party were remiss in discounting an extra penny or two on income tax or VAT.
IANAE on the inner life of Reform, but as they have a 30%+ chance of forming a majority government next time, here is a question I have no idea about.
Does Reform have a modest collection of really serious names to be, between them:
CoE, Defence Minister, Health, Foreign Secretary? And most interesting of all, Home Secretary and Minister for Migration?
There are of course 100 other jobs to fill, including some of mega importance. But I can't even fill these. Can PB help?
No, they don’t. Almost nobody with serious policy, governance, or academic experience campaigns for Reform. The closest would be Anne Widdecombe and Jake Berry.
I wouldn’t focus on the career politicians. I have heard of some truly excellent people in industry being quietly approached to assist with policy creation. The sell is that they are almost certainly going to gain power and it’s a crucial period for the country to arrest its decline. Will be fascinating to see if this gets traction or not.
That may be so - and if it is it seems to be good news, but the problems that a government faces are not those of industry. You need someone fully involved. You need them to have their career on the line.
I am nearly sure that Reform will make the most awful of governments should we unwisely elect them.
They are bound to fill the benches with a high number of pirates and bandits. So no different to what we have been treated to by the Big 2 then.
I'm not sure how more pirates taken out of the front line would help or hinder Reforms attacks on Net Zero.
Very odd graph, that, especially the location of the zero on the ordinate. Which LD constituency association produced it? Polperro?
IANAE on the inner life of Reform, but as they have a 30%+ chance of forming a majority government next time, here is a question I have no idea about.
Does Reform have a modest collection of really serious names to be, between them:
CoE, Defence Minister, Health, Foreign Secretary? And most interesting of all, Home Secretary and Minister for Migration?
There are of course 100 other jobs to fill, including some of mega importance. But I can't even fill these. Can PB help?
No, they don’t. Almost nobody with serious policy, governance, or academic experience campaigns for Reform. The closest would be Anne Widdecombe and Jake Berry.
I wouldn’t focus on the career politicians. I have heard of some truly excellent people in industry being quietly approached to assist with policy creation. The sell is that they are almost certainly going to gain power and it’s a crucial period for the country to arrest its decline. Will be fascinating to see if this gets traction or not.
That may be so - and if it is it seems to be good news, but the problems that a government faces are not those of industry. You need someone fully involved. You need them to have their career on the line.
I am nearly sure that Reform will make the most awful of governments should we unwisely elect them.
They are bound to fill the benches with a high number of pirates and bandits. So no different to what we have been treated to by the Big 2 then.
I'm not sure how more pirates taken out of the front line would help or hinder Reforms attacks on Net Zero.
There's been quite a significant rise in piracy of late; presumably that's impacted temperatures?
Why is a boat housing asylum seekers in Weymouth any different to a hotel housing asylum seekers in Weymouth except for being much more expensive (£6,000 per month per resident)
Easier to control. Also better value for money, according to the last Government. Plus it's not in Weymouth city centre. Or rather wasn't. Edit: it was in the Portland Harbour complex.
Yes, I know it was in Portland, which is next to Weymouth. I don't think there are any hotels used for asylum seekers in Portland though. More control? No, it might have looked like a prison but it wasn't one, residents were allowed to come and go as they pleased on the same basis as hotel accommodation. And it wasn't better value for money, the original plans by the government did promise it would be cheaper, but costs were more and occupancy less than expected. Here's a link to the National Audit Office report from March 2024. https://www.nao.org.uk/press-releases/alternative-asylum-accommodation-will-cost-more-than-hotels/
Still: better control - and more of it if needed. Not easy going through a hole in the back fence without a rowing boat. And the point is it wasn't in central Weymouth.
There are hotel(s) in Portland too but the barge was shoved out on the maritime equivalent of an industrial estate. And the per diem would have been much better if the HO had been more efficient with the occupancy.
Whatever one thinks of the basic notion of housing rather than processing the denizens, one can see that the idea did have a certain logic at the time.
How do you get the better control idea? also as the NAO report states, it was projected to cost £34.8m over 2023/24 and 2024/25, over 440 maximum capacity that's still £3,300/month. That is better than the hotel costs that are reported at £3,615 per resident per month but remember that the hotels won't be at 100% occupancy either so to be fair you will have to calculate the hotel cost by maximum occupancy as well.
Just to explain re control - do think about access. How do you get in an d out illicitly? Much more secure than an old army camp with any number of holes in the fence. And compared to a crap hotel with annexes ...
Point taken re hotels and occupancy but by the same token the hotels still lose unless HO is even less efficient with the barge, which seems unlikely.
Some hotels were pleased to accept asylum seekers, and are struggling to keep up with the requirements of today’s visitors. It can be particularly so for hotels in listed buildings, which find it difficult to be upgraded. The Dolphin Hotel in Southampton is an example. It is 500 years old and grade II* listed, and has links to Jane Austen. It was run by Mercure hotels when it suddenly closed to the public in November 2021, with all outstanding bookings cancelled. It was used for asylum seekers until May 2024, and is now being converted into student accommodation as the owners don’t believe it can be upgraded to modern hotel standards due to the listing and visitors wanting modern accommodation.
High Court awards temporary injunction to Epping Council to block migrant housing in hotel
The problem is where do you put them and won’t this act as a green light for protests at other hotels .
Detain them at popup camps with high fences until they can be deported.
There’s plenty of military land out there, not technically difficult to have the Army fence off an area and put up 10,000 tents in a couple of weeks. They do this in other countries, and the COVID emergency plans had something similar domestically.
It’s a political will issue, not an equipment and logistics issue.
How do you stop them running away?
Desertion is a pretty serious offense.
How about. - Anyone who attempts to enter the U.K. by sea, illegally, is deemed to have enlisted in the Royal Navy.
Solves the manning problem overnight.
Reform UK supporters already fear asylum seekers. Now you want to give the asylum seekers control of nuclear submarines and aircraft carriers?
To claim universal credit you have to be actively seeking work and cannot turn down a job offer. The UK minimum wage is also now higher than ever at over £20,000 a year.
So there should be plenty of incentive for UK unemployed to take care home jobs now not just migrants, especially is there are now more out of work than there are job vacancies here. We should also follow the Japanese model of funding social care with insurance
Not so. There are around 3.4 million UC claimants who do. It need to work.
I concur your final sentence.
What's more. In a residential care home you need an Enhanced DBS. So a great many of the unemployed aren't eligible to work there.
The sentence "Families will find even less of granny’s inheritance trickling down." reveals an odd assumption which most of us make without thinking about it. Why should we model our society on the assumption that money will come down from our grandparents, bearing in mind that many people don't have rich grandparents, and they may have had complex relationships with multiple descendants.
Certainly the State should step in where needed. But assisting people in looking after themselves where they can needs to be part of the solution.
One advantage of taxing inheritance as income by the recipient is that it is inherently redistribute. Either it is paid as tax by the wealthy, or passed to those on lower incomes, like grandkids etc.
Councils are spending an average of £2 in every £5 on staff pensions and debt interest payments before a penny is allocated to essential services.
Some 18pc of council tax revenue is used to service the cost of huge loans taken out over the last decade, as local authorities struggle to cut costs and face greater demand for services. Staff pension contributions account for a further 23pc of revenues on average, meaning that 41pc is swallowed up before any money is spent on core services
Add in the massive increase in SEND cost to councils over the past 5-10 years. No wonder they are all busto.
Have to say there are some generalisations in the above.
It all depends on whether a council is a Unitary, a County or a District. Districts. for excample, have no responsibilities for social care while Counties do in the two-tier system.
Councils borrow from the Public Works Loan Board and obviously they have to pay interest on those loans and where those loans have been used for investment property, they haven't always worked.
Can you show me a council budget where 41% of "Revenue" is taken up with pensions and debt interest payments.
The Surrey County Council Budget for 2025/26 doesn't suggest this:
It's true many councils are deeply in debt but once again there's that undercurrent about the "pensions". Council staff can belong to one of a number of different pension schemes whether it be the LPGS, the Teachers' Pension or the Pension for firefighters and the Police. All are different with different levels of contribution and benefit and if your authority doesn't have responsibility for education and fire (most districts in the tow tier system) that will be less of a factor.
There's also the levels of payment to current and former Councillors who are (or were) Members of the Council to consider.
Found the article from the Times and they are being a little misleading in the headline but correct in the body of the piece. 18% of council tax revenue is spend on servicing debt and 23% of council tax revenue is going into pensions. But council tax is not the only or even main income for councils.
So the correct answer is Councils spend around 7.4% of their spending on pensions which feels about right. Around half of council spend is on staff. An employee on median wage will be contributing 6.5% of their pay to the pension scheme and the employer contributes usually around three times the employee's contribution which would be 9.9% of spending, but some employees won't be in the scheme so it's lower.
They protested. They were smeared. But they have won.
The solution, however, cannot be to move the illegal migrants and force them on another community.
This has gone on far too long. The country is well past breaking point. The last Government didn’t listen and failed. Starmer’s making it even worse.
Change the laws. Get third country deals. Deport everyone who’s come here illegally. End this.
I’m pleased but not surprised that HYUFD has kept well clear of the unedifying Epping hotel saga. He has more class than some on here.
It was a good result for DC and a solid judgement from Judge Eyre (once a Tory candidate in Stourbridge in 2001) but yes some of the far right element in the protests has been unsavoury
So he's a political activist judge then? Or is that OK if you're a Tory?
The sentence "Families will find even less of granny’s inheritance trickling down." reveals an odd assumption which most of us make without thinking about it. Why should we model our society on the assumption that money will come down from our grandparents, bearing in mind that many people don't have rich grandparents, and they may have had complex relationships with multiple descendants.
Certainly the State should step in where needed. But assisting people in looking after themselves where they can needs to be part of the solution.
One advantage of taxing inheritance as income by the recipient is that it is inherently redistribute. Either it is paid as tax by the wealthy, or passed to those on lower incomes, like grandkids etc.
Or will governments simply direct domestic banks to purchase long dated government bonds?
Effectively QE ?
It’s happened before.
QE is when the Bank of England does the buying directly, and that is what would happen were there ever to be a threat to the UK's ability to fund itself.
We're not at that stage yet. Instead, what the government will likely do is what happened in Japan: they will lean on RBS, etc., to own more UK long dated government bonds. A technical white paper will be written looking at capital adequacy for UK lenders which will note that their low exposure to domestic long-term bonds is creating a mismatch between various asset markets*, and therefore in the interests of financial stability, they should increase their weighting of long term UK government bonds.
In this way, the can can be kicked down the road for at least another 15 years, maybe 20.
Trump: The Smithsonian is OUT OF CONTROL, where everything discussed is how horrible our Country is, how bad Slavery was… We are not going to allow this to happen, and I have instructed my attorneys to go through the Museums, and start the exact same process that has been done with Colleges and Universities
The sentence "Families will find even less of granny’s inheritance trickling down." reveals an odd assumption which most of us make without thinking about it. Why should we model our society on the assumption that money will come down from our grandparents, bearing in mind that many people don't have rich grandparents, and they may have had complex relationships with multiple descendants.
Certainly the State should step in where needed. But assisting people in looking after themselves where they can needs to be part of the solution.
One advantage of taxing inheritance as income by the recipient is that it is inherently redistribute. Either it is paid as tax by the wealthy, or passed to those on lower incomes, like grandkids etc.
I agree that it is insanity to tax the estate rather than the recipient.
It's terrible that the EU - and particularly a handful of countries (*) have not weaned themselves off Russian O&G. But surely the figures above are not all profit to the Russian government, as there would be hefty production costs.
(*) Some for good reasons; others for bad
It's basically a sign of a lack of seriousness in supporting Ukraine to fight the war when so much money is being handed over to Russia.
The first line of a strategy for victory would be to stop sending money to Russia.
Hang on: remember Hungary is basically a full out supporter of Russia. How is the EU supposed to stop them from importing Russian oil and gas?
I would like to see a breakdown of the €21.9 billion by country, to see how much is exported to Hungary.
https://b4ukraine.org/whats-new/hungary-russian-fossil-fuels has some figures, with Hungary as the biggest importer from Russia, but only on €412 million, so a very small proportion of that total. I'm not certain how the figures add up here?
High Court awards temporary injunction to Epping Council to block migrant housing in hotel
The problem is where do you put them and won’t this act as a green light for protests at other hotels .
Detain them at popup camps with high fences until they can be deported.
There’s plenty of military land out there, not technically difficult to have the Army fence off an area and put up 10,000 tents in a couple of weeks. They do this in other countries, and the COVID emergency plans had something similar domestically.
It’s a political will issue, not an equipment and logistics issue.
Do you have no compassion for refugees from war?
How do you know they are refugees from war? They sneak over from France.
The majority are accepted as legitimate claims.
Not all from war, many from internal oppression. If you were Iranian, Sudanese or Afghan wouldn't you hot-foot it too?
I can't make out if this is satire or not. From a founder of Waymo :
The role: You’ll be building production grade AI applications using LLMs, embeddings, and agentic systems to power features like personalized recommendations, feed generation, or user-facing assistants. This is a deeply technical, high-impact role right at the heart of the product. They are revolutionizing inventory management through an AI-powered gamification platform. This platform represents the future of inventory monetization, offering a scalable solution that can revolutionize how businesses across industries manage and liquidate excess stock while maintaining brand value and creating engaging customer experiences.
While initially targeting luxury fashion, their innovative solution has the potential to address a universal business challenge across multiple industries. Core Value Proposition: - Transforms excess inventory into exclusive, high-demand opportunities - Uses AI to understand user preferences and deliver personalized recommendations - Creates urgency through time-limited "gold hour" offerings with significant discounts (up to 70%) - Provides detailed analytics and trackable metrics for partner brands
IANAE on the inner life of Reform, but as they have a 30%+ chance of forming a majority government next time, here is a question I have no idea about.
Does Reform have a modest collection of really serious names to be, between them:
CoE, Defence Minister, Health, Foreign Secretary? And most interesting of all, Home Secretary and Minister for Migration?
There are of course 100 other jobs to fill, including some of mega importance. But I can't even fill these. Can PB help?
The only thing you need to think here is compared to what? Current or past government? Do me a favour!
So Reform is so much Astroturf that they can only find neo-fascist retreads to be their candidates, never mind ministers.
A 30% chance of being the next government, you say? Has no one here actually studied British History or Politics? The past is littered with sure fire new things that crashed and burned, from the New Party, the BUF or the National Front to Change UK. There is a far better chance than 30% that "Reform" will indeed crash and burn.
At this point there is probably both a 30% chance of Reform being the next government and a 30% chance of Reform crashing and burning
Does anyone know any survey of Reform support across the sympathetic media?
I've seen a couple of papers having a go at them - there Daily Mail have a Where's Wally style peace on Joseph Boam, but I'm not seeing anything much more yet apart from tabloid-type pieces about the odd defenestrati.
I can't make out if this is satire or not. From a founder of Waymo :
The role: You’ll be building production grade AI applications using LLMs, embeddings, and agentic systems to power features like personalized recommendations, feed generation, or user-facing assistants. This is a deeply technical, high-impact role right at the heart of the product. They are revolutionizing inventory management through an AI-powered gamification platform. This platform represents the future of inventory monetization, offering a scalable solution that can revolutionize how businesses across industries manage and liquidate excess stock while maintaining brand value and creating engaging customer experiences.
While initially targeting luxury fashion, their innovative solution has the potential to address a universal business challenge across multiple industries. Core Value Proposition: - Transforms excess inventory into exclusive, high-demand opportunities - Uses AI to understand user preferences and deliver personalized recommendations - Creates urgency through time-limited "gold hour" offerings with significant discounts (up to 70%) - Provides detailed analytics and trackable metrics for partner brands
I think what they are saying is they want to do limited time tiktok promotions to clear excess stock and want to automate as much of it as possible.
I think a sovereign debt crisis is inevitable. Too many countries are simply over borrowed and cannot afford to both pay the interest and maintain the services that their electorates expect. We are certainly one of them and the lack of confidence in our monetary structures means that we are already paying a premium on our borrowings compared to most western countries.
We may well see governments simply unable to borrow the money they need to pay the bills. The fact that our 10 year gilt rate is already somewhat higher than our base lending rate is ominous and they are heading in opposite directions. Given the importance of gilt rates to real borrowing, whether for mortgages or long term investment, I fear we are getting to the point when the Bank is losing control of base rates. The latest cut was extremely unwise.
The risk is that we go back to QE using new money to buy the gilts for us or we have a very serious dislocation in our economy as we try to close the gap between spending and the tax take. Neither is an attractive option.
It's terrible that the EU - and particularly a handful of countries (*) have not weaned themselves off Russian O&G. But surely the figures above are not all profit to the Russian government, as there would be hefty production costs.
(*) Some for good reasons; others for bad
It's basically a sign of a lack of seriousness in supporting Ukraine to fight the war when so much money is being handed over to Russia.
The first line of a strategy for victory would be to stop sending money to Russia.
Hang on: remember Hungary is basically a full out supporter of Russia. How is the EU supposed to stop them from importing Russian oil and gas?
I would like to see a breakdown of the €21.9 billion by country, to see how much is exported to Hungary.
https://b4ukraine.org/whats-new/hungary-russian-fossil-fuels has some figures, with Hungary as the biggest importer from Russia, but only on €412 million, so a very small proportion of that total. I'm not certain how the figures add up here?
High Court awards temporary injunction to Epping Council to block migrant housing in hotel
The problem is where do you put them and won’t this act as a green light for protests at other hotels .
Detain them at popup camps with high fences until they can be deported.
There’s plenty of military land out there, not technically difficult to have the Army fence off an area and put up 10,000 tents in a couple of weeks. They do this in other countries, and the COVID emergency plans had something similar domestically.
It’s a political will issue, not an equipment and logistics issue.
Do you have no compassion for refugees from war?
How do you know they are refugees from war? They sneak over from France.
Just in case it's of any interest to people who like good food, Sainsbury's has got their own brand ventresca tuna fillet cans on sale for £3 each, I tried one yesterday and bought 20 today. They are at least good as the Ortiz ones. Absolutely insane price on them for £3 per can, the Ortiz ventresca is about £8-10 per can and as I said these are at least as good IMO.
High Court awards temporary injunction to Epping Council to block migrant housing in hotel
The problem is where do you put them and won’t this act as a green light for protests at other hotels .
Detain them at popup camps with high fences until they can be deported.
There’s plenty of military land out there, not technically difficult to have the Army fence off an area and put up 10,000 tents in a couple of weeks. They do this in other countries, and the COVID emergency plans had something similar domestically.
It’s a political will issue, not an equipment and logistics issue.
Do you have no compassion for refugees from war?
How do you know they are refugees from war? They sneak over from France.
I think the ones coming from Syria or Sudan are pretty clearly refugees from war. The ones coming from Bangladesh and India, probably not. Which is why the former have a high acceptance rate for their claims and the latter, a low acceptance rate.
Connoisseurs of the genre of manipulative people who get through innumerable lawyers dealing with Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) would enjoy this recent exhaustive and exhausting judgment about someone who could give even Marten lessons in time wasting complexification and how it is done, though not in how to succeed.
The thing I like about BAILII is their recent decisions list. Because the Queen's Bench Division will not sit again for maybe 80+ years, Vardy v Rooney [2022] EWHC 2017 (QB) (29 July 2022) will be there as if frozen in time.
Why is a boat housing asylum seekers in Weymouth any different to a hotel housing asylum seekers in Weymouth except for being much more expensive (£6,000 per month per resident)
Easier to control. Also better value for money, according to the last Government. Plus it's not in Weymouth city centre. Or rather wasn't. Edit: it was in the Portland Harbour complex.
Yes, I know it was in Portland, which is next to Weymouth. I don't think there are any hotels used for asylum seekers in Portland though. More control? No, it might have looked like a prison but it wasn't one, residents were allowed to come and go as they pleased on the same basis as hotel accommodation. And it wasn't better value for money, the original plans by the government did promise it would be cheaper, but costs were more and occupancy less than expected. Here's a link to the National Audit Office report from March 2024. https://www.nao.org.uk/press-releases/alternative-asylum-accommodation-will-cost-more-than-hotels/
Still: better control - and more of it if needed. Not easy going through a hole in the back fence without a rowing boat. And the point is it wasn't in central Weymouth.
There are hotel(s) in Portland too but the barge was shoved out on the maritime equivalent of an industrial estate. And the per diem would have been much better if the HO had been more efficient with the occupancy.
Whatever one thinks of the basic notion of housing rather than processing the denizens, one can see that the idea did have a certain logic at the time.
How do you get the better control idea? also as the NAO report states, it was projected to cost £34.8m over 2023/24 and 2024/25, over 440 maximum capacity that's still £3,300/month. That is better than the hotel costs that are reported at £3,615 per resident per month but remember that the hotels won't be at 100% occupancy either so to be fair you will have to calculate the hotel cost by maximum occupancy as well.
Just to explain re control - do think about access. How do you get in an d out illicitly? Much more secure than an old army camp with any number of holes in the fence. And compared to a crap hotel with annexes ...
Point taken re hotels and occupancy but by the same token the hotels still lose unless HO is even less efficient with the barge, which seems unlikely.
Some hotels were pleased to accept asylum seekers, and are struggling to keep up with the requirements of today’s visitors. It can be particularly so for hotels in listed buildings, which find it difficult to be upgraded. The Dolphin Hotel in Southampton is an example. It is 500 years old and grade II* listed, and has links to Jane Austen. It was run by Mercure hotels when it suddenly closed to the public in November 2021, with all outstanding bookings cancelled. It was used for asylum seekers until May 2024, and is now being converted into student accommodation as the owners don’t believe it can be upgraded to modern hotel standards due to the listing and visitors wanting modern accommodation.
It's been converted with rooms from £210 a week. So a mere £10500 to £12000 per room per year...
I can't make out if this is satire or not. From a founder of Waymo :
The role: You’ll be building production grade AI applications using LLMs, embeddings, and agentic systems to power features like personalized recommendations, feed generation, or user-facing assistants. This is a deeply technical, high-impact role right at the heart of the product. They are revolutionizing inventory management through an AI-powered gamification platform. This platform represents the future of inventory monetization, offering a scalable solution that can revolutionize how businesses across industries manage and liquidate excess stock while maintaining brand value and creating engaging customer experiences.
While initially targeting luxury fashion, their innovative solution has the potential to address a universal business challenge across multiple industries. Core Value Proposition: - Transforms excess inventory into exclusive, high-demand opportunities - Uses AI to understand user preferences and deliver personalized recommendations - Creates urgency through time-limited "gold hour" offerings with significant discounts (up to 70%) - Provides detailed analytics and trackable metrics for partner brands
I think what they are saying is they want to do limited time tiktok promotions to clear excess stock and want to automate as much of it as possible.
That was my reading too. But I guess I would raise rather less in the way of VC money.
They protested. They were smeared. But they have won.
The solution, however, cannot be to move the illegal migrants and force them on another community.
This has gone on far too long. The country is well past breaking point. The last Government didn’t listen and failed. Starmer’s making it even worse.
Change the laws. Get third country deals. Deport everyone who’s come here illegally. End this.
I’m pleased but not surprised that HYUFD has kept well clear of the unedifying Epping hotel saga. He has more class than some on here.
It was a good result for DC and a solid judgement from Judge Eyre (once a Tory candidate in Stourbridge in 2001) but yes some of the far right element in the protests has been unsavoury
So he's a political activist judge then? Or is that OK if you're a Tory?
No, as far as I can see he has not stood as a candidate at any level for decades, his judgement was correct on the law
Trump: The Smithsonian is OUT OF CONTROL, where everything discussed is how horrible our Country is, how bad Slavery was… We are not going to allow this to happen, and I have instructed my attorneys to go through the Museums, and start the exact same process that has been done with Colleges and Universities
The sellers having made a five hundred percent profit on their home after 25 years coughing up would be more equitable than the poor old buyer having to front stamp duty at purchase.
This policy would be devastating for Labour in London and home counties marginal Labour seats, the AVERAGE London house price is now over £500k, the same in Hertfordshire
Or will governments simply direct domestic banks to purchase long dated government bonds?
There is no such thing as a free lunch. If banks are forced to buy government gilts the money available for investment in our domestic economy will fall rapidly. This is a part of the trap that Japan has been in for a very long time now. We urgently need to increase investment, not cut it. We need more growth, not less. I think your estimate that the government can keep this going for 20 years or so is wildly optimistic.
Prediction: Reform will win the next General election and Farage will be PM. Not because I want it but the left liberal kumbaya types continue to bury their heads in sand in complete denial of the absurdity that our asylum system has become. The more they refuse to listen to ordinary people with ordinary legitimate concerns, the more they try to stigmatise protest and generalise protestors as right wing racist xenophobes, the more they will do Reform's work for them as the only party prepared to listen...
Ali is... an interesting figure. He was thrown out of the Green Party for being anti-trans. He may be right, but he's not representative of Green Party thought.
I believe he is right. This is the best warning anyone could give of what will happen if immigration isn't brought under control.
Voting RefUK will bring immigration under control in the same way that voting for Brexit made Britain Great Again.
It will be the same voters, with the same outcome
Please maintain exactly this attitude all the way to the next General Election, thanks
Just in case it's of any interest to people who like good food, Sainsbury's has got their own brand ventresca tuna fillet cans on sale for £3 each, I tried one yesterday and bought 20 today. They are at least good as the Ortiz ones. Absolutely insane price on them for £3 per can, the Ortiz ventresca is about £8-10 per can and as I said these are at least as good IMO.
My favourite tuna recipe.
Get some new potatoes. Boil them until about two thirds cooked, so that you can at least cause them to break open if you use a potato masher on them.
Put them in a largeish baking tray. Crush them so they are all at least "broken". Add salt and pepper and liberally coat in olive oil.
Chuck it into the over on 180.
Now, while those crisp up, chuck a couple of anchovies into a small pot along with some butter (quote a lot is good), and add some low heat. As the anchovies break down add some crushed garlic. Basically, you've made garlic-anchovy butter. (15 year old sons in our house have a habit of dipping bits of french bread in the mixture as they pass.)
Take the potatoes out the oven, put them on a serving plate. Pour the anchovy garlic butter over the potatoes.
Now take a tin of very nice tuna, and break it up and top the potatoes with it.
20 minutes later it will all be eaten. And your children will be demanding seconds.
The sentence "Families will find even less of granny’s inheritance trickling down." reveals an odd assumption which most of us make without thinking about it. Why should we model our society on the assumption that money will come down from our grandparents, bearing in mind that many people don't have rich grandparents, and they may have had complex relationships with multiple descendants.
Certainly the State should step in where needed. But assisting people in looking after themselves where they can needs to be part of the solution.
One advantage of taxing inheritance as income by the recipient is that it is inherently redistribute. Either it is paid as tax by the wealthy, or passed to those on lower incomes, like grandkids etc.
I agree that it is insanity to tax the estate rather than the recipient.
If I'm not in danger of oversharing... When my mother died, my sister and I received an inheritance. The estate paid inheritance tax, then we each got half of what was left. Fine. It's not a joy paying tax, but someone has to pay tax. I'm OK with that.
Now, my father has died, earlier in the year. (No condolences necessary!) However, he was living in the US and the inheritance is partly in IRAs. There's no tax on the estate, but when we cash in the IRAs in the US and bring the money into the UK, we have to pay income tax. (I'm simplifying. There's more complicated family details.)
This has given me experience of taxing the estate versus taxing the personal income.
Because I have a well-paid job, I will pay lots of income tax on my share from my father. My sister gets the same share, but she's a housewife (with a husband with a well-paid job), so she'll pay much less income tax on her share. We get equal shares before tax, but I get substantially less after tax.
I earn more than my office mate, so I pay more in income tax. That feels fair. Yet it feels unfair that I am "meant" to get an equal share of an inheritance, but get less. The estate tax felt fair. The tax was paid and we split the rest. This doesn't.
These are first world problems, I'm getting a chunk of money - woo! Maybe I'm just pissed because I'm losing out, but that's my gut reaction to why you should tax the estate rather than the recipient.
Or will governments simply direct domestic banks to purchase long dated government bonds?
There is no such thing as a free lunch. If banks are forced to buy government gilts the money available for investment in our domestic economy will fall rapidly. This is a part of the trap that Japan has been in for a very long time now. We urgently need to increase investment, not cut it. We need more growth, not less. I think your estimate that the government can keep this going for 20 years or so is wildly optimistic.
Of course: the impact will be to starve industry etc of needed capital.
It's not a free lunch at all.
It is - however - the easiest way for the government to kick the can down the road for another decade or so.
The sellers having made a five hundred percent profit on their home after 25 years coughing up would be more equitable than the poor old buyer having to front stamp duty at purchase.
This policy would be devastating for Labour in London and home counties marginal Labour seats, the AVERAGE London house price is now over £500k, the same in Hertfordshire
It's simply moving stamp duty to the other side of the equation. Unless you are selling a house and moving abroad you won't be any worse off than you are now.
And without stamp duty reducing deposits its likely that the change will result in a slight increase in house prices.
Although looking at the Times article that's just appeared on my phone, it's seems designed to make something else look acceptable when it's announced.
Prediction: Reform will win the next General election and Farage will be PM. Not because I want it but the left liberal kumbaya types continue to bury their heads in sand in complete denial of the absurdity that our asylum system has become. The more they refuse to listen to ordinary people with ordinary legitimate concerns, the more they try to stigmatise protest and generalise protestors as right wing racist xenophobes, the more they will do Reform's work for them as the only party prepared to listen...
Ali is... an interesting figure. He was thrown out of the Green Party for being anti-trans. He may be right, but he's not representative of Green Party thought.
I believe he is right. This is the best warning anyone could give of what will happen if immigration isn't brought under control.
Voting RefUK will bring immigration under control in the same way that voting for Brexit made Britain Great Again.
It will be the same voters, with the same outcome
Please maintain exactly this attitude all the way to the next General Election, thanks
So that you can once again vote for the worst possible outcome then whine about it incessantly
High Court awards temporary injunction to Epping Council to block migrant housing in hotel
The problem is where do you put them and won’t this act as a green light for protests at other hotels .
Detain them at popup camps with high fences until they can be deported.
There’s plenty of military land out there, not technically difficult to have the Army fence off an area and put up 10,000 tents in a couple of weeks. They do this in other countries, and the COVID emergency plans had something similar domestically.
It’s a political will issue, not an equipment and logistics issue.
Do you have no compassion for refugees from war?
How do you know they are refugees from war? They sneak over from France.
The majority are accepted as legitimate claims.
Not all from war, many from internal oppression. If you were Iranian, Sudanese or Afghan wouldn't you hot-foot it too?
What proportion are accepted goes up and down a lot, mainly it seems because where people are coming from changes a lot. So, 76% of claims were accepted in 2022 at first decision (before appeals), but that was down to 47% in 2024. The majority are now rejected at first decision. (OK, after appeals, it probably goes back to a majority being accepted.)
Where people come from is a big determiner of the acceptance rate. People from Sudan, 99% acceptance rate. From India, 2%. It would seem likely that most people fleeing Sudan are refugees from war, while most claiming asylum from India are economic migrants.
They protested. They were smeared. But they have won.
The solution, however, cannot be to move the illegal migrants and force them on another community.
This has gone on far too long. The country is well past breaking point. The last Government didn’t listen and failed. Starmer’s making it even worse.
Change the laws. Get third country deals. Deport everyone who’s come here illegally. End this.
Christ give over.
Well past breaking point. What a load of catsastrophising bullshit.
There were 108000 asylum applications last year. If it were 10800 no one except obsessives would care. If it were 1080000 most everyone would say we were past breaking point - maybe even you. So it's all about the numbers.
What do we have in place as legal and practical structures if we get to 216000, 432000 and so on? Nothing. Only quantity is saving us.
Yes but the numbers are not that high. Say 0.1% of the UK population per year, taking into account that not all asylum claims are upheld. In the context of negative natural population growth is that something that I find especially concerning? No. There are far bigger things to worry about, believe me.
It's terrible that the EU - and particularly a handful of countries (*) have not weaned themselves off Russian O&G. But surely the figures above are not all profit to the Russian government, as there would be hefty production costs.
(*) Some for good reasons; others for bad
It's basically a sign of a lack of seriousness in supporting Ukraine to fight the war when so much money is being handed over to Russia.
The first line of a strategy for victory would be to stop sending money to Russia.
Hang on: remember Hungary is basically a full out supporter of Russia. How is the EU supposed to stop them from importing Russian oil and gas?
I would like to see a breakdown of the €21.9 billion by country, to see how much is exported to Hungary.
https://b4ukraine.org/whats-new/hungary-russian-fossil-fuels has some figures, with Hungary as the biggest importer from Russia, but only on €412 million, so a very small proportion of that total. I'm not certain how the figures add up here?
The fact that the thing we're calling artificial intelligence *can't do math* and yet we're jamming it into programs that successfully *have done math* for decades, then warning people against using the AI to do math, seems like an excellent summary of where we are.
I think a sovereign debt crisis is inevitable. Too many countries are simply over borrowed and cannot afford to both pay the interest and maintain the services that their electorates expect. We are certainly one of them and the lack of confidence in our monetary structures means that we are already paying a premium on our borrowings compared to most western countries.
We may well see governments simply unable to borrow the money they need to pay the bills. The fact that our 10 year gilt rate is already somewhat higher than our base lending rate is ominous and they are heading in opposite directions. Given the importance of gilt rates to real borrowing, whether for mortgages or long term investment, I fear we are getting to the point when the Bank is losing control of base rates. The latest cut was extremely unwise.
The risk is that we go back to QE using new money to buy the gilts for us or we have a very serious dislocation in our economy as we try to close the gap between spending and the tax take. Neither is an attractive option.
I think this is about right. And both Labour and Tory are responsible for the coming sovereign debt crisis. In particular the current regime has proved completely unable to do the expenditure cutting and tax raising necessary to create confidence, and this with a stonking majority. In fact the massive majority seems to give dim backbenchers even greater irresponsibility.
I think it remains unlikely that the UK voters plan to put the Tories back in charge, which means that of the possible government configurations the highest probability is Reform majority or Reform minority (maybe 40-45%). But it is not possible at the moment to identify either the policies or the outstanding Reform person who could be the confidence creating Chancellor of the Exchequer from their ranks.
The autumn budget could well be the last chance for Labour to establish itself as the government to take control of out of control finances. It needs a greta deal of promise breaking, a clear narrative and excplanation, as etting out of the direction of travel which does more than meet ever moving bogus targets for debt, and balances the books before the next election.
The fact that the thing we're calling artificial intelligence *can't do math* and yet we're jamming it into programs that successfully *have done math* for decades, then warning people against using the AI to do math, seems like an excellent summary of where we are.
Part of the problem here is people using the term "AI" to describe one particular type of AI (large language models). Various other forms of AI have been widely and successfully used for decades, and will go on being widely and successfully used. LLMs are very interesting, but not the be all and end all of AI.
Prediction: Reform will win the next General election and Farage will be PM. Not because I want it but the left liberal kumbaya types continue to bury their heads in sand in complete denial of the absurdity that our asylum system has become. The more they refuse to listen to ordinary people with ordinary legitimate concerns, the more they try to stigmatise protest and generalise protestors as right wing racist xenophobes, the more they will do Reform's work for them as the only party prepared to listen...
Ali is... an interesting figure. He was thrown out of the Green Party for being anti-trans. He may be right, but he's not representative of Green Party thought.
I believe he is right. This is the best warning anyone could give of what will happen if immigration isn't brought under control.
Voting RefUK will bring immigration under control in the same way that voting for Brexit made Britain Great Again.
It will be the same voters, with the same outcome
Please maintain exactly this attitude all the way to the next General Election, thanks
So that you can once again vote for the worst possible outcome then whine about it incessantly
Going back to the Green Party, if Polanski wins and sees the party become watermelon central will we see the reformation of the Ecology Party?
Trump: The Smithsonian is OUT OF CONTROL, where everything discussed is how horrible our Country is, how bad Slavery was… We are not going to allow this to happen, and I have instructed my attorneys to go through the Museums, and start the exact same process that has been done with Colleges and Universities
High Court awards temporary injunction to Epping Council to block migrant housing in hotel
The problem is where do you put them and won’t this act as a green light for protests at other hotels .
Detain them at popup camps with high fences until they can be deported.
There’s plenty of military land out there, not technically difficult to have the Army fence off an area and put up 10,000 tents in a couple of weeks. They do this in other countries, and the COVID emergency plans had something similar domestically.
It’s a political will issue, not an equipment and logistics issue.
Do you have no compassion for refugees from war?
I'm more worried about the lack of compassion for refugees from France.
I think a sovereign debt crisis is inevitable. Too many countries are simply over borrowed and cannot afford to both pay the interest and maintain the services that their electorates expect. We are certainly one of them and the lack of confidence in our monetary structures means that we are already paying a premium on our borrowings compared to most western countries.
We may well see governments simply unable to borrow the money they need to pay the bills. The fact that our 10 year gilt rate is already somewhat higher than our base lending rate is ominous and they are heading in opposite directions. Given the importance of gilt rates to real borrowing, whether for mortgages or long term investment, I fear we are getting to the point when the Bank is losing control of base rates. The latest cut was extremely unwise.
The risk is that we go back to QE using new money to buy the gilts for us or we have a very serious dislocation in our economy as we try to close the gap between spending and the tax take. Neither is an attractive option.
I think this is about right. And both Labour and Tory are responsible for the coming sovereign debt crisis. In particular the current regime has proved completely unable to do the expenditure cutting and tax raising necessary to create confidence, and this with a stonking majority. In fact the massive majority seems to give dim backbenchers even greater irresponsibility.
I think it remains unlikely that the UK voters plan to put the Tories back in charge, which means that of the possible government configurations the highest probability is Reform majority or Reform minority (maybe 40-45%). But it is not possible at the moment to identify either the policies or the outstanding Reform person who could be the confidence creating Chancellor of the Exchequer from their ranks.
The autumn budget could well be the last chance for Labour to establish itself as the government to take control of out of control finances. It needs a greta deal of promise breaking, a clear narrative and excplanation, as etting out of the direction of travel which does more than meet ever moving bogus targets for debt, and balances the books before the next election.
Faced with a sovereign debt crisis, a Labour or Conservative government will put up taxes. There will then be no sovereign debt crisis. It's politically unpalatable, but the country can afford to pay a bit more tax.
The only way to get an actual sovereign debt crisis is to put someone in charge who would defy the markets, logic and reality. A Liz Truss, a Recep Tayyip Erdoğan... a Nigel Farage???
Rachel Reeves is considering hitting the owners of high-value properties with capital gains tax when they sell their homes
The chancellor is considering using the Autumn Budget to end the current exemption from capital gains tax that people enjoy when they sell their 'primary' residence
Under the plans the current exemption from capital gains tax, known as private residence relief, would come to an end for properties above a certain threshold
Higher-rate taxpayers would pay 24% of any gain they make from the increase in the value of their properties while basic rate taxpayers would have to pay 18%
She loves history, churches, geology, poetry, and surreal jokes
Which is kinda handy as these are many of my favourite things as well
Did you go up it? It costs, but it's worth it. Some of the paintings open up and you can look down...
It's just so incredibly beautiful
I've only beem once before, and that was about 25 years ago. So this was almost like my first visit
Stunning. Just stunning. When I first went in I thought, OK, this is like one of the great French cathedrals - Amiens or Reims - very lovely, but lacking Noom
And then we got to the Octagon and the Noom comes from the sheer effrontery of the architecture. The absurd, dreamy idea of this floating geometrical ceiling-from-heaven, my God the Noom kicks in then. Oh yes. Verily, and yea
Also, the Lady Chapel. Also, the fact it was founded in about 670AD by an Anglo-Saxon princess. Also, the Anglo-Saxon warlords and bishops interred in one of the prettier chantries, including some earl who died at the Battle of Maldon. Also, the presence nearby of Grimes Graves in the Breckland (which we both visited for the first time)
We had a brilliant day out. England can still wildly surprise on the upside, and then some. 90 minutes from the North Circular!
Ely must be in the top ten most-beautiful-cathedrals in the world
Rachel Reeves is considering hitting the owners of high-value properties with capital gains tax when they sell their homes
The chancellor is considering using the Autumn Budget to end the current exemption from capital gains tax that people enjoy when they sell their 'primary' residence
Under the plans the current exemption from capital gains tax, known as private residence relief, would come to an end for properties above a certain threshold
Higher-rate taxpayers would pay 24% of any gain they make from the increase in the value of their properties while basic rate taxpayers would have to pay 18%
Rachel Reeves is considering hitting the owners of high-value properties with capital gains tax when they sell their homes
The chancellor is considering using the Autumn Budget to end the current exemption from capital gains tax that people enjoy when they sell their 'primary' residence
Under the plans the current exemption from capital gains tax, known as private residence relief, would come to an end for properties above a certain threshold
Higher-rate taxpayers would pay 24% of any gain they make from the increase in the value of their properties while basic rate taxpayers would have to pay 18%
Rachel Reeves is considering hitting the owners of high-value properties with capital gains tax when they sell their homes
The chancellor is considering using the Autumn Budget to end the current exemption from capital gains tax that people enjoy when they sell their 'primary' residence
Under the plans the current exemption from capital gains tax, known as private residence relief, would come to an end for properties above a certain threshold
Higher-rate taxpayers would pay 24% of any gain they make from the increase in the value of their properties while basic rate taxpayers would have to pay 18%
Rachel Reeves is considering hitting the owners of high-value properties with capital gains tax when they sell their homes
The chancellor is considering using the Autumn Budget to end the current exemption from capital gains tax that people enjoy when they sell their 'primary' residence
Under the plans the current exemption from capital gains tax, known as private residence relief, would come to an end for properties above a certain threshold
Higher-rate taxpayers would pay 24% of any gain they make from the increase in the value of their properties while basic rate taxpayers would have to pay 18%
Discussed this morning. The Guardian write-up of this is awful & confuses who is being taxed & when.
Under this proposal the seller is not being taxed - the buyer is being taxed an annual % property tax after they purchase the property as a replacement for stamp duty.
As I commented earlier, it honestly looks like the journalist in question shoved that document into an LLM, asked it to summarise the document & then published whatever bullshit the LLM spat out. A poor show frankly.
Discussed this morning. The Guardian write-up of this is awful & confuses who is being taxed & when.
Under this proposal the seller is not being taxed - the buyer is being taxed an annual % property tax after they purchase the property as a replacement for stamp duty.
As I commented earlier, it honestly looks like the journalist in question shoved that document into an LLM, asked it to summarise the document & then published whatever bullshit the LLM spat out. A poor show frankly.
The Guardian article says that they are “drawing” on this study. It doesn’t necessarily mean they are implementing it word-for-word.
She loves history, churches, geology, poetry, and surreal jokes
Which is kinda handy as these are many of my favourite things as well
Did you go up it? It costs, but it's worth it. Some of the paintings open up and you can look down...
It's just so incredibly beautiful
I've only beem once before, and that was about 25 years ago. So this was almost like my first visit
Stunning. Just stunning. When I first went in I thought, OK, this is like one of the great French cathedrals - Amiens or Reims - very lovely, but lacking Noom
And then we got to the Octagon and the Noom comes from the sheer effrontery of the architecture. The absurd, dreamy idea of this floating geometrical ceiling-from-heaven, and then the Noom kicks in
Also, the Lady Chapel. Also, the fact it was founded in about 670AD by an Anglo-Saxon princess. Also, the Anglo-Saxon warlord and bishops interred in one of the prettier chantries. Also, the presence nearby of Grimes Graves in the Breckland (which we both visited for the first time)
We had a brilliant day out. England can still wildly surprise on the upside, and then some. 90 minutes from the North Circular!
Next up, go further up the train line to Kings Lynn. A rather more mixed experience, to say the least. But good stuff. Excellent medieval buildings, and the quay Vancouver set sail from.
You can realise how mixed it is by noting that one can buy a grade I listed tudor flat in beautiful condition for £175k and extrapolating:
I think a sovereign debt crisis is inevitable. Too many countries are simply over borrowed and cannot afford to both pay the interest and maintain the services that their electorates expect. We are certainly one of them and the lack of confidence in our monetary structures means that we are already paying a premium on our borrowings compared to most western countries.
We may well see governments simply unable to borrow the money they need to pay the bills. The fact that our 10 year gilt rate is already somewhat higher than our base lending rate is ominous and they are heading in opposite directions. Given the importance of gilt rates to real borrowing, whether for mortgages or long term investment, I fear we are getting to the point when the Bank is losing control of base rates. The latest cut was extremely unwise.
The risk is that we go back to QE using new money to buy the gilts for us or we have a very serious dislocation in our economy as we try to close the gap between spending and the tax take. Neither is an attractive option.
I think this is about right. And both Labour and Tory are responsible for the coming sovereign debt crisis. In particular the current regime has proved completely unable to do the expenditure cutting and tax raising necessary to create confidence, and this with a stonking majority. In fact the massive majority seems to give dim backbenchers even greater irresponsibility.
I think it remains unlikely that the UK voters plan to put the Tories back in charge, which means that of the possible government configurations the highest probability is Reform majority or Reform minority (maybe 40-45%). But it is not possible at the moment to identify either the policies or the outstanding Reform person who could be the confidence creating Chancellor of the Exchequer from their ranks.
The autumn budget could well be the last chance for Labour to establish itself as the government to take control of out of control finances. It needs a greta deal of promise breaking, a clear narrative and excplanation, as etting out of the direction of travel which does more than meet ever moving bogus targets for debt, and balances the books before the next election.
Sadly consensus is impossible when political opportunism abounds.
The main parties all know what they need to do. However tinkering at the edges won’t cut it.
‘ Sir Ed Davey, asked by @TomSwarbrick1, whether the Lib Dems will continue to support the triple lock “whatever the cost may be”, replies: “We do”. However much it costs. When will this insanity end?’
Discussed this morning. The Guardian write-up of this is awful & confuses who is being taxed & when.
Under this proposal the seller is not being taxed - the buyer is being taxed an annual % property tax after they purchase the property as a replacement for stamp duty.
As I commented earlier, it honestly looks like the journalist in question shoved that document into an LLM, asked it to summarise the document & then published whatever bullshit the LLM spat out. A poor show frankly.
The Guardian article says that they are “drawing” on this study. It doesn’t necessarily mean they are implementing it word-for-word.
Making the housing market even worse by imposing yet another huge transaction tax on the seller as well as the buyer would be a bold move certainly.
Discussed this morning. The Guardian write-up of this is awful & confuses who is being taxed & when.
Under this proposal the seller is not being taxed - the buyer is being taxed an annual % property tax after they purchase the property as a replacement for stamp duty.
As I commented earlier, it honestly looks like the journalist in question shoved that document into an LLM, asked it to summarise the document & then published whatever bullshit the LLM spat out. A poor show frankly.
The sellers having made a five hundred percent profit on their home after 25 years coughing up would be more equitable than the poor old buyer having to front stamp duty at purchase.
It will just be added to the asking price and the buyer pays it in higher mortgage charges
Stamp duty is a ridiculous tax.
Bear in mind at the moment this proposal is simply kite flying which has been taken as gospel government policy, although I suspect the government will venture down that avenue regardless.
All these proposals are just tinkering around the edges. In opposition the Labour Party were remiss in discounting an extra penny or two on income tax or VAT.
To @Big_G_NorthWales ’s point, at the moment the buyers pay the stamp duty but can’t finance it with mortgage. So it’s an improvement if they can now finance it.
But the reality is the sellers can’t simply “add it to price”. They will sell for the maximum they can buy that is driven by financing availability not any target price they have in mind
Discussed this morning. The Guardian write-up of this is awful & confuses who is being taxed & when.
Under this proposal the seller is not being taxed - the buyer is being taxed an annual % property tax after they purchase the property as a replacement for stamp duty.
As I commented earlier, it honestly looks like the journalist in question shoved that document into an LLM, asked it to summarise the document & then published whatever bullshit the LLM spat out. A poor show frankly.
The Guardian article says that they are “drawing” on this study. It doesn’t necessarily mean they are implementing it word-for-word.
Making the housing market even worse by imposing yet another huge transaction tax on the seller as well as the buyer would be a bold move certainly.
I suspect the Guardian is simply wrong.
This assessment is surely not based on Reeves’ track record.
Rachel Reeves is considering hitting the owners of high-value properties with capital gains tax when they sell their homes
The chancellor is considering using the Autumn Budget to end the current exemption from capital gains tax that people enjoy when they sell their 'primary' residence
Under the plans the current exemption from capital gains tax, known as private residence relief, would come to an end for properties above a certain threshold
Higher-rate taxpayers would pay 24% of any gain they make from the increase in the value of their properties while basic rate taxpayers would have to pay 18%
Yeah, no one would sell, in the hope that Labour get kicked out and it changes back next election. Not gonna work
Yup it will completely destroy any liquidity in the housing market because older people in mid sized houses will refuse to sell, why pay 24% CGT when they can pass up £1m on tax free.
Honestly, I can't see it happening anyway, this is just kite flying. A tax like this would completely destroy Labour's chances for a generation. Property taxes always go down very, very poorly with voters.
Discussed this morning. The Guardian write-up of this is awful & confuses who is being taxed & when.
Under this proposal the seller is not being taxed - the buyer is being taxed an annual % property tax after they purchase the property as a replacement for stamp duty.
As I commented earlier, it honestly looks like the journalist in question shoved that document into an LLM, asked it to summarise the document & then published whatever bullshit the LLM spat out. A poor show frankly.
Presumably on top of their council tax ?
Who’d buy in those circumstances ?
Given that it substitutes for stamp duty, buyers end up no worse off overall. Buyers who buy once and never buy again end up paying more, buyers who have to move often are much, much better off.
This is good - we want people to be able to move to get better paying jobs without it costing them a fortune & in the longer term it’s better for the country if people sitting on large houses they don’t need any more have a financial incentive to downsize.
A rather gruesome sight in our garden: amid a heap of feathers a pigeon's body with a decapitated head and no head to be found. No sign of the corpse having been eaten. Could it be a fox?
Free Alexander Isak, the Saudis are treating him worse than they treated Jamal Khashoggi.
Pay £130m or more and he will head your way.
Problem is you also bought the player Newcastle intended to replace him with..
We told the Geordies that if they sold us Isak in July we wouldn't sign Ekitike, so when they didn't, we said we'll take both.
With the way he has behaved, I'm no longer sure I want him.
Golden rule is that no player, no matter how talented, should ever be bigger than the club. Players who think they are creates a toxic attitude like at Old Trafford in recent years.
The way Isak has acted in recent weeks, its clear he thinks he's bigger than the Geordies, which may be fair enough but to act it out like that . . . if he's prepared to do that with them, what's to stop him doing that with us in a couple of years time?
People who easily badmouth their last employer tend to normally not work well with their next one either.
London is the last Labour stronghold so Rachel has decided she wants to trash their support there .
I’m beginning to wonder whether she’s a Reform plant .
Or even a Tory plant, given in London the Tories are still Labour's main rivals not Reform and it is London and the most expensive home counties where this policy could be fatal for Labour MPs in marginal seats
Very, very interesting: European leaders asked Donald Trump to make Viktor Orbán lift his long-held veto on Ukraine’s accession process, which Europeans consider to be another layer of security of guarantees.
Trump, who now supports security guarantees, assented and made the call.
Discussed this morning. The Guardian write-up of this is awful & confuses who is being taxed & when.
Under this proposal the seller is not being taxed - the buyer is being taxed an annual % property tax after they purchase the property as a replacement for stamp duty.
As I commented earlier, it honestly looks like the journalist in question shoved that document into an LLM, asked it to summarise the document & then published whatever bullshit the LLM spat out. A poor show frankly.
Presumably on top of their council tax ?
Who’d buy in those circumstances ?
If must have taxes - and sadly I don't really see any alternative - then I prefer taxes which discourage the inefficient use of scarce resources.
I really don't like taxes that prevent the market from clearing*: like stamp duty.
Gently discouraging people from having homes larger than they actually need is probably a net benefit. (Are there losers? Sure there are. But the winners in terms of greater housing availability are surely more than the losers.)
Discussed this morning. The Guardian write-up of this is awful & confuses who is being taxed & when.
Under this proposal the seller is not being taxed - the buyer is being taxed an annual % property tax after they purchase the property as a replacement for stamp duty.
As I commented earlier, it honestly looks like the journalist in question shoved that document into an LLM, asked it to summarise the document & then published whatever bullshit the LLM spat out. A poor show frankly.
Presumably on top of their council tax ?
Who’d buy in those circumstances ?
The national property tax proposed is for houses over £500k and is a replacement for stamp duty.
The original document says that only houses under £500K would pay the local tax (ie council tax) if I have understood it right
It's terrible that the EU - and particularly a handful of countries (*) have not weaned themselves off Russian O&G. But surely the figures above are not all profit to the Russian government, as there would be hefty production costs.
(*) Some for good reasons; others for bad
It's basically a sign of a lack of seriousness in supporting Ukraine to fight the war when so much money is being handed over to Russia.
The first line of a strategy for victory would be to stop sending money to Russia.
Hang on: remember Hungary is basically a full out supporter of Russia. How is the EU supposed to stop them from importing Russian oil and gas?
I would like to see a breakdown of the €21.9 billion by country, to see how much is exported to Hungary.
https://b4ukraine.org/whats-new/hungary-russian-fossil-fuels has some figures, with Hungary as the biggest importer from Russia, but only on €412 million, so a very small proportion of that total. I'm not certain how the figures add up here?
The sellers having made a five hundred percent profit on their home after 25 years coughing up would be more equitable than the poor old buyer having to front stamp duty at purchase.
It will just be added to the asking price and the buyer pays it in higher mortgage charges
Stamp duty is a ridiculous tax.
Bear in mind at the moment this proposal is simply kite flying which has been taken as gospel government policy, although I suspect the government will venture down that avenue regardless.
All these proposals are just tinkering around the edges. In opposition the Labour Party were remiss in discounting an extra penny or two on income tax or VAT.
To @Big_G_NorthWales ’s point, at the moment the buyers pay the stamp duty but can’t finance it with mortgage. So it’s an improvement if they can now finance it.
But the reality is the sellers can’t simply “add it to price”. They will sell for the maximum they can buy that is driven by financing availability not any target price they have in mind
Two things will happen
Sellers will include and overprice internals ie carpets, curtains, furniture etc to keep it away when marginal
Higher price owners will collectively add it to their asking prices or simply will not sell
It's the way markets work
Also it won't apply in Wales where we already have Land Transaction Tax [LTT]
Discussed this morning. The Guardian write-up of this is awful & confuses who is being taxed & when.
Under this proposal the seller is not being taxed - the buyer is being taxed an annual % property tax after they purchase the property as a replacement for stamp duty.
As I commented earlier, it honestly looks like the journalist in question shoved that document into an LLM, asked it to summarise the document & then published whatever bullshit the LLM spat out. A poor show frankly.
Presumably on top of their council tax ?
Who’d buy in those circumstances ?
If must have taxes - and sadly I don't really see any alternative - then I prefer taxes which discourage the inefficient use of scarce resources.
I really don't like taxes that prevent the market from clearing*: like stamp duty.
Gently discouraging people from having homes larger than they actually need is probably a net benefit. (Are there losers? Sure there are. But the winners in terms of greater housing availability are surely more than the losers.)
* Yes, I know the market always clears.
But how does CGT on primary residence encourage older people to downsize? Surely it does the opposite as they'll just lock in and pass their primary residence on tax free up to £1m.
What on earth is Reeves thinking with all these ridiculous taxation ideas for housing; seemingly on top of council tax
The best thing to do is scrap Council Tax, scrap Stamp Duty and replace with a simple, percentage tax on property values.
I expect however that she'll attempt to introduce a new tax without abolishing either Council Tax or Stamp Duty, which would be the worst thing to do.
Indeed.
Just make sure you don't do the retarded California thing and base it all on last transacion price, which means my friend Joe has a property tax bill about 10% of mine, despite living in a mansion in one of the most expensive parts of LA.
A rather gruesome sight in our garden: amid a heap of feathers a pigeon's body with a decapitated head and no head to be found. No sign of the corpse having been eaten. Could it be a fox?
Discussed this morning. The Guardian write-up of this is awful & confuses who is being taxed & when.
Under this proposal the seller is not being taxed - the buyer is being taxed an annual % property tax after they purchase the property as a replacement for stamp duty.
As I commented earlier, it honestly looks like the journalist in question shoved that document into an LLM, asked it to summarise the document & then published whatever bullshit the LLM spat out. A poor show frankly.
Presumably on top of their council tax ?
Who’d buy in those circumstances ?
The national property tax proposed is for houses over £500k and is a replacement for stamp duty.
The original document says that only houses under £500K would pay the local tax (ie council tax) if I have understood it right
That’s confusing . Wouldn’t you still pay council tax if your property is over 500,000 pounds . As the old saying goes in politics , if you’re explaining you’re losing .
What on earth is Reeves thinking with all these ridiculous taxation ideas for housing; seemingly on top of council tax
The best thing to do is scrap Council Tax, scrap Stamp Duty and replace with a simple, percentage tax on property values.
I expect however that she'll attempt to introduce a new tax without abolishing either Council Tax or Stamp Duty, which would be the worst thing to do.
Erm, that's the proposal. Maybe not a simple, single % but otherwise what you ask:
"First, the stamp duty land tax should be replaced with a national proportional property tax, levied on house values above £500,000. This rate would be set by central government. An annual rate of 0.54%, with a 0.278% supplement on values over £1m would raise the same amount as stamp duty."
"Second, council tax should be replaced with a local proportional property tax, levied on house values up to £500,000 with a minimum annual payment of £800. The rate would be set by local authorities. A rate of 0.44% would raise the same amount of revenue as council tax."
Discussed this morning. The Guardian write-up of this is awful & confuses who is being taxed & when.
Under this proposal the seller is not being taxed - the buyer is being taxed an annual % property tax after they purchase the property as a replacement for stamp duty.
As I commented earlier, it honestly looks like the journalist in question shoved that document into an LLM, asked it to summarise the document & then published whatever bullshit the LLM spat out. A poor show frankly.
Presumably on top of their council tax ?
Who’d buy in those circumstances ?
If must have taxes - and sadly I don't really see any alternative - then I prefer taxes which discourage the inefficient use of scarce resources.
I really don't like taxes that prevent the market from clearing*: like stamp duty.
Gently discouraging people from having homes larger than they actually need is probably a net benefit. (Are there losers? Sure there are. But the winners in terms of greater housing availability are surely more than the losers.)
* Yes, I know the market always clears.
But how does CGT on primary residence encourage older people to downsize? Surely it does the opposite as they'll just lock in and pass their primary residence on tax free up to £1m.
I'm referring to this quote: Under this proposal the seller is not being taxed - the buyer is being taxed an annual % property tax after they purchase the property as a replacement for stamp duty.
The sentence "Families will find even less of granny’s inheritance trickling down." reveals an odd assumption which most of us make without thinking about it. Why should we model our society on the assumption that money will come down from our grandparents, bearing in mind that many people don't have rich grandparents, and they may have had complex relationships with multiple descendants.
Certainly the State should step in where needed. But assisting people in looking after themselves where they can needs to be part of the solution.
One advantage of taxing inheritance as income by the recipient is that it is inherently redistribute. Either it is paid as tax by the wealthy, or passed to those on lower incomes, like grandkids etc.
I agree that it is insanity to tax the estate rather than the recipient.
If I'm not in danger of oversharing... When my mother died, my sister and I received an inheritance. The estate paid inheritance tax, then we each got half of what was left. Fine. It's not a joy paying tax, but someone has to pay tax. I'm OK with that.
Now, my father has died, earlier in the year. (No condolences necessary!) However, he was living in the US and the inheritance is partly in IRAs. There's no tax on the estate, but when we cash in the IRAs in the US and bring the money into the UK, we have to pay income tax. (I'm simplifying. There's more complicated family details.)
This has given me experience of taxing the estate versus taxing the personal income.
Because I have a well-paid job, I will pay lots of income tax on my share from my father. My sister gets the same share, but she's a housewife (with a husband with a well-paid job), so she'll pay much less income tax on her share. We get equal shares before tax, but I get substantially less after tax.
I earn more than my office mate, so I pay more in income tax. That feels fair. Yet it feels unfair that I am "meant" to get an equal share of an inheritance, but get less. The estate tax felt fair. The tax was paid and we split the rest. This doesn't.
These are first world problems, I'm getting a chunk of money - woo! Maybe I'm just pissed because I'm losing out, but that's my gut reaction to why you should tax the estate rather than the recipient.
My suggestion:
Do a deed of variation so that you sister gets *all* of the US inheritance.
She can then make a PET gift of your share to you (on the assumption she survives 7 years this will be tax free).
Lot of kite flying on property taxes in the press today clearly. Looks like different Treasury officials have been briefing the Guardian & the Times on the various policies they want to stab in the back early.
Comments
Are we rapidly coming to an inflexion point
https://x.com/_investinq/status/1957842078123110907?s=61
Bear in mind at the moment this proposal is simply kite flying which has been taken as gospel government policy, although I suspect the government will venture down that avenue regardless.
All these proposals are just tinkering around the edges. In opposition the Labour Party were remiss in discounting an extra penny or two on income tax or VAT.
"From Those Wonderful folks Who gave Us Brexit"
So a great many of the unemployed aren't eligible to work there.
It’s happened before.
Overall in 2024/25 (projected figures from October 2024 https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/local-authority-revenue-expenditure-and-financing-england-2024-to-2025-budget/local-authority-revenue-expenditure-and-financing-2024-25-budget-england) Councils in England got £67.1bn from Government grants, £41.2bn from Council Tax, £20.3bn from Business Rates, £1.6bn from reserves and £0.6bn from other items. That means it's 19% and 23% of 32% of Council spending.
So the correct answer is Councils spend around 7.4% of their spending on pensions which feels about right. Around half of council spend is on staff. An employee on median wage will be contributing 6.5% of their pay to the pension scheme and the employer contributes usually around three times the employee's contribution which would be 9.9% of spending, but some employees won't be in the scheme so it's lower.
Or is that OK if you're a Tory?
We're not at that stage yet. Instead, what the government will likely do is what happened in Japan: they will lean on RBS, etc., to own more UK long dated government bonds. A technical white paper will be written looking at capital adequacy for UK lenders which will note that their low exposure to domestic long-term bonds is creating a mismatch between various asset markets*, and therefore in the interests of financial stability, they should increase their weighting of long term UK government bonds.
In this way, the can can be kicked down the road for at least another 15 years, maybe 20.
* This is true, by the way.
Acyn
@Acyn
Trump: The Smithsonian is OUT OF CONTROL, where everything discussed is how horrible our Country is, how bad Slavery was… We are not going to allow this to happen, and I have instructed my attorneys to go through the Museums, and start the exact same process that has been done with Colleges and Universities
https://x.com/Acyn/status/1957877516053672302
There are similar figures at https://energyandcleanair.org/june-2025-monthly-analysis-of-russian-fossil-fuel-exports-and-sanctions/
Not all from war, many from internal oppression. If you were Iranian, Sudanese or Afghan wouldn't you hot-foot it too?
I've seen a couple of papers having a go at them - there Daily Mail have a Where's Wally style peace on Joseph Boam, but I'm not seeing anything much more yet apart from tabloid-type pieces about the odd defenestrati.
I think what they are saying is they want to do limited time tiktok promotions to clear excess stock and want to automate as much of it as possible.
We may well see governments simply unable to borrow the money they need to pay the bills. The fact that our 10 year gilt rate is already somewhat higher than our base lending rate is ominous and they are heading in opposite directions. Given the importance of gilt rates to real borrowing, whether for mortgages or long term investment, I fear we are getting to the point when the Bank is losing control of base rates. The latest cut was extremely unwise.
The risk is that we go back to QE using new money to buy the gilts for us or we have a very serious dislocation in our economy as we try to close the gap between spending and the tax take. Neither is an attractive option.
That was my reading too. But I guess I would raise rather less in the way of VC money.
Get some new potatoes. Boil them until about two thirds cooked, so that you can at least cause them to break open if you use a potato masher on them.
Put them in a largeish baking tray. Crush them so they are all at least "broken". Add salt and pepper and liberally coat in olive oil.
Chuck it into the over on 180.
Now, while those crisp up, chuck a couple of anchovies into a small pot along with some butter (quote a lot is good), and add some low heat. As the anchovies break down add some crushed garlic. Basically, you've made garlic-anchovy butter. (15 year old sons in our house have a habit of dipping bits of french bread in the mixture as they pass.)
Take the potatoes out the oven, put them on a serving plate. Pour the anchovy garlic butter over the potatoes.
Now take a tin of very nice tuna, and break it up and top the potatoes with it.
20 minutes later it will all be eaten. And your children will be demanding seconds.
Now, my father has died, earlier in the year. (No condolences necessary!) However, he was living in the US and the inheritance is partly in IRAs. There's no tax on the estate, but when we cash in the IRAs in the US and bring the money into the UK, we have to pay income tax. (I'm simplifying. There's more complicated family details.)
This has given me experience of taxing the estate versus taxing the personal income.
Because I have a well-paid job, I will pay lots of income tax on my share from my father. My sister gets the same share, but she's a housewife (with a husband with a well-paid job), so she'll pay much less income tax on her share. We get equal shares before tax, but I get substantially less after tax.
I earn more than my office mate, so I pay more in income tax. That feels fair. Yet it feels unfair that I am "meant" to get an equal share of an inheritance, but get less. The estate tax felt fair. The tax was paid and we split the rest. This doesn't.
These are first world problems, I'm getting a chunk of money - woo! Maybe I'm just pissed because I'm losing out, but that's my gut reaction to why you should tax the estate rather than the recipient.
Problem is you also bought the player Newcastle intended to replace him with..
It's not a free lunch at all.
It is - however - the easiest way for the government to kick the can down the road for another decade or so.
And without stamp duty reducing deposits its likely that the change will result in a slight increase in house prices.
Although looking at the Times article that's just appeared on my phone, it's seems designed to make something else look acceptable when it's announced.
She loves history, churches, geology, poetry, and surreal jokes
Which is kinda handy as these are many of my favourite things as well
Where people come from is a big determiner of the acceptance rate. People from Sudan, 99% acceptance rate. From India, 2%. It would seem likely that most people fleeing Sudan are refugees from war, while most claiming asylum from India are economic migrants.
Try the church at Isleham for a much smaller and very different wooden roof ...
https://historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/1126475
The fact that the thing we're calling artificial intelligence *can't do math* and yet we're jamming it into programs that successfully *have done math* for decades, then warning people against using the AI to do math, seems like an excellent summary of where we are.
https://bsky.app/profile/jacobtlevy.bsky.social/post/3lwrj2xcijk2h
I think it remains unlikely that the UK voters plan to put the Tories back in charge, which means that of the possible government configurations the highest probability is Reform majority or Reform minority (maybe 40-45%). But it is not possible at the moment to identify either the policies or the outstanding Reform person who could be the confidence creating Chancellor of the Exchequer from their ranks.
The autumn budget could well be the last chance for Labour to establish itself as the government to take control of out of control finances. It needs a greta deal of promise breaking, a clear narrative and excplanation, as etting out of the direction of travel which does more than meet ever moving bogus targets for debt, and balances the books before the next election.
Flying the flag of the USA's enemies, the Confederates or the Nazis, is now the mark of a Patriot™.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/aug/19/merseyside-police-helicopter-crew-to-face-no-action-after-chasing-suspect-at-low-altitude
The only way to get an actual sovereign debt crisis is to put someone in charge who would defy the markets, logic and reality. A Liz Truss, a Recep Tayyip Erdoğan... a Nigel Farage???
Exclusive:
Rachel Reeves is considering hitting the owners of high-value properties with capital gains tax when they sell their homes
The chancellor is considering using the Autumn Budget to end the current exemption from capital gains tax that people enjoy when they sell their 'primary' residence
Under the plans the current exemption from capital gains tax, known as private residence relief, would come to an end for properties above a certain threshold
Higher-rate taxpayers would pay 24% of any gain they make from the increase in the value of their properties while basic rate taxpayers would have to pay 18%
https://x.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1957904266481344523
I've only beem once before, and that was about 25 years ago. So this was almost like my first visit
Stunning. Just stunning. When I first went in I thought, OK, this is like one of the great French cathedrals - Amiens or Reims - very lovely, but lacking Noom
And then we got to the Octagon and the Noom comes from the sheer effrontery of the architecture. The absurd, dreamy idea of this floating geometrical ceiling-from-heaven, my God the Noom kicks in then. Oh yes. Verily, and yea
Also, the Lady Chapel. Also, the fact it was founded in about 670AD by an Anglo-Saxon princess. Also, the Anglo-Saxon warlords and bishops interred in one of the prettier chantries, including some earl who died at the Battle of Maldon. Also, the presence nearby of Grimes Graves in the Breckland (which we both visited for the first time)
We had a brilliant day out. England can still wildly surprise on the upside, and then some. 90 minutes from the North Circular!
Ely must be in the top ten most-beautiful-cathedrals in the world
Under this proposal the seller is not being taxed - the buyer is being taxed an annual % property tax after they purchase the property as a replacement for stamp duty.
Full details are in the proposal linked to in the Guardian article: https://www.ukonward.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Onward-A-Fairer-Property-Tax.pdf
As I commented earlier, it honestly looks like the journalist in question shoved that document into an LLM, asked it to summarise the document & then published whatever bullshit the LLM spat out. A poor show frankly.
You can realise how mixed it is by noting that one can buy a grade I listed tudor flat in beautiful condition for £175k and extrapolating:
https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/163903709#/?channel=RES_BUY
The main parties all know what they need to do. However tinkering at the edges won’t cut it.
‘ Sir Ed Davey, asked by @TomSwarbrick1, whether the Lib Dems will continue to support the triple lock “whatever the cost may be”, replies: “We do”. However much it costs. When will this insanity end?’
https://x.com/benkentish/status/1957723272503812431?s=61
I’m beginning to wonder whether she’s a Reform plant .
I suspect the Guardian is simply wrong.
Who’d buy in those circumstances ?
But the reality is the sellers can’t simply “add it to price”. They will sell for the maximum they can buy that is driven by financing availability not any target price they have in mind
Honestly, I can't see it happening anyway, this is just kite flying. A tax like this would completely destroy Labour's chances for a generation. Property taxes always go down very, very poorly with voters.
This is good - we want people to be able to move to get better paying jobs without it costing them a fortune & in the longer term it’s better for the country if people sitting on large houses they don’t need any more have a financial incentive to downsize.
Golden rule is that no player, no matter how talented, should ever be bigger than the club. Players who think they are creates a toxic attitude like at Old Trafford in recent years.
The way Isak has acted in recent weeks, its clear he thinks he's bigger than the Geordies, which may be fair enough but to act it out like that . . . if he's prepared to do that with them, what's to stop him doing that with us in a couple of years time?
People who easily badmouth their last employer tend to normally not work well with their next one either.
Very, very interesting: European leaders asked Donald Trump to make Viktor Orbán lift his long-held veto on Ukraine’s accession process, which Europeans consider to be another layer of security of guarantees.
Trump, who now supports security guarantees, assented and made the call.
https://bsky.app/profile/jorgeliboreiro.bsky.social/post/3lwrmifihrs2g
I really don't like taxes that prevent the market from clearing*: like stamp duty.
Gently discouraging people from having homes larger than they actually need is probably a net benefit. (Are there losers? Sure there are. But the winners in terms of greater housing availability are surely more than the losers.)
* Yes, I know the market always clears.
The original document says that only houses under £500K would pay the local tax (ie council tax) if I have understood it right
I expect however that she'll attempt to introduce a new tax without abolishing either Council Tax or Stamp Duty, which would be the worst thing to do.
Sellers will include and overprice internals ie carpets, curtains, furniture etc to keep it away when marginal
Higher price owners will collectively add it to their asking prices or simply will not sell
It's the way markets work
Also it won't apply in Wales where we already have Land Transaction Tax [LTT]
Just make sure you don't do the retarded California thing and base it all on last transacion price, which means my friend Joe has a property tax bill about 10% of mine, despite living in a mansion in one of the most expensive parts of LA.
"First, the stamp duty land tax should be replaced with a national proportional property tax, levied on house values above £500,000. This rate would be set by central government. An annual rate of 0.54%, with a 0.278% supplement on values over £1m would raise the same amount as stamp duty."
"Second, council tax should be replaced with a local proportional property tax, levied on house values up to £500,000 with a minimum annual payment of £800. The rate would be set by local authorities. A rate of 0.44% would raise the same amount of revenue as council tax."
(original policy document)
Do a deed of variation so that you sister gets *all* of the US inheritance.
She can then make a PET gift of your share to you (on the assumption she survives 7 years this will be tax free).