Skip to content

Andy Burnham’s manifesto destiny – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 13,232
edited 8:16AM in General
Andy Burnham’s manifesto destiny – politicalbetting.com

Britons tend to feel it's more important for an Andy Burnham government to pursue policies it believes are right than to stick to the policies in the Labour manifestoPursue policies it believes are right: 48%Stick to manifesto promises: 16%Something else: 14%yougov.com/en-gb/daily-…

Read the full story here

«1

Comments

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 137,429
    edited 8:21AM
    Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.

    ''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

    Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.

    It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.

    In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.

    Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.

    It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'

    https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15953425/Burnham-plots-homes-tax-raid-middle-clas.html'

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/tax/income/burnham-50pc-income-tax-rate-would-be-a-disaster/
  • MattWMattW Posts: 33,874
    A strong second. Good morning everyone.
  • BattlebusBattlebus Posts: 3,521
    Who was it on here that knew there was going to be a Burnham coronation. Chapeau.

    The ability to knife the party leader (and chancellor) and to manoeuvre an anointed candidate into place is a wonder to behold. Speaks of a level of party discipline that Reform can only aspire to. And it is this lack of basic party organisation that will continue to haunt Reform - plus of course the venal nature of its key players.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 67,052
    This poll is probably softly clocking contempt for SKS, and wanting a "fresh start".

    They won't get it.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 67,052
    HYUFD said:

    Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.

    ''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

    Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.

    It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.

    In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.

    Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.

    It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'

    https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15953425/Burnham-plots-homes-tax-raid-middle-clas.html'

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/tax/income/burnham-50pc-income-tax-rate-would-be-a-disaster/

    Andy Burnham has both been supremely entitled about his journey to power, and entirely unwilling to open himself up to scrutiny.

    He said in his speech last week that his overarching political direction is "not up for negotiation", and then refused to take any questions from journalists.

    We are now 2 weeks away from having a PM imposed on us who has no mandate, no clear policies, no clear cabinet, no challengers, and has allowed no questions, but will claim his vision is law and won't call an election. His response to anyone who criticises him is to be cold-shouldered or quietly threatened by 'friends of' or 'sources close to Andy Burnham'. Briefings I haven't seen since the Brown years.

    That's not the behaviour of a democrat, nor of someone who's not going to come unstuck very quickly.
  • UnpopularUnpopular Posts: 1,001

    This poll is probably softly clocking contempt for SKS, and wanting a "fresh start".

    They won't get it.

    I agree. I think as soon as he does something unpopular he will be hammered on the lack of mandate and be vulnerable on it. Hell, the Ming vase strategy left Starmer vulnerable to it and he was leader of the party.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 48,156
    I think there’s a distinct possibility of Andylab getting high on its own supply, just as Starmlab did after its ‘landslide’ of two years ago. Hiring the Everton ground to announce Burnham as leader, wtf?


    ‘I think I owe Pippa Crerar an apology.

    While I was furious about the later media spin surrounding Andy Burnham, I have just read the incredible investigative piece she co-authored with Jessica Elgot on 2 July.

    They did not sit back. They exposed the Westminster backroom operation in full light.
    They revealed that Labour bosses actually considered hiring Everton Football Stadium to announce Burnham as leader before the official nominations even opened.

    They exposed the growing fury among rank-and-file Labour members who refuse to accept this undemocratic coronation. They showed that the planned online Q&A sessions are just a desperate move to placate voters who are angry about a total lack of a leadership contest.

    This is the scrutiny we deserve. Pippa and Jessica held the line for the truth and exposed that behind the whimsical social media videos lies deep party disunity and a deeply flawed process.

    I am glad to stand corrected when real journalism proves itself alive and well.
    The Guardian article⬇️

    #UKPolitics #AndyBurnham #PippaCrerar #Guardian #MediaScrutiny #FactCheck #Labour’

    https://x.com/cherryopenmind/status/2073179319719899515?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 35,551
    I don't think that polling is particularly indicative. It's all in the question with these. Very few people would argue that the Government should not pursue policies that 'it thinks are right'. As TSE says, it wouldn't survive a single tax being raised.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 67,052

    This poll is probably softly clocking contempt for SKS, and wanting a "fresh start".

    They won't get it.

    It's definitely part of the general desire for change, yes.

    Given the fiscal constraints, unless the leader who implements real change is very persuasive, the likely response to that change is most likely to be, "not like that!"

    So, broadly speaking there are four possible outcomes.

    1. Burnham isn't really any different to Starmer. Fantastically unpopular
    2. Burnham is different, but doesn't manage to convince the voters that short-ten pain is necessary for future payoff. Fantastically unpopular with added rage at broken promises.
    3. Burnham is different, but is able to convince at least some people that his plan will work, given enough time. Grudging support.
    4. Burnham finds a novel way to feck things up even worse than before. Unpopularity records broken. Memory of Truss superseded.
    So far, Burnham is Ming-Vasing just it as much as SKS did, but with much better communication skills.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 57,340
    Interesting to see that a clear majority of all parties want Burnham to not be bound by the Labour manifesto.

    We are in the summer lull, so I wouldn't expect too much politics this summer. Inevitably there will be some court politics around cabinet positions, but I think Burnham is by nature not a factionalist and will want all strands of the party represented in cabinet.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 24,706
    edited 8:48AM

    HYUFD said:

    Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.

    ''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

    Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.

    It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.

    In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.

    Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.

    It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'

    https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15953425/Burnham-plots-homes-tax-raid-middle-clas.html'

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/tax/income/burnham-50pc-income-tax-rate-would-be-a-disaster/

    The "Mansion Tax" for properties over £2m is only forecast to raise about £400 million from 2028, whilst gumming up the property market (bad for growth) and raising the additional rate to 50p would probably raise £500 million but also drive high-income workers overseas (also bad for growth). The total of both is under £1bn. And the immediate hole in the DIP alone is £4.7bn.

    So, these are political taxes for the Labour base, and not serious economic revenue-raisers. And even then it's not one-way: these sorts of moves expose at least 50-60 seats to Conservative re-capture in the South in the 2029GE.
    Did Starmer get much credit from his base for VAT on private school fees?

    To what extent do these sort of base-pleasing politicies work (in terms of pleasing the base)? Or is there main benefit in provoking the opposition, and directing attention away from more consequential policies?
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 23,213
    edited 8:48AM

    This poll is probably softly clocking contempt for SKS, and wanting a "fresh start".

    They won't get it.

    Depends. He won't on the right, but if he can win back those who drifted away from Starmer on the left, job's a goodun. Neither of us is really the audience for this coup.

    I do wonder if we're heading for a Stravinsky/Abstract Art premiership. Make it sound changey to hide the lack of actual change. The song won't be that different (the constraints mean that it can't be) but a different singer with a better rapport with the audience. Who, fundamentally, isn't us.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 64,731
    MattW said:

    O/T I keep seeing adverts online for self-contained ’air conditioning’ units that break the laws of physics by generating cold without dumping the extracted heat anywhere. Does the Advertising Standards Authority’s remit not include online adverts?

    How may gullible people are being duped by these scammers I wonder?

    The hot-dealing hub has some of these for its kitchen. The units out has work by using freezer packs in a water bath and blowing air over this top produce cooler air.

    So, they do work and the effect is to time-shift the heat from when you use the unit to the night, when your freezer refreezes the ice pack.
    I think these are a variety of what is known as an "evaporative cooler" or "swamp cooler", which work by using room heat to evaporate the water (cold water means it absorbs more heat). That is "latent heat of evaporation" and so on as we all remember from Physics at school.

    The downside is that they increase humidity, and so do not work so well in high humidity countries like the UK - unlike in say Texas.

    Freezer packs mean that the freezer has put out heat to cool those down, so relative efficiency applies too.
    Errr

    Texas -like Florida- is high humidity.

    It would presumably work well in Arizona and Nevada.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 24,706

    This poll is probably softly clocking contempt for SKS, and wanting a "fresh start".

    They won't get it.

    Depends. He won't on the right, but if he can win back those who drifted away from Starmer on the left, job's a goodun. Neither of us is really the audience for this coup.

    I do wonder if we're heading for a Stravinsky/Abstract Art premiership. Make it sound changey to hide the lack of actual change. The song won't be that different (the constraints mean that it can't be) but a different singer with a better rapport with the audience. Who, fundamentally, isn't us.
    But, on the fundamentals (see, for example, house-building) Starmer was a huge failure.

    Better communication can only help Britain break out of its current morass if it's used in service of bolder change, that's willing to do something unpopular in the short-term.

    If Burnham is aiming for better communication on top of the status quo to win re-election in 2029, then I think he's very likely going to end up bemoaning his misfortunes in the same way Starmer currently is.
  • DriverDriver Posts: 5,635
    Foxy said:

    Interesting to see that a clear majority of all parties want Burnham to not be bound by the Labour manifesto.

    Well, they say that now.

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 90,514
    The relies to this are quite something.

    If there were any lingering doubts that you (Musk) and your friends were against the very principles of democracy, you just removed them.
    https://x.com/ylecun/status/2073427970656452822
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 9,699
    All this speculation about Burnham is fascinating, but pretty meaningless until he's actually got the job. Regardless of the hyperbole in the Mail and Telegraph, we don't have much of a clue about what he'll do (other than the devolution stuff) or how he'll perform.

    If I were to guess, I reckon his chances are about the same as England v. Mexico. I reckon there's around a 30% chance that England will overcome Mexico with ease. I reckon there's about the same 30% chance that Burnham will sweep all before him and be a popular PM who will comfortably win the next GE.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 67,052

    HYUFD said:

    Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.

    ''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

    Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.

    It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.

    In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.

    Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.

    It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'

    https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15953425/Burnham-plots-homes-tax-raid-middle-clas.html'

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/tax/income/burnham-50pc-income-tax-rate-would-be-a-disaster/

    The "Mansion Tax" for properties over £2m is only forecast to raise about £400 million from 2028, whilst gumming up the property market (bad for growth) and raising the additional rate to 50p would probably raise £500 million but also drive high-income workers overseas (also bad for growth). The total of both is under £1bn. And the immediate hole in the DIP alone is £4.7bn.

    So, these are political taxes for the Labour base, and not serious economic revenue-raisers. And even then it's not one-way: these sorts of moves expose at least 50-60 seats to Conservative re-capture in the South in the 2029GE.
    Did Starmer get much credit from his base for VAT on private school fees?

    To what extent do these sort of base-pleasing politicies work (in terms of pleasing the base)? Or is there main benefit in provoking the opposition, and directing attention away from more consequential policies?
    I think it's the former. They all defend it vociferously.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 90,514
    The subtle pun is made manifest in the header, yet again.
  • PhilPhil Posts: 3,331
    Nigelb said:

    The relies to this are quite something.

    If there were any lingering doubts that you (Musk) and your friends were against the very principles of democracy, you just removed them.
    https://x.com/ylecun/status/2073427970656452822

    TwiX is rammed full of quasi-fascist groknards these days.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 37,332
    edited 8:59AM
    HYUFD said:

    Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.

    ''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

    Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.

    It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.

    In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.

    Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.

    It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'

    https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15953425/Burnham-plots-homes-tax-raid-middle-clas.html'

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/tax/income/burnham-50pc-income-tax-rate-would-be-a-disaster/

    Hardly worth doing - raises an estimated extra £170m over the existing planned mansion tax. The Defence review alone needs £4.7bn.

    Burnham needs something more radical imo. I'd exempt principal residences (one per couple) and pension pots below a new LTA (say £1.5m), then tax all other wealth above a threshold of £0.5m at 1% pa. Apply the existing Deprivation of Capital and 'couples' rules - the rules that are happily applied to benefit claimants.

    Extend NI to all income, maybe by reducing employees NI rate and increasing the basic ICT rate.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 67,052

    This poll is probably softly clocking contempt for SKS, and wanting a "fresh start".

    They won't get it.

    Depends. He won't on the right, but if he can win back those who drifted away from Starmer on the left, job's a goodun. Neither of us is really the audience for this coup.

    I do wonder if we're heading for a Stravinsky/Abstract Art premiership. Make it sound changey to hide the lack of actual change. The song won't be that different (the constraints mean that it can't be) but a different singer with a better rapport with the audience. Who, fundamentally, isn't us.
    But, on the fundamentals (see, for example, house-building) Starmer was a huge failure.

    Better communication can only help Britain break out of its current morass if it's used in service of bolder change, that's willing to do something unpopular in the short-term.

    If Burnham is aiming for better communication on top of the status quo to win re-election in 2029, then I think he's very likely going to end up bemoaning his misfortunes in the same way Starmer currently is.
    Quite.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 90,514
    edited 9:07AM
    I would estimate that Burnham's experience of "reviving economies" is less than zero.

    Make Ed Miliband chancellor, ex-chief Treasury adviser tells Andy Burnham
    Nicholas Stern joins growing number backing Miliband, saying he has vision and experience to revive economy
    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2026/jul/05/make-ed-miliband-chancellor-ex-chief-treasury-adviser-nicholas-stern-tells-andy-burnham

    The appointment is looking increasingly likely.
    The headline treatment, and attempt at a 'hero' photo of Ed are mildly risible.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 129,430
    World Club T20 and shorter ODIs among ICC options in radical overhaul of calendar

    ICC exploring fixed windows for each format

    Continental championships among ideas up for debate


    The International Cricket Council is exploring a radical overhaul of the global calendar with discussions surrounding multilateral series, the creation of continental championships, a World Club Championship for T20 franchises, fixed windows for each format and possible changes to the length of one-day internationals.

    Talks between the 12 full members will take place at the ICC’s annual general meeting in Edinburgh on Wednesday as part of a strategic review being managed by the consulting firm McKinsey.

    Sources say that while the process is at an early stage, the ICC is encouraging discussion of radical ideas with the aim of securing the long-term future of all three formats of international cricket – Test matches, T20s and ODIs – in the face of the threat posed by franchise leagues.

    The ICC’s future tours programme is fixed until next year, and beyond that events such as World Cups, the World Test Championship (WC) and series involving England, India and Australia are scheduled until 2031, so any changes would have to wait until after then.

    Sources say that after spending recent years focusing on the format of the WTC, the ICC now favours a more holistic, long-term approach, to build a framework to allow three international formats to thrive.

    In addition to fixed windows, with ODIs being played only in the 18 months leading up to a World Cup, for example, more radical ideas are being discussed including reducing the length of ODIs. The ICC is also exploring adding more events to its portfolio, with bilateral series not involving two of England, India and Australia having little commercial value.


    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2026/jul/05/world-club-t20-and-shorter-odis-among-icc-options-in-radical-overhaul-of-cricket-calendar
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 37,332

    HYUFD said:

    Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.

    ''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

    Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.

    It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.

    In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.

    Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.

    It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'

    https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15953425/Burnham-plots-homes-tax-raid-middle-clas.html'

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/tax/income/burnham-50pc-income-tax-rate-would-be-a-disaster/

    The "Mansion Tax" for properties over £2m is only forecast to raise about £400 million from 2028, whilst gumming up the property market (bad for growth) and raising the additional rate to 50p would probably raise £500 million but also drive high-income workers overseas (also bad for growth). The total of both is under £1bn. And the immediate hole in the DIP alone is £4.7bn.

    So, these are political taxes for the Labour base, and not serious economic revenue-raisers. And even then it's not one-way: these sorts of moves expose at least 50-60 seats to Conservative re-capture in the South in the 2029GE.
    I agree with you Casino (it happens!).

    The question is what would you do to cover the Defence £4.7bn (assuming you agree it's needed)?
  • stodgestodge Posts: 16,818
    HYUFD said:

    Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.

    ''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

    Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.

    It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.

    In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.

    Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.

    It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'

    https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15953425/Burnham-plots-homes-tax-raid-middle-clas.html'

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/tax/income/burnham-50pc-income-tax-rate-would-be-a-disaster/

    To be expected, the Mail and the Telegraph (hardly friends of this Government) have come out swinging.

    Yet we cannot go on as we are - Council Tax was a botched solution to the Poll Tax which did much to bring down one of your previous Prime Ministers.

    With no revaluations since 1991, it is riven with anomalies and more than anything else doesn't raise the sums local councils need to cover social care and other areas.

    First, let's call it what it is - it's a High Value Council Tax Surcharge (not what you have lazily called a "Mansion Tax")

    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/high-value-council-tax-surcharge/high-value-council-tax-surcharge

    It's worth stating for the vast majority of homeowners in this country the HVCTS won't mean anything - obviously, as with any tax, those who stand to pay more shout the loudest.

    The key point is this:

    Under the current system, the average band D charge for a typical family home across England is £2,280. That is £250 more per year than a £10 million property in Mayfair, based on the band H charge in the City of Westminster, currently pays. This surcharge will change that, implementing a significant reform to improve fairness within England’s property tax system.

    Taxing the "value" of properties isn't of course a million miles away from the Council Tax and had successive Governments implemented the necessary revaluations and added additional bands, we wouldn't need such a drastic response now.

  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 21,426
    Nigelb said:

    The relies to this are quite something.

    If there were any lingering doubts that you (Musk) and your friends were against the very principles of democracy, you just removed them.
    https://x.com/ylecun/status/2073427970656452822

    The rhetoric Musk is supporting here isn’t a million miles further along than the talk of scroungers and contributors we get in UK politics.
  • MustaphaMondeoMustaphaMondeo Posts: 563
    Labour’s previous manifesto failed.
    A new one is needed.
    We all know that.

    Can Burnham beat the blob is the question.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 21,426

    HYUFD said:

    Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.

    ''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

    Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.

    It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.

    In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.

    Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.

    It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'

    https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15953425/Burnham-plots-homes-tax-raid-middle-clas.html'

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/tax/income/burnham-50pc-income-tax-rate-would-be-a-disaster/

    Hardly worth doing - raises an estimated extra £170m over the existing planned mansion tax. The Defence review alone needs £4.7bn.

    Burnham needs something more radical imo. I'd exempt principal residences (one per couple) and pension pots below a new LTA (say £1.5m), then tax all other wealth above a threshold of £0.5m at 1% pa. Apply the existing Deprivation of Capital and 'couples' rules - the rules that are happily applied to benefit claimants.

    Extend NI to all income, maybe by reducing employees NI rate and increasing the basic ICT rate.
    That immediately encourages everyone to buy a bigger principal residence and to put everything else into their pension pot, reducing what they pay in a wealth tax. Not a good system.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 92,049
    edited 9:15AM

    World Club T20 and shorter ODIs among ICC options in radical overhaul of calendar

    ICC exploring fixed windows for each format

    Continental championships among ideas up for debate


    The International Cricket Council is exploring a radical overhaul of the global calendar with discussions surrounding multilateral series, the creation of continental championships, a World Club Championship for T20 franchises, fixed windows for each format and possible changes to the length of one-day internationals.

    Talks between the 12 full members will take place at the ICC’s annual general meeting in Edinburgh on Wednesday as part of a strategic review being managed by the consulting firm McKinsey.

    Sources say that while the process is at an early stage, the ICC is encouraging discussion of radical ideas with the aim of securing the long-term future of all three formats of international cricket – Test matches, T20s and ODIs – in the face of the threat posed by franchise leagues.

    The ICC’s future tours programme is fixed until next year, and beyond that events such as World Cups, the World Test Championship (WC) and series involving England, India and Australia are scheduled until 2031, so any changes would have to wait until after then.

    Sources say that after spending recent years focusing on the format of the WTC, the ICC now favours a more holistic, long-term approach, to build a framework to allow three international formats to thrive.

    In addition to fixed windows, with ODIs being played only in the 18 months leading up to a World Cup, for example, more radical ideas are being discussed including reducing the length of ODIs. The ICC is also exploring adding more events to its portfolio, with bilateral series not involving two of England, India and Australia having little commercial value.


    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2026/jul/05/world-club-t20-and-shorter-odis-among-icc-options-in-radical-overhaul-of-cricket-calendar

    ODIs will eventually be killed off completely. Replaced with global T20 league and many more T20 internationals. T20s are much better financially, you can put them on in the evenings as they only last 3hrs, players can play every other day, and you can still charge the same price as a test match or ODI.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 25,741
    I heard on the news this morning that Burnham has been making plans for what he'll do when he takes over for at least a year. Arrogant fecker.

    At least he should be able to hit the ground running.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 14,531
    edited 9:18AM
    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:

    Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.

    ''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

    Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.

    It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.

    In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.

    Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.

    It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'

    https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15953425/Burnham-plots-homes-tax-raid-middle-clas.html'

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/tax/income/burnham-50pc-income-tax-rate-would-be-a-disaster/

    To be expected, the Mail and the Telegraph (hardly friends of this Government) have come out swinging.

    Yet we cannot go on as we are - Council Tax was a botched solution to the Poll Tax which did much to bring down one of your previous Prime Ministers.

    With no revaluations since 1991, it is riven with anomalies and more than anything else doesn't raise the sums local councils need to cover social care and other areas.

    First, let's call it what it is - it's a High Value Council Tax Surcharge (not what you have lazily called a "Mansion Tax")

    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/high-value-council-tax-surcharge/high-value-council-tax-surcharge

    It's worth stating for the vast majority of homeowners in this country the HVCTS won't mean anything - obviously, as with any tax, those who stand to pay more shout the loudest.

    The key point is this:

    Under the current system, the average band D charge for a typical family home across England is £2,280. That is £250 more per year than a £10 million property in Mayfair, based on the band H charge in the City of Westminster, currently pays. This surcharge will change that, implementing a significant reform to improve fairness within England’s property tax system.

    Taxing the "value" of properties isn't of course a million miles away from the Council Tax and had successive Governments implemented the necessary revaluations and added additional bands, we wouldn't need such a drastic response now.

    Also baffled by the idea it would gum up the property market. Housing gets all sorts of subsidies (IHT, CGT, perverse CT bands and discounts, even UC savings thresholds), which makes it incredibly attractive to hold onto. Taxing it based on value will help to unstick it - especially if Burnham finally bites the bullet and abolishes Stamp Duty too.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 129,430

    World Club T20 and shorter ODIs among ICC options in radical overhaul of calendar

    ICC exploring fixed windows for each format

    Continental championships among ideas up for debate


    The International Cricket Council is exploring a radical overhaul of the global calendar with discussions surrounding multilateral series, the creation of continental championships, a World Club Championship for T20 franchises, fixed windows for each format and possible changes to the length of one-day internationals.

    Talks between the 12 full members will take place at the ICC’s annual general meeting in Edinburgh on Wednesday as part of a strategic review being managed by the consulting firm McKinsey.

    Sources say that while the process is at an early stage, the ICC is encouraging discussion of radical ideas with the aim of securing the long-term future of all three formats of international cricket – Test matches, T20s and ODIs – in the face of the threat posed by franchise leagues.

    The ICC’s future tours programme is fixed until next year, and beyond that events such as World Cups, the World Test Championship (WC) and series involving England, India and Australia are scheduled until 2031, so any changes would have to wait until after then.

    Sources say that after spending recent years focusing on the format of the WTC, the ICC now favours a more holistic, long-term approach, to build a framework to allow three international formats to thrive.

    In addition to fixed windows, with ODIs being played only in the 18 months leading up to a World Cup, for example, more radical ideas are being discussed including reducing the length of ODIs. The ICC is also exploring adding more events to its portfolio, with bilateral series not involving two of England, India and Australia having little commercial value.


    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2026/jul/05/world-club-t20-and-shorter-odis-among-icc-options-in-radical-overhaul-of-cricket-calendar

    ODIs will eventually be killed off completely. Replaced with global T20 league and many more T20 internationals. T20s are much better financially, you can put them on in the evenings as they only last 3hrs, players can play every other day, and you can still charge the same price as a test match or ODI.
    One proposal I did hear mooted a few years ago which I liked was to make the ODIs a 4 innings event.

    So team A bats first for 25 overs, then team B bats for 25 overs etc.

    That way you can get to see the likes of Buttler/Bethell etc bat twice in one day.
  • CiceroCicero Posts: 4,499
    The Sunday Times is really going after Farage today. The £5 million bung and the dodgy houses is now being joined by a whole host of naughtiness, which may not be just against the rules of Parliament, but actually illegal.

    A few comments here last week suggested that we had not heard all of the Farage corruption story, and that indeed does seem to be the case. I am not of the view that ReformUK (proprietor N P Farage) can survive his departure. So I think the implosion of the Nationalist Right may well be incoming. Mrs Badenoch is probably fairly gleeful, Sir Edward and the Labour Borg collective probably much less so.

    Its going to be a fun week... *Popcorn*
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 14,531
    Cicero said:

    The Sunday Times is really going after Farage today. The £5 million bung and the dodgy houses is now being joined by a whole host of naughtiness, which may not be just against the rules of Parliament, but actually illegal.

    A few comments here last week suggested that we had not heard all of the Farage corruption story, and that indeed does seem to be the case. I am not of the view that ReformUK (proprietor N P Farage) can survive his departure. So I think the implosion of the Nationalist Right may well be incoming. Mrs Badenoch is probably fairly gleeful, Sir Edward and the Labour Borg collective probably much less so.

    Its going to be a fun week... *Popcorn*

    There's one person who won't be happy about the proposed property tax.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 33,874
    Nice pun by @TSE . I never thought would say that.

    So are we to believe in the 3 core elements of Manifesto Destiny:

    Andy's Exceptionalism: The belief in the unique moral virtue and superiority of the States of the Democratic Institutions.

    Mayoral Mission: The duty to spread Manchesterism government and the "Mancunian way of life" to other peoples.

    Divine Ordainment: The absolute faith that this expansion is the inevitable will of Providence.


    What say you, PB, and .. er .. The Local Marshall?
  • pm215pm215 Posts: 1,447

    I heard on the news this morning that Burnham has been making plans for what he'll do when he takes over for at least a year. Arrogant fecker.

    At least he should be able to hit the ground running.

    It would be pretty stupid not to be making plans -- the last two years have been a worked example of what happens when you get into government snd and don't have a plan for what you'll do. And if we'd had a leadership contest then a big part of being a viable candidate would be whether you had a worked out plan you could present for what you'd do to turn things around. Thinking you didn't need to plan and could just wing it would be the arrogant move (Boris Johnson style).
  • DriverDriver Posts: 5,635
    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:

    Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.

    ''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

    Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.

    It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.

    In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.

    Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.

    It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'

    https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15953425/Burnham-plots-homes-tax-raid-middle-clas.html'

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/tax/income/burnham-50pc-income-tax-rate-would-be-a-disaster/

    To be expected, the Mail and the Telegraph (hardly friends of this Government) have come out swinging.

    Yet we cannot go on as we are - Council Tax was a botched solution to the Poll Tax which did much to bring down one of your previous Prime Ministers.

    With no revaluations since 1991, it is riven with anomalies and more than anything else doesn't raise the sums local councils need to cover social care and other areas.

    First, let's call it what it is - it's a High Value Council Tax Surcharge (not what you have lazily called a "Mansion Tax")

    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/high-value-council-tax-surcharge/high-value-council-tax-surcharge

    It's worth stating for the vast majority of homeowners in this country the HVCTS won't mean anything - obviously, as with any tax, those who stand to pay more shout the loudest.

    The key point is this:

    Under the current system, the average band D charge for a typical family home across England is £2,280. That is £250 more per year than a £10 million property in Mayfair, based on the band H charge in the City of Westminster, currently pays. This surcharge will change that, implementing a significant reform to improve fairness within England’s property tax system.

    Taxing the "value" of properties isn't of course a million miles away from the Council Tax and had successive Governments implemented the necessary revaluations and added additional bands, we wouldn't need such a drastic response now.

    I do hope you never used the term "poll tax".

    Oh, wait...
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 60,752

    HYUFD said:

    Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.

    ''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

    Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.

    It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.

    In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.

    Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.

    It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'

    https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15953425/Burnham-plots-homes-tax-raid-middle-clas.html'

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/tax/income/burnham-50pc-income-tax-rate-would-be-a-disaster/

    Andy Burnham has both been supremely entitled about his journey to power, and entirely unwilling to open himself up to scrutiny.

    He said in his speech last week that his overarching political direction is "not up for negotiation", and then refused to take any questions from journalists.

    We are now 2 weeks away from having a PM imposed on us who has no mandate, no clear policies, no clear cabinet, no challengers, and has allowed no questions, but will claim his vision is law and won't call an election. His response to anyone who criticises him is to be cold-shouldered or quietly threatened by 'friends of' or 'sources close to Andy Burnham'. Briefings I haven't seen since the Brown years.

    That's not the behaviour of a democrat, nor of someone who's not going to come unstuck very quickly.
    Going to make for entertaining politics though...
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 64,116
    One of Starmer’s big problems was not building his policies around what the Labour Party (MPs and members) wanted. He tried to impose policies.

    Politics is the art of the possible.

    If the Burnsiah replaces that with imposing policies that are a bit more Labour friendly, he may do better. But if the policies fail to inspire the electorate, he will run out of road with the party rapidly, in that case.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 129,430
    edited 9:26AM
    Cicero said:

    The Sunday Times is really going after Farage today. The £5 million bung and the dodgy houses is now being joined by a whole host of naughtiness, which may not be just against the rules of Parliament, but actually illegal.

    A few comments here last week suggested that we had not heard all of the Farage corruption story, and that indeed does seem to be the case. I am not of the view that ReformUK (proprietor N P Farage) can survive his departure. So I think the implosion of the Nationalist Right may well be incoming. Mrs Badenoch is probably fairly gleeful, Sir Edward and the Labour Borg collective probably much less so.

    Its going to be a fun week... *Popcorn*

    It was me who obliquely referred to more scandals.

    One thing I would caution is that the Tories and Mrs Badenoch shouldn't be too gleeful is that some of the donors such as Mr Harbone have previously donated to the Tories.

    There's also a very messy libel case being brought by Mr Harbone against Ben Habib of Advance (formerly of Reform) which also has the potential to get messy for the Tories, Boris Johnson in particular, and any Tory who was involved in the 2019 campaign.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 37,332

    HYUFD said:

    Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.

    ''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

    Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.

    It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.

    In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.

    Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.

    It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'

    https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15953425/Burnham-plots-homes-tax-raid-middle-clas.html'

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/tax/income/burnham-50pc-income-tax-rate-would-be-a-disaster/

    Hardly worth doing - raises an estimated extra £170m over the existing planned mansion tax. The Defence review alone needs £4.7bn.

    Burnham needs something more radical imo. I'd exempt principal residences (one per couple) and pension pots below a new LTA (say £1.5m), then tax all other wealth above a threshold of £0.5m at 1% pa. Apply the existing Deprivation of Capital and 'couples' rules - the rules that are happily applied to benefit claimants.

    Extend NI to all income, maybe by reducing employees NI rate and increasing the basic ICT rate.
    That immediately encourages everyone to buy a bigger principal residence and to put everything else into their pension pot, reducing what they pay in a wealth tax. Not a good system.
    No, it doesn't.

    1. There are a finite number of high-value properties. Say I have £10m total assets and live in a £2m house. I could look for a £10m house but... there aren't many around; they cost more to maintain and run; why would I want to tie all my wealth up in an illiquid asset?.

    2. As I said: reintroduce the pension Lifetime Allowance (LTA) set at £1.5m.

    You could raise other objections but they can all be dealt with.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 60,752
    Eabhal said:

    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:

    Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.

    ''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

    Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.

    It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.

    In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.

    Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.

    It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'

    https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15953425/Burnham-plots-homes-tax-raid-middle-clas.html'

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/tax/income/burnham-50pc-income-tax-rate-would-be-a-disaster/

    To be expected, the Mail and the Telegraph (hardly friends of this Government) have come out swinging.

    Yet we cannot go on as we are - Council Tax was a botched solution to the Poll Tax which did much to bring down one of your previous Prime Ministers.

    With no revaluations since 1991, it is riven with anomalies and more than anything else doesn't raise the sums local councils need to cover social care and other areas.

    First, let's call it what it is - it's a High Value Council Tax Surcharge (not what you have lazily called a "Mansion Tax")

    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/high-value-council-tax-surcharge/high-value-council-tax-surcharge

    It's worth stating for the vast majority of homeowners in this country the HVCTS won't mean anything - obviously, as with any tax, those who stand to pay more shout the loudest.

    The key point is this:

    Under the current system, the average band D charge for a typical family home across England is £2,280. That is £250 more per year than a £10 million property in Mayfair, based on the band H charge in the City of Westminster, currently pays. This surcharge will change that, implementing a significant reform to improve fairness within England’s property tax system.

    Taxing the "value" of properties isn't of course a million miles away from the Council Tax and had successive Governments implemented the necessary revaluations and added additional bands, we wouldn't need such a drastic response now.

    Also baffled by the idea it would gum up the property market. Housing gets all sorts of subsidies (IHT, CGT, perverse CT bands and discounts, even UC savings thresholds), which makes it incredibly attractive to hold onto. Taxing it based on value will help to unstick it - especially if Burnham finally bites the bullet and abolishes Stamp Duty too.
    The gap between mooting it and doing it is what kills the housing market. Fannying about for months puts everyone on hold who would risk unneccesarily paying a heap of Stamp Duty in the meantime.

    If you are going to do it, announce it overnight.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 92,049

    World Club T20 and shorter ODIs among ICC options in radical overhaul of calendar

    ICC exploring fixed windows for each format

    Continental championships among ideas up for debate


    The International Cricket Council is exploring a radical overhaul of the global calendar with discussions surrounding multilateral series, the creation of continental championships, a World Club Championship for T20 franchises, fixed windows for each format and possible changes to the length of one-day internationals.

    Talks between the 12 full members will take place at the ICC’s annual general meeting in Edinburgh on Wednesday as part of a strategic review being managed by the consulting firm McKinsey.

    Sources say that while the process is at an early stage, the ICC is encouraging discussion of radical ideas with the aim of securing the long-term future of all three formats of international cricket – Test matches, T20s and ODIs – in the face of the threat posed by franchise leagues.

    The ICC’s future tours programme is fixed until next year, and beyond that events such as World Cups, the World Test Championship (WC) and series involving England, India and Australia are scheduled until 2031, so any changes would have to wait until after then.

    Sources say that after spending recent years focusing on the format of the WTC, the ICC now favours a more holistic, long-term approach, to build a framework to allow three international formats to thrive.

    In addition to fixed windows, with ODIs being played only in the 18 months leading up to a World Cup, for example, more radical ideas are being discussed including reducing the length of ODIs. The ICC is also exploring adding more events to its portfolio, with bilateral series not involving two of England, India and Australia having little commercial value.


    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2026/jul/05/world-club-t20-and-shorter-odis-among-icc-options-in-radical-overhaul-of-cricket-calendar

    ODIs will eventually be killed off completely. Replaced with global T20 league and many more T20 internationals. T20s are much better financially, you can put them on in the evenings as they only last 3hrs, players can play every other day, and you can still charge the same price as a test match or ODI.
    One proposal I did hear mooted a few years ago which I liked was to make the ODIs a 4 innings event.

    So team A bats first for 25 overs, then team B bats for 25 overs etc.

    That way you can get to see the likes of Buttler/Bethell etc bat twice in one day.
    I can see the attraction, but the work load for bowlers is still the issue. Max 10 overs (2x5) compared to the max 4 overs in T20. If the best bowlers end up bowling 8-10 overs at full tilt, for a seamer is quite a heavy workload and for spinners presurre on the shoulders / fingers. I am sure the big money from India want to maximise revenue by maximising games played, these spells of 2 overs here and there, physically the demands are far less, and can be ready to go again in a couple of days.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 29,131
    HYUFD said:

    Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.

    ''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

    Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.

    It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.

    In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.

    Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.

    It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'

    https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15953425/Burnham-plots-homes-tax-raid-middle-clas.html'

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/tax/income/burnham-50pc-income-tax-rate-would-be-a-disaster/

    I don't believe, even in London, 4 bed houses are "relatively modest".

    Has a rather perverse interpretation of the word relative for that to hold.
  • DriverDriver Posts: 5,635

    Cicero said:

    The Sunday Times is really going after Farage today. The £5 million bung and the dodgy houses is now being joined by a whole host of naughtiness, which may not be just against the rules of Parliament, but actually illegal.

    A few comments here last week suggested that we had not heard all of the Farage corruption story, and that indeed does seem to be the case. I am not of the view that ReformUK (proprietor N P Farage) can survive his departure. So I think the implosion of the Nationalist Right may well be incoming. Mrs Badenoch is probably fairly gleeful, Sir Edward and the Labour Borg collective probably much less so.

    Its going to be a fun week... *Popcorn*

    It was me who obliquely referred to more scandals.

    One thing I would caution is that the Tories and Mrs Badenoch shouldn't be too gleeful is that some of the donors such as Mr Harbone have previously donated to the Tories.

    There's also a very messy libel case being brought by Mr Harbone against Ben Habib of Restore (formally of Reform) which also has the potential to get messy for the Tories, Boris Johnson in particular, and any Tory who was involved in the 2019 campaign.
    Isn't Habib with Advance - last I heard they rejected merging with Restore?

    Also, formally/formerly.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 129,430
    edited 9:28AM
    Driver said:

    Cicero said:

    The Sunday Times is really going after Farage today. The £5 million bung and the dodgy houses is now being joined by a whole host of naughtiness, which may not be just against the rules of Parliament, but actually illegal.

    A few comments here last week suggested that we had not heard all of the Farage corruption story, and that indeed does seem to be the case. I am not of the view that ReformUK (proprietor N P Farage) can survive his departure. So I think the implosion of the Nationalist Right may well be incoming. Mrs Badenoch is probably fairly gleeful, Sir Edward and the Labour Borg collective probably much less so.

    Its going to be a fun week... *Popcorn*

    It was me who obliquely referred to more scandals.

    One thing I would caution is that the Tories and Mrs Badenoch shouldn't be too gleeful is that some of the donors such as Mr Harbone have previously donated to the Tories.

    There's also a very messy libel case being brought by Mr Harbone against Ben Habib of Restore (formally of Reform) which also has the potential to get messy for the Tories, Boris Johnson in particular, and any Tory who was involved in the 2019 campaign.
    Isn't Habib with Advance - last I heard they rejected merging with Restore?

    Also, formally/formerly.
    Yes, see my edit.

    Also from last month

    Ben Habib has just announced that Advance UK is taking a step back in order to allow the momentum behind Restore Britain to build.

    Ben has previously endorsed Restore Britain in Makerfield, and I thank him for that.

    I believe that Ben and the wider Advance UK membership are patriots who want the best for Britain - they are welcome in our Restore Britain family to help deliver the radical change that the country so desperately needs.

    Ben and I have not always agreed on logistics over the last few months, that’s politics, but this is an incredibly principled decision and I have the utmost respect for what Ben has sacrificed to build Advance to where it is today.

    For both Ben and I - it is country first, every single time.

    It would be an honour to welcome Ben and the Advance UK membership into Restore Britain, but that is a decision for them and I will respect whatever they decide.

    In the years to come, today will be seen as a significant event on Britain’s path to restoration.


    https://x.com/RupertLowe10/status/2062112586116571322
  • MattWMattW Posts: 33,874

    HYUFD said:

    Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.

    ''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

    Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.

    It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.

    In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.

    Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.

    It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'

    https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15953425/Burnham-plots-homes-tax-raid-middle-clas.html'

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/tax/income/burnham-50pc-income-tax-rate-would-be-a-disaster/

    Hardly worth doing - raises an estimated extra £170m over the existing planned mansion tax. The Defence review alone needs £4.7bn.

    Burnham needs something more radical imo. I'd exempt principal residences (one per couple) and pension pots below a new LTA (say £1.5m), then tax all other wealth above a threshold of £0.5m at 1% pa. Apply the existing Deprivation of Capital and 'couples' rules - the rules that are happily applied to benefit claimants.

    Extend NI to all income, maybe by reducing employees NI rate and increasing the basic ICT rate.
    That immediately encourages everyone to buy a bigger principal residence and to put everything else into their pension pot, reducing what they pay in a wealth tax. Not a good system.
    1% per annum of all privately held businesses? Ouch.

    What about corporate wealth? And corporately held property - do Grainger need to worry about their £3.1bn investment portfolio, which is iirc residential? What about the Duke of Westminster's portfolio in Mayfair?

    This will be immensely complex to avoid unintended consequences.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 60,752

    Cicero said:

    The Sunday Times is really going after Farage today. The £5 million bung and the dodgy houses is now being joined by a whole host of naughtiness, which may not be just against the rules of Parliament, but actually illegal.

    A few comments here last week suggested that we had not heard all of the Farage corruption story, and that indeed does seem to be the case. I am not of the view that ReformUK (proprietor N P Farage) can survive his departure. So I think the implosion of the Nationalist Right may well be incoming. Mrs Badenoch is probably fairly gleeful, Sir Edward and the Labour Borg collective probably much less so.

    Its going to be a fun week... *Popcorn*

    It was me who obliquely referred to more scandals.

    One thing I would caution is that the Tories and Mrs Badenoch shouldn't be too gleeful is that some of the donors such as Mr Harbone have previously donated to the Tories.

    There's also a very messy libel case being brought by Mr Harbone against Ben Habib of Restore (formally of Reform) which also has the potential to get messy for the Tories, Boris Johnson in particular, and any Tory who was involved in the 2019 campaign.
    The Tories have already taken the hit for Boris. Anyting coming out will be a sideshow comared to Farage ending his career.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 21,426
    Cicero said:

    The Sunday Times is really going after Farage today. The £5 million bung and the dodgy houses is now being joined by a whole host of naughtiness, which may not be just against the rules of Parliament, but actually illegal.

    A few comments here last week suggested that we had not heard all of the Farage corruption story, and that indeed does seem to be the case. I am not of the view that ReformUK (proprietor N P Farage) can survive his departure. So I think the implosion of the Nationalist Right may well be incoming. Mrs Badenoch is probably fairly gleeful, Sir Edward and the Labour Borg collective probably much less so.

    Its going to be a fun week... *Popcorn*

    Faragists online are pushing the line that the establishment is out to get him and a Trump-like devotion to Nigel. I hope that doesn’t work so well in the UK with our more pluralistic media and political system.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 29,131

    HYUFD said:

    Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.

    ''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

    Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.

    It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.

    In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.

    Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.

    It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'

    https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15953425/Burnham-plots-homes-tax-raid-middle-clas.html'

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/tax/income/burnham-50pc-income-tax-rate-would-be-a-disaster/

    Hardly worth doing - raises an estimated extra £170m over the existing planned mansion tax. The Defence review alone needs £4.7bn.

    Burnham needs something more radical imo. I'd exempt principal residences (one per couple) and pension pots below a new LTA (say £1.5m), then tax all other wealth above a threshold of £0.5m at 1% pa. Apply the existing Deprivation of Capital and 'couples' rules - the rules that are happily applied to benefit claimants.

    Extend NI to all income, maybe by reducing employees NI rate and increasing the basic ICT rate.
    To exclude land, but to include all other wealth, is the polar opposite of what we should be doing.

    Shares etc are mobile and can be easily transferred out of the country. Land can not be.

    We should be taxing all land at 0.5% (including primary properties, but abolishing stamp duty and Council Tax), with secondary properties potentially at 1%

    Taxing other forms of wealth is not a very good idea and has been shown to fail time and again in practice wherever attempted.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 129,430

    Cicero said:

    The Sunday Times is really going after Farage today. The £5 million bung and the dodgy houses is now being joined by a whole host of naughtiness, which may not be just against the rules of Parliament, but actually illegal.

    A few comments here last week suggested that we had not heard all of the Farage corruption story, and that indeed does seem to be the case. I am not of the view that ReformUK (proprietor N P Farage) can survive his departure. So I think the implosion of the Nationalist Right may well be incoming. Mrs Badenoch is probably fairly gleeful, Sir Edward and the Labour Borg collective probably much less so.

    Its going to be a fun week... *Popcorn*

    It was me who obliquely referred to more scandals.

    One thing I would caution is that the Tories and Mrs Badenoch shouldn't be too gleeful is that some of the donors such as Mr Harbone have previously donated to the Tories.

    There's also a very messy libel case being brought by Mr Harbone against Ben Habib of Restore (formally of Reform) which also has the potential to get messy for the Tories, Boris Johnson in particular, and any Tory who was involved in the 2019 campaign.
    The Tories have already taken the hit for Boris. Anyting coming out will be a sideshow comared to Farage ending his career.
    They could take another hit, it is possible for both Farage and the Tories to be damaged.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 92,049
    Driver said:

    Cicero said:

    The Sunday Times is really going after Farage today. The £5 million bung and the dodgy houses is now being joined by a whole host of naughtiness, which may not be just against the rules of Parliament, but actually illegal.

    A few comments here last week suggested that we had not heard all of the Farage corruption story, and that indeed does seem to be the case. I am not of the view that ReformUK (proprietor N P Farage) can survive his departure. So I think the implosion of the Nationalist Right may well be incoming. Mrs Badenoch is probably fairly gleeful, Sir Edward and the Labour Borg collective probably much less so.

    Its going to be a fun week... *Popcorn*

    It was me who obliquely referred to more scandals.

    One thing I would caution is that the Tories and Mrs Badenoch shouldn't be too gleeful is that some of the donors such as Mr Harbone have previously donated to the Tories.

    There's also a very messy libel case being brought by Mr Harbone against Ben Habib of Restore (formally of Reform) which also has the potential to get messy for the Tories, Boris Johnson in particular, and any Tory who was involved in the 2019 campaign.
    Isn't Habib with Advance - last I heard they rejected merging with Restore?

    Also, formally/formerly.
    I thought Advance had shut down?

    It so confusing with these 87 different right wing parties, Restore, Reform, Advance, Reclaim, Retreat....there are more parties than Yaxley Lennon's nom de plumes
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 129,430
    edited 9:30AM

    HYUFD said:

    Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.

    ''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

    Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.

    It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.

    In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.

    Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.

    It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'

    https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15953425/Burnham-plots-homes-tax-raid-middle-clas.html'

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/tax/income/burnham-50pc-income-tax-rate-would-be-a-disaster/

    I don't believe, even in London, 4 bed houses are "relatively modest".

    Has a rather perverse interpretation of the word relative for that to hold.
    Some people also have a perverse interpretation of the word 'modest'
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 48,156
    Did I just hear Jenrick describing the Sunday Times as a Labour supporting paper? Wait till he hears how many times it supported a party & government of which he was a member!

    Election endorsements

    The paper endorsed the Conservative Party in the 2005, 2010, 2015, 2017 and 2019 UK general elections, before endorsing the Labour Party in the 2024 election.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 14,531

    Eabhal said:

    stodge said:

    HYUFD said:

    Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.

    ''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

    Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.

    It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.

    In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.

    Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.

    It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'

    https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15953425/Burnham-plots-homes-tax-raid-middle-clas.html'

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/tax/income/burnham-50pc-income-tax-rate-would-be-a-disaster/

    To be expected, the Mail and the Telegraph (hardly friends of this Government) have come out swinging.

    Yet we cannot go on as we are - Council Tax was a botched solution to the Poll Tax which did much to bring down one of your previous Prime Ministers.

    With no revaluations since 1991, it is riven with anomalies and more than anything else doesn't raise the sums local councils need to cover social care and other areas.

    First, let's call it what it is - it's a High Value Council Tax Surcharge (not what you have lazily called a "Mansion Tax")

    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/high-value-council-tax-surcharge/high-value-council-tax-surcharge

    It's worth stating for the vast majority of homeowners in this country the HVCTS won't mean anything - obviously, as with any tax, those who stand to pay more shout the loudest.

    The key point is this:

    Under the current system, the average band D charge for a typical family home across England is £2,280. That is £250 more per year than a £10 million property in Mayfair, based on the band H charge in the City of Westminster, currently pays. This surcharge will change that, implementing a significant reform to improve fairness within England’s property tax system.

    Taxing the "value" of properties isn't of course a million miles away from the Council Tax and had successive Governments implemented the necessary revaluations and added additional bands, we wouldn't need such a drastic response now.

    Also baffled by the idea it would gum up the property market. Housing gets all sorts of subsidies (IHT, CGT, perverse CT bands and discounts, even UC savings thresholds), which makes it incredibly attractive to hold onto. Taxing it based on value will help to unstick it - especially if Burnham finally bites the bullet and abolishes Stamp Duty too.
    The gap between mooting it and doing it is what kills the housing market. Fannying about for months puts everyone on hold who would risk unneccesarily paying a heap of Stamp Duty in the meantime.

    If you are going to do it, announce it overnight.
    Agree on stamp duty. But I don’t think that’s the case on a property tax - even just floating the idea is going to make housing less attractive as an investment.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 21,426
    edited 9:35AM

    HYUFD said:

    Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.

    ''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

    Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.

    It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.

    In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.

    Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.

    It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'

    https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15953425/Burnham-plots-homes-tax-raid-middle-clas.html'

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/tax/income/burnham-50pc-income-tax-rate-would-be-a-disaster/

    Hardly worth doing - raises an estimated extra £170m over the existing planned mansion tax. The Defence review alone needs £4.7bn.

    Burnham needs something more radical imo. I'd exempt principal residences (one per couple) and pension pots below a new LTA (say £1.5m), then tax all other wealth above a threshold of £0.5m at 1% pa. Apply the existing Deprivation of Capital and 'couples' rules - the rules that are happily applied to benefit claimants.

    Extend NI to all income, maybe by reducing employees NI rate and increasing the basic ICT rate.
    That immediately encourages everyone to buy a bigger principal residence and to put everything else into their pension pot, reducing what they pay in a wealth tax. Not a good system.
    No, it doesn't.

    1. There are a finite number of high-value properties. Say I have £10m total assets and live in a £2m house. I could look for a £10m house but... there aren't many around; they cost more to maintain and run; why would I want to tie all my wealth up in an illiquid asset?.

    2. As I said: reintroduce the pension Lifetime Allowance (LTA) set at £1.5m.

    You could raise other objections but they can all be dealt with.
    I can do improvements to my £2m house so it’s worth more. Maybe a basement extension? A bigger house does cost more to maintain and run, but that cost will be less than the tax I’d be saving. (It would also be a less obvious cost.)

    A Lifetime Allowance helps, but people will still be using that as much as possible, so a lot of the taxable wealth will disappear. There are also some practical problems with lifetime allowances and how they’re calculated.

    PS: I don’t actually own a £2m house. I own a “modest” maisonette, although it’s in London, so it is still worth gazillions.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 67,052
    edited 9:34AM

    HYUFD said:

    Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.

    ''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

    Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.

    It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.

    In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.

    Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.

    It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'

    https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15953425/Burnham-plots-homes-tax-raid-middle-clas.html'

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/tax/income/burnham-50pc-income-tax-rate-would-be-a-disaster/

    The "Mansion Tax" for properties over £2m is only forecast to raise about £400 million from 2028, whilst gumming up the property market (bad for growth) and raising the additional rate to 50p would probably raise £500 million but also drive high-income workers overseas (also bad for growth). The total of both is under £1bn. And the immediate hole in the DIP alone is £4.7bn.

    So, these are political taxes for the Labour base, and not serious economic revenue-raisers. And even then it's not one-way: these sorts of moves expose at least 50-60 seats to Conservative re-capture in the South in the 2029GE.
    I agree with you Casino (it happens!).

    The question is what would you do to cover the Defence £4.7bn (assuming you agree it's needed)?
    I would raise the basic and top rates by 2p in the pound. Edit: I should add that this, together with the welfare cuts, would fund the entire £28bn DIP in full and restore our armed forces to full credibility.

    You can't just do it cold. You have to lay the groundwork in speeches and with journalists and lead people over many months.

    Sadly, this is where we're at.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 129,430

    Driver said:

    Cicero said:

    The Sunday Times is really going after Farage today. The £5 million bung and the dodgy houses is now being joined by a whole host of naughtiness, which may not be just against the rules of Parliament, but actually illegal.

    A few comments here last week suggested that we had not heard all of the Farage corruption story, and that indeed does seem to be the case. I am not of the view that ReformUK (proprietor N P Farage) can survive his departure. So I think the implosion of the Nationalist Right may well be incoming. Mrs Badenoch is probably fairly gleeful, Sir Edward and the Labour Borg collective probably much less so.

    Its going to be a fun week... *Popcorn*

    It was me who obliquely referred to more scandals.

    One thing I would caution is that the Tories and Mrs Badenoch shouldn't be too gleeful is that some of the donors such as Mr Harbone have previously donated to the Tories.

    There's also a very messy libel case being brought by Mr Harbone against Ben Habib of Restore (formally of Reform) which also has the potential to get messy for the Tories, Boris Johnson in particular, and any Tory who was involved in the 2019 campaign.
    Isn't Habib with Advance - last I heard they rejected merging with Restore?

    Also, formally/formerly.
    I thought Advance had shut down?

    It so confusing with these 87 different right wing parties, Restore, Reform, Advance, Reclaim, Retreat....there are more parties than Yaxley Lennon's nom de plumes
    It's all so weird, Tommy Ten Names thinks Restore are far too racist.

    White supremacists with links to banned neo-Nazi groups are helping to fund Restore Britain.

    Rupert Lowe’s party could hold the balance of power in Thursday’s Makerfield by-election by splitting the Right-wing vote with Reform UK, clearing the way for Labour’s Andy Burnham to win.

    Some of Restore’s supporters are so openly racist that Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, the far-Right activist detained last week under counter-terrorism laws, has questioned whether the party is too extreme.

    Yaxley-Lennon, who uses the alias Tommy Robinson, challenged Mr Lowe to ask whether black people would be allowed to stand as parliamentary candidates for the party, or whether their skin colour would rule them out. Robinson suggested they should be able to stand


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2026/06/17/white-supremacists-fund-rupert-lowes-restore-party/
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 90,514

    World Club T20 and shorter ODIs among ICC options in radical overhaul of calendar

    ICC exploring fixed windows for each format

    Continental championships among ideas up for debate


    The International Cricket Council is exploring a radical overhaul of the global calendar with discussions surrounding multilateral series, the creation of continental championships, a World Club Championship for T20 franchises, fixed windows for each format and possible changes to the length of one-day internationals.

    Talks between the 12 full members will take place at the ICC’s annual general meeting in Edinburgh on Wednesday as part of a strategic review being managed by the consulting firm McKinsey.

    Sources say that while the process is at an early stage, the ICC is encouraging discussion of radical ideas with the aim of securing the long-term future of all three formats of international cricket – Test matches, T20s and ODIs – in the face of the threat posed by franchise leagues.

    The ICC’s future tours programme is fixed until next year, and beyond that events such as World Cups, the World Test Championship (WC) and series involving England, India and Australia are scheduled until 2031, so any changes would have to wait until after then.

    Sources say that after spending recent years focusing on the format of the WTC, the ICC now favours a more holistic, long-term approach, to build a framework to allow three international formats to thrive.

    In addition to fixed windows, with ODIs being played only in the 18 months leading up to a World Cup, for example, more radical ideas are being discussed including reducing the length of ODIs. The ICC is also exploring adding more events to its portfolio, with bilateral series not involving two of England, India and Australia having little commercial value.


    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2026/jul/05/world-club-t20-and-shorter-odis-among-icc-options-in-radical-overhaul-of-cricket-calendar

    ODIs will eventually be killed off completely. Replaced with global T20 league and many more T20 internationals. T20s are much better financially, you can put them on in the evenings as they only last 3hrs, players can play every other day, and you can still charge the same price as a test match or ODI.
    One proposal I did hear mooted a few years ago which I liked was to make the ODIs a 4 innings event.

    So team A bats first for 25 overs, then team B bats for 25 overs etc.

    That way you can get to see the likes of Buttler/Bethell etc bat twice in one day.
    I can see the attraction, but the work load for bowlers is still the issue. Max 10 overs (2x5) compared to the max 4 overs in T20. If the best bowlers end up bowling 8-10 overs at full tilt, for a seamer is quite a heavy workload and for spinners presurre on the shoulders / fingers. I am sure the big money from India want to maximise revenue by maximising games played, these spells of 2 overs here and there, physically the demands are far less, and can be ready to go again in a couple of days.
    How about 2 innings of 20 overs, then ?
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 51,319

    All this speculation about Burnham is fascinating, but pretty meaningless until he's actually got the job. Regardless of the hyperbole in the Mail and Telegraph, we don't have much of a clue about what he'll do (other than the devolution stuff) or how he'll perform.

    If I were to guess, I reckon his chances are about the same as England v. Mexico. I reckon there's around a 30% chance that England will overcome Mexico with ease. I reckon there's about the same 30% chance that Burnham will sweep all before him and be a popular PM who will comfortably win the next GE.

    But who is Mexico? Reform atm but if Farage crashes and burns it might be the Cons. Both wily opponents playing at home with the right-wing media being their equivalent of the Azteca.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 59,369
    I've yet to see any real evidence that Restore are a thing but a disintegrating Reform party is surely their best opportunity to prove me wrong.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 28,275

    HYUFD said:

    Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.

    ''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

    Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.

    It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.

    In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.

    Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.

    It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'

    https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15953425/Burnham-plots-homes-tax-raid-middle-clas.html'

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/tax/income/burnham-50pc-income-tax-rate-would-be-a-disaster/

    Hardly worth doing - raises an estimated extra £170m over the existing planned mansion tax. The Defence review alone needs £4.7bn.

    Burnham needs something more radical imo. I'd exempt principal residences (one per couple) and pension pots below a new LTA (say £1.5m), then tax all other wealth above a threshold of £0.5m at 1% pa. Apply the existing Deprivation of Capital and 'couples' rules - the rules that are happily applied to benefit claimants.

    Extend NI to all income, maybe by reducing employees NI rate and increasing the basic ICT rate.
    I asked yesterday why the government should favour house owners over renters and people who save with a pension wrapper rather than an ISA wrapper. Would be intrigued to know if there is any particular justification?
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 29,131
    MattW said:

    HYUFD said:

    Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.

    ''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

    Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.

    It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.

    In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.

    Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.

    It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'

    https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15953425/Burnham-plots-homes-tax-raid-middle-clas.html'

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/tax/income/burnham-50pc-income-tax-rate-would-be-a-disaster/

    Hardly worth doing - raises an estimated extra £170m over the existing planned mansion tax. The Defence review alone needs £4.7bn.

    Burnham needs something more radical imo. I'd exempt principal residences (one per couple) and pension pots below a new LTA (say £1.5m), then tax all other wealth above a threshold of £0.5m at 1% pa. Apply the existing Deprivation of Capital and 'couples' rules - the rules that are happily applied to benefit claimants.

    Extend NI to all income, maybe by reducing employees NI rate and increasing the basic ICT rate.
    That immediately encourages everyone to buy a bigger principal residence and to put everything else into their pension pot, reducing what they pay in a wealth tax. Not a good system.
    1% per annum of all privately held businesses? Ouch.

    What about corporate wealth? And corporately held property - do Grainger need to worry about their £3.1bn investment portfolio, which is iirc residential? What about the Duke of Westminster's portfolio in Mayfair?

    This will be immensely complex to avoid unintended consequences.
    I would not tax businesses or other wealth beyond property as I have said as it has terrible unintended consequences.

    But absolutely I would expect the Duke of Westminster's portfolio to pay 1% per annum in tax under my proposal (0.5% for primary residences, 1% for all other properties) - why should it not be taxed?

    If its making money from land, it should be paying towards the upkeep of the country that makes that viable.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 37,332
    edited 9:36AM

    HYUFD said:

    Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.

    ''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

    Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.

    It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.

    In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.

    Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.

    It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'

    https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15953425/Burnham-plots-homes-tax-raid-middle-clas.html'

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/tax/income/burnham-50pc-income-tax-rate-would-be-a-disaster/

    Hardly worth doing - raises an estimated extra £170m over the existing planned mansion tax. The Defence review alone needs £4.7bn.

    Burnham needs something more radical imo. I'd exempt principal residences (one per couple) and pension pots below a new LTA (say £1.5m), then tax all other wealth above a threshold of £0.5m at 1% pa. Apply the existing Deprivation of Capital and 'couples' rules - the rules that are happily applied to benefit claimants.

    Extend NI to all income, maybe by reducing employees NI rate and increasing the basic ICT rate.
    To exclude land, but to include all other wealth, is the polar opposite of what we should be doing.

    Shares etc are mobile and can be easily transferred out of the country. Land can not be.

    We should be taxing all land at 0.5% (including primary properties, but abolishing stamp duty and Council Tax), with secondary properties potentially at 1%

    Taxing other forms of wealth is not a very good idea and has been shown to fail time and again in practice wherever attempted.
    I'm open to persuasion. But a couple of points:

    I am not suggesting excluding land, just one principal residence per single person or couple. All other land would be valued and taxed.

    There is no reason why foreign assets owned by British Citizens should be in some way exempt. (Of course people can commit fraud by failing to declare those assets but the penalties should be severe.)

    IHT manages to deal with this, as does the benefits system.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 33,874

    HYUFD said:

    Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.

    ''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

    Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.

    It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.

    In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.

    Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.

    It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'

    https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15953425/Burnham-plots-homes-tax-raid-middle-clas.html'

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/tax/income/burnham-50pc-income-tax-rate-would-be-a-disaster/

    The "Mansion Tax" for properties over £2m is only forecast to raise about £400 million from 2028, whilst gumming up the property market (bad for growth) and raising the additional rate to 50p would probably raise £500 million but also drive high-income workers overseas (also bad for growth). The total of both is under £1bn. And the immediate hole in the DIP alone is £4.7bn.

    So, these are political taxes for the Labour base, and not serious economic revenue-raisers. And even then it's not one-way: these sorts of moves expose at least 50-60 seats to Conservative re-capture in the South in the 2029GE.
    Why would a change in a tiny (rounding error scale) percentage of Council Taxes gum up the property market? Has such a change ever done so before? When?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 60,752

    Cicero said:

    The Sunday Times is really going after Farage today. The £5 million bung and the dodgy houses is now being joined by a whole host of naughtiness, which may not be just against the rules of Parliament, but actually illegal.

    A few comments here last week suggested that we had not heard all of the Farage corruption story, and that indeed does seem to be the case. I am not of the view that ReformUK (proprietor N P Farage) can survive his departure. So I think the implosion of the Nationalist Right may well be incoming. Mrs Badenoch is probably fairly gleeful, Sir Edward and the Labour Borg collective probably much less so.

    Its going to be a fun week... *Popcorn*

    It was me who obliquely referred to more scandals.

    One thing I would caution is that the Tories and Mrs Badenoch shouldn't be too gleeful is that some of the donors such as Mr Harbone have previously donated to the Tories.

    There's also a very messy libel case being brought by Mr Harbone against Ben Habib of Restore (formally of Reform) which also has the potential to get messy for the Tories, Boris Johnson in particular, and any Tory who was involved in the 2019 campaign.
    The Tories have already taken the hit for Boris. Anyting coming out will be a sideshow comared to Farage ending his career.
    They could take another hit, it is possible for both Farage and the Tories to be damaged.
    Boris is the past; anything damaging him probably demonstrates clear blue water between who the Tories were and who they are.

    Reform have not suffered the sort of hit the Tories got in 2024. Yet.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 21,426

    Driver said:

    Cicero said:

    The Sunday Times is really going after Farage today. The £5 million bung and the dodgy houses is now being joined by a whole host of naughtiness, which may not be just against the rules of Parliament, but actually illegal.

    A few comments here last week suggested that we had not heard all of the Farage corruption story, and that indeed does seem to be the case. I am not of the view that ReformUK (proprietor N P Farage) can survive his departure. So I think the implosion of the Nationalist Right may well be incoming. Mrs Badenoch is probably fairly gleeful, Sir Edward and the Labour Borg collective probably much less so.

    Its going to be a fun week... *Popcorn*

    It was me who obliquely referred to more scandals.

    One thing I would caution is that the Tories and Mrs Badenoch shouldn't be too gleeful is that some of the donors such as Mr Harbone have previously donated to the Tories.

    There's also a very messy libel case being brought by Mr Harbone against Ben Habib of Restore (formally of Reform) which also has the potential to get messy for the Tories, Boris Johnson in particular, and any Tory who was involved in the 2019 campaign.
    Isn't Habib with Advance - last I heard they rejected merging with Restore?

    Also, formally/formerly.
    I thought Advance had shut down?

    It so confusing with these 87 different right wing parties, Restore, Reform, Advance, Reclaim, Retreat....there are more parties than Yaxley Lennon's nom de plumes
    It's all so weird, Tommy Ten Names thinks Restore are far too racist.

    White supremacists with links to banned neo-Nazi groups are helping to fund Restore Britain.

    Rupert Lowe’s party could hold the balance of power in Thursday’s Makerfield by-election by splitting the Right-wing vote with Reform UK, clearing the way for Labour’s Andy Burnham to win.

    Some of Restore’s supporters are so openly racist that Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, the far-Right activist detained last week under counter-terrorism laws, has questioned whether the party is too extreme.

    Yaxley-Lennon, who uses the alias Tommy Robinson, challenged Mr Lowe to ask whether black people would be allowed to stand as parliamentary candidates for the party, or whether their skin colour would rule them out. Robinson suggested they should be able to stand


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2026/06/17/white-supremacists-fund-rupert-lowes-restore-party/
    Robinson has pivoted from hating black people to hating Muslims.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 37,332

    HYUFD said:

    Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.

    ''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

    Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.

    It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.

    In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.

    Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.

    It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'

    https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15953425/Burnham-plots-homes-tax-raid-middle-clas.html'

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/tax/income/burnham-50pc-income-tax-rate-would-be-a-disaster/

    Hardly worth doing - raises an estimated extra £170m over the existing planned mansion tax. The Defence review alone needs £4.7bn.

    Burnham needs something more radical imo. I'd exempt principal residences (one per couple) and pension pots below a new LTA (say £1.5m), then tax all other wealth above a threshold of £0.5m at 1% pa. Apply the existing Deprivation of Capital and 'couples' rules - the rules that are happily applied to benefit claimants.

    Extend NI to all income, maybe by reducing employees NI rate and increasing the basic ICT rate.
    I asked yesterday why the government should favour house owners over renters and people who save with a pension wrapper rather than an ISA wrapper. Would be intrigued to know if there is any particular justification?
    Not sure about your favouring house owners over renters? Given this is about a wealth tax most renters have no significant assets. Thos that do and still choose to rent, well that's up to them.

    Pensions v ISAs? Pensions limit access before 55. Since we want people to fund their own retirement as far as possible, it seems right to give pensions preferential treatment.

    Actually, I'd abolish ISAs which only really benefit the wealthy.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 92,049
    edited 9:50AM

    Driver said:

    Cicero said:

    The Sunday Times is really going after Farage today. The £5 million bung and the dodgy houses is now being joined by a whole host of naughtiness, which may not be just against the rules of Parliament, but actually illegal.

    A few comments here last week suggested that we had not heard all of the Farage corruption story, and that indeed does seem to be the case. I am not of the view that ReformUK (proprietor N P Farage) can survive his departure. So I think the implosion of the Nationalist Right may well be incoming. Mrs Badenoch is probably fairly gleeful, Sir Edward and the Labour Borg collective probably much less so.

    Its going to be a fun week... *Popcorn*

    It was me who obliquely referred to more scandals.

    One thing I would caution is that the Tories and Mrs Badenoch shouldn't be too gleeful is that some of the donors such as Mr Harbone have previously donated to the Tories.

    There's also a very messy libel case being brought by Mr Harbone against Ben Habib of Restore (formally of Reform) which also has the potential to get messy for the Tories, Boris Johnson in particular, and any Tory who was involved in the 2019 campaign.
    Isn't Habib with Advance - last I heard they rejected merging with Restore?

    Also, formally/formerly.
    I thought Advance had shut down?

    It so confusing with these 87 different right wing parties, Restore, Reform, Advance, Reclaim, Retreat....there are more parties than Yaxley Lennon's nom de plumes
    It's all so weird, Tommy Ten Names thinks Restore are far too racist.

    White supremacists with links to banned neo-Nazi groups are helping to fund Restore Britain.

    Rupert Lowe’s party could hold the balance of power in Thursday’s Makerfield by-election by splitting the Right-wing vote with Reform UK, clearing the way for Labour’s Andy Burnham to win.

    Some of Restore’s supporters are so openly racist that Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, the far-Right activist detained last week under counter-terrorism laws, has questioned whether the party is too extreme.

    Yaxley-Lennon, who uses the alias Tommy Robinson, challenged Mr Lowe to ask whether black people would be allowed to stand as parliamentary candidates for the party, or whether their skin colour would rule them out. Robinson suggested they should be able to stand


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2026/06/17/white-supremacists-fund-rupert-lowes-restore-party/
    Robinson has pivoted from hating black people to hating Muslims.
    Not to think too deeply about Robinson's world views, but I think you have it the wrong way around.

    His EDL days, two of his best mates was a black guy and a Sikh guy who he knew from football hooliganism. His primary focus has always from the start anti-Muslim (he started EDL after the Islamist stunts like poppy burning and anti arm forces), but now dips into anti-African migrants.

    But I wouldn't go too deep on the world according to Tommy, as now a big movitation appears to be how do I generate money to fund my lifestyle.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 51,319

    Did I just hear Jenrick describing the Sunday Times as a Labour supporting paper? Wait till he hears how many times it supported a party & government of which he was a member!

    Election endorsements

    The paper endorsed the Conservative Party in the 2005, 2010, 2015, 2017 and 2019 UK general elections, before endorsing the Labour Party in the 2024 election.

    The ST and T normally hunt the left. But that's great if they have the desire/bandwidth to rough up Nigel Farage too. I only want what's worst for him.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 15,755
    DavidL said:

    I've yet to see any real evidence that Restore are a thing but a disintegrating Reform party is surely their best opportunity to prove me wrong.

    Big Roop is going on the Human Big Toe's fucking terrible podcast. That's the Fields Medal for right wing shitbags and an honour that has conspicuously not been extended to Big Nige or Olukemi.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 14,531
    edited 9:51AM
    A

    HYUFD said:

    Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.

    ''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

    Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.

    It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.

    In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.

    Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.

    It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'

    https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15953425/Burnham-plots-homes-tax-raid-middle-clas.html'

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/tax/income/burnham-50pc-income-tax-rate-would-be-a-disaster/

    Hardly worth doing - raises an estimated extra £170m over the existing planned mansion tax. The Defence review alone needs £4.7bn.

    Burnham needs something more radical imo. I'd exempt principal residences (one per couple) and pension pots below a new LTA (say £1.5m), then tax all other wealth above a threshold of £0.5m at 1% pa. Apply the existing Deprivation of Capital and 'couples' rules - the rules that are happily applied to benefit claimants.

    Extend NI to all income, maybe by reducing employees NI rate and increasing the basic ICT rate.
    I asked yesterday why the government should favour house owners over renters and people who save with a pension wrapper rather than an ISA wrapper. Would be intrigued to know if there is any particular justification?
    Not sure about your favouring house owners over renters? Given this is about a wealth tax most renters have no significant assets. Thos that do and still choose to rent, well that's up to them.

    Pensions v ISAs? Pensions limit access before 55. Since we want people to fund their own retirement as far as possible, it seems right to give pensions preferential treatment.

    Actually, I'd abolish ISAs which only really benefit the wealthy.
    Abolishing ISAs when there is no CGT on primary residence just makes housing even more attractive than it already is.

    And to be more precise, ISAs benefit the wealthy and/or those on high incomes. I think the right balance is £10k per year (if you're saving more than that you're on a very high income), with a pot limit of perhaps £100k (again, average savings in the UK are about £20k).
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 28,275

    HYUFD said:

    Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.

    ''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

    Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.

    It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.

    In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.

    Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.

    It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'

    https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15953425/Burnham-plots-homes-tax-raid-middle-clas.html'

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/tax/income/burnham-50pc-income-tax-rate-would-be-a-disaster/

    Hardly worth doing - raises an estimated extra £170m over the existing planned mansion tax. The Defence review alone needs £4.7bn.

    Burnham needs something more radical imo. I'd exempt principal residences (one per couple) and pension pots below a new LTA (say £1.5m), then tax all other wealth above a threshold of £0.5m at 1% pa. Apply the existing Deprivation of Capital and 'couples' rules - the rules that are happily applied to benefit claimants.

    Extend NI to all income, maybe by reducing employees NI rate and increasing the basic ICT rate.
    I asked yesterday why the government should favour house owners over renters and people who save with a pension wrapper rather than an ISA wrapper. Would be intrigued to know if there is any particular justification?
    Not sure about your favouring house owners over renters? Given this is about a wealth tax most renters have no significant assets. Thos that do and still choose to rent, well that's up to them.

    Pensions v ISAs? Pensions limit access before 55. Since we want people to fund their own retirement as far as possible, it seems right to give pensions preferential treatment.

    Actually, I'd abolish ISAs which only really benefit the wealthy.
    It is not about most renters, but those with assets. You are proposing the government taxes a renter with £1m in ISAs an extra £5000 a year, yet a house owner with £1.5m residence and £1.5m pension pot nothing. It is clearly unfair.

    As for pensions for ISAs, your argument perhaps holds up to a £0.5m pot, but beyond that the govt shouldn't need to encourage private pension saving, indeed it is better for the economy if they spend rather than save beyond that.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 37,332

    HYUFD said:

    Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.

    ''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

    Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.

    It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.

    In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.

    Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.

    It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'

    https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15953425/Burnham-plots-homes-tax-raid-middle-clas.html'

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/tax/income/burnham-50pc-income-tax-rate-would-be-a-disaster/

    Hardly worth doing - raises an estimated extra £170m over the existing planned mansion tax. The Defence review alone needs £4.7bn.

    Burnham needs something more radical imo. I'd exempt principal residences (one per couple) and pension pots below a new LTA (say £1.5m), then tax all other wealth above a threshold of £0.5m at 1% pa. Apply the existing Deprivation of Capital and 'couples' rules - the rules that are happily applied to benefit claimants.

    Extend NI to all income, maybe by reducing employees NI rate and increasing the basic ICT rate.
    That immediately encourages everyone to buy a bigger principal residence and to put everything else into their pension pot, reducing what they pay in a wealth tax. Not a good system.
    No, it doesn't.

    1. There are a finite number of high-value properties. Say I have £10m total assets and live in a £2m house. I could look for a £10m house but... there aren't many around; they cost more to maintain and run; why would I want to tie all my wealth up in an illiquid asset?.

    2. As I said: reintroduce the pension Lifetime Allowance (LTA) set at £1.5m.

    You could raise other objections but they can all be dealt with.
    I can do improvements to my £2m house so it’s worth more. Maybe a basement extension? A bigger house does cost more to maintain and run, but that cost will be less than the tax I’d be saving. (It would also be a less obvious cost.)

    A Lifetime Allowance helps, but people will still be using that as much as possible, so a lot of the taxable wealth will disappear. There are also some practical problems with lifetime allowances and how they’re calculated.

    PS: I don’t actually own a £2m house. I own a “modest” maisonette, although it’s in London, so it is still worth gazillions.
    And as CoE I'd be happy to let people squirrel some of their wealth away in home improvements and max out their pension pots. The former injects more demand into the economy, the latter means they can fund their own old age care in future.

    With a threshold of £1m say for personal wealth excluding principal residence and pension pot, you're looking at c.600k people with an aggregate wealth of about £3 trillion. 1% pa tax on that is a very useful £30bn - more than pays for the Defence review. It would be the price of British Citizenship - living abroad or assets abroad would not be an exemption.
  • theakestheakes Posts: 992
    Loads of anti Burnham rhetoric on here, are they all from the right?
    Really nobody knows what will happen, media are just looking for stories and we are idiots if we follow what is said at moment.
    Let the man take over and use the summer to prepare for September.
    He4 cannot be worse than the succession of prime ministers we have had from the left and the RIGHT.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 37,332

    HYUFD said:

    Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.

    ''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

    Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.

    It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.

    In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.

    Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.

    It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'

    https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15953425/Burnham-plots-homes-tax-raid-middle-clas.html'

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/tax/income/burnham-50pc-income-tax-rate-would-be-a-disaster/

    Hardly worth doing - raises an estimated extra £170m over the existing planned mansion tax. The Defence review alone needs £4.7bn.

    Burnham needs something more radical imo. I'd exempt principal residences (one per couple) and pension pots below a new LTA (say £1.5m), then tax all other wealth above a threshold of £0.5m at 1% pa. Apply the existing Deprivation of Capital and 'couples' rules - the rules that are happily applied to benefit claimants.

    Extend NI to all income, maybe by reducing employees NI rate and increasing the basic ICT rate.
    I asked yesterday why the government should favour house owners over renters and people who save with a pension wrapper rather than an ISA wrapper. Would be intrigued to know if there is any particular justification?
    Not sure about your favouring house owners over renters? Given this is about a wealth tax most renters have no significant assets. Thos that do and still choose to rent, well that's up to them.

    Pensions v ISAs? Pensions limit access before 55. Since we want people to fund their own retirement as far as possible, it seems right to give pensions preferential treatment.

    Actually, I'd abolish ISAs which only really benefit the wealthy.
    It is not about most renters, but those with assets. You are proposing the government taxes a renter with £1m in ISAs an extra £5000 a year, yet a house owner with £1.5m residence and £1.5m pension pot nothing. It is clearly unfair.

    As for pensions for ISAs, your argument perhaps holds up to a £0.5m pot, but beyond that the govt shouldn't need to encourage private pension saving, indeed it is better for the economy if they spend rather than save beyond that.
    You say it's unfair but the existing rules for IHT are similar.

    With pensions a £0.5m will get you an index linked pension of £25k - £30k pa. So below average earnings. Seems a bit harsh to me but the principal is the same.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 90,514
    Surprising lack of coverage of his disappearance after collapsing.

    Mitch McConnell remaining technically alive for an extra three weeks because of a manipulative procedural maneuver is exactly how he would have wanted to go out.
    https://x.com/davidzmorris/status/2073584779123990562
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 37,332
    Dura_Ace said:

    DavidL said:

    I've yet to see any real evidence that Restore are a thing but a disintegrating Reform party is surely their best opportunity to prove me wrong.

    Big Roop is going on the Human Big Toe's fucking terrible podcast. That's the Fields Medal for right wing shitbags and an honour that has conspicuously not been extended to Big Nige or Olukemi.
    My Duraglese is letting me down again. Who's the Human Big Toe? And should I care?
  • TazTaz Posts: 29,136
    edited 9:59AM

    Driver said:

    Cicero said:

    The Sunday Times is really going after Farage today. The £5 million bung and the dodgy houses is now being joined by a whole host of naughtiness, which may not be just against the rules of Parliament, but actually illegal.

    A few comments here last week suggested that we had not heard all of the Farage corruption story, and that indeed does seem to be the case. I am not of the view that ReformUK (proprietor N P Farage) can survive his departure. So I think the implosion of the Nationalist Right may well be incoming. Mrs Badenoch is probably fairly gleeful, Sir Edward and the Labour Borg collective probably much less so.

    Its going to be a fun week... *Popcorn*

    It was me who obliquely referred to more scandals.

    One thing I would caution is that the Tories and Mrs Badenoch shouldn't be too gleeful is that some of the donors such as Mr Harbone have previously donated to the Tories.

    There's also a very messy libel case being brought by Mr Harbone against Ben Habib of Restore (formally of Reform) which also has the potential to get messy for the Tories, Boris Johnson in particular, and any Tory who was involved in the 2019 campaign.
    Isn't Habib with Advance - last I heard they rejected merging with Restore?

    Also, formally/formerly.
    I thought Advance had shut down?

    It so confusing with these 87 different right wing parties, Restore, Reform, Advance, Reclaim, Retreat....there are more parties than Yaxley Lennon's nom de plumes
    It's all so weird, Tommy Ten Names thinks Restore are far too racist.

    White supremacists with links to banned neo-Nazi groups are helping to fund Restore Britain.

    Rupert Lowe’s party could hold the balance of power in Thursday’s Makerfield by-election by splitting the Right-wing vote with Reform UK, clearing the way for Labour’s Andy Burnham to win.

    Some of Restore’s supporters are so openly racist that Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, the far-Right activist detained last week under counter-terrorism laws, has questioned whether the party is too extreme.

    Yaxley-Lennon, who uses the alias Tommy Robinson, challenged Mr Lowe to ask whether black people would be allowed to stand as parliamentary candidates for the party, or whether their skin colour would rule them out. Robinson suggested they should be able to stand


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2026/06/17/white-supremacists-fund-rupert-lowes-restore-party/
    Robinson has pivoted from hating black people to hating Muslims.
    No

    He’s always been islamophobic but that’s it.

    Back in his days a member of the MIG firm he ran with and got on with plenty of black and other races.

    His former best mate, Kevin Carroll, has a mixed race daughter.

    The EDL was born as a response to a protest by an Islamic group in Luton against the Army. Mid 2000’s
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 37,332
    Sorry, I can't spend all day on here answering questions about my tax proposals - I've got Andy on the phone, wants to speak to me about a job - comes with a flat in Westminster apparently.

    Byes for now

    Ed
  • TazTaz Posts: 29,136
    theakes said:

    Loads of anti Burnham rhetoric on here, are they all from the right?
    Really nobody knows what will happen, media are just looking for stories and we are idiots if we follow what is said at moment.
    Let the man take over and use the summer to prepare for September.
    He4 cannot be worse than the succession of prime ministers we have had from the left and the RIGHT.

    Well I thought that about SKS when I reluctantly voted labour in 2024

    I was wrong.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 14,531
    edited 10:02AM
    theakes said:

    Loads of anti Burnham rhetoric on here, are they all from the right?
    Really nobody knows what will happen, media are just looking for stories and we are idiots if we follow what is said at moment.
    Let the man take over and use the summer to prepare for September.
    He4 cannot be worse than the succession of prime ministers we have had from the left and the RIGHT.

    There is also strong undercurrent of scepticism from the London/University town left wing who find themselves not the centre of attention for once. I think that will be a bigger challenge for Burnham than the histrionics of the Mail/Telegraph, which is already baked in.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 129,430
    Taz said:

    Driver said:

    Cicero said:

    The Sunday Times is really going after Farage today. The £5 million bung and the dodgy houses is now being joined by a whole host of naughtiness, which may not be just against the rules of Parliament, but actually illegal.

    A few comments here last week suggested that we had not heard all of the Farage corruption story, and that indeed does seem to be the case. I am not of the view that ReformUK (proprietor N P Farage) can survive his departure. So I think the implosion of the Nationalist Right may well be incoming. Mrs Badenoch is probably fairly gleeful, Sir Edward and the Labour Borg collective probably much less so.

    Its going to be a fun week... *Popcorn*

    It was me who obliquely referred to more scandals.

    One thing I would caution is that the Tories and Mrs Badenoch shouldn't be too gleeful is that some of the donors such as Mr Harbone have previously donated to the Tories.

    There's also a very messy libel case being brought by Mr Harbone against Ben Habib of Restore (formally of Reform) which also has the potential to get messy for the Tories, Boris Johnson in particular, and any Tory who was involved in the 2019 campaign.
    Isn't Habib with Advance - last I heard they rejected merging with Restore?

    Also, formally/formerly.
    I thought Advance had shut down?

    It so confusing with these 87 different right wing parties, Restore, Reform, Advance, Reclaim, Retreat....there are more parties than Yaxley Lennon's nom de plumes
    It's all so weird, Tommy Ten Names thinks Restore are far too racist.

    White supremacists with links to banned neo-Nazi groups are helping to fund Restore Britain.

    Rupert Lowe’s party could hold the balance of power in Thursday’s Makerfield by-election by splitting the Right-wing vote with Reform UK, clearing the way for Labour’s Andy Burnham to win.

    Some of Restore’s supporters are so openly racist that Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, the far-Right activist detained last week under counter-terrorism laws, has questioned whether the party is too extreme.

    Yaxley-Lennon, who uses the alias Tommy Robinson, challenged Mr Lowe to ask whether black people would be allowed to stand as parliamentary candidates for the party, or whether their skin colour would rule them out. Robinson suggested they should be able to stand


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2026/06/17/white-supremacists-fund-rupert-lowes-restore-party/
    Robinson has pivoted from hating black people to hating Muslims.
    No

    He’s always been islamophobic but that’s it.

    Back in his days a member of the MIG firm he ran with and got on with plenty of black and other races.

    His former best mate, Kevin Carroll, has a mixed race daughter.

    The EDL was born as a response to a protest by an Islamic group in Luton against the Army. Mid 2000’s
    Nah, he's causes grief for black people too.

    Family in fear after Tommy Robinson shares video of black man with white granddaughters

    Exclusive: Olajuwon Ayeni racially abused and falsely labelled a paedophile as far right weaponises clip of family in park


    A family say their lives have been ruined after a video of a black man and his brother playing in the park with his white granddaughters was shared by Tommy Robinson and weaponised by the far right.

    Olajuwon Ayeni, a musician from Redcar, North Yorkshire, has been racially abused and falsely labelled a paedophile in the week since the family video was stolen from the TikTok account of his wife, Natalie, whom he married five years ago, and shared by extremists online.

    On Tuesday, the couple’s local MP, Anna Turley, was forced to write a letter providing a reference of good character for Ayeni when he was suspended by his management after the online disinformation.

    “I’m devastated to receive the email from my management,” Ayeni said. “Music is my life. My social media will be damaged, my career will be tarnished … but I am determined to show the truth and hopefully clear it up.”

    He and Natalie say they have been living in fear since being threatened in the street after Robinson shared the video with his 1.4 million followers. The far-right activist wrote on his X account: “Wtf is even going on here? Where are the parents?!”


    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/aug/20/family-in-fear-after-tommy-robinson-shares-video-of-black-man-with-white-granddaughters
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 25,741

    Driver said:

    Cicero said:

    The Sunday Times is really going after Farage today. The £5 million bung and the dodgy houses is now being joined by a whole host of naughtiness, which may not be just against the rules of Parliament, but actually illegal.

    A few comments here last week suggested that we had not heard all of the Farage corruption story, and that indeed does seem to be the case. I am not of the view that ReformUK (proprietor N P Farage) can survive his departure. So I think the implosion of the Nationalist Right may well be incoming. Mrs Badenoch is probably fairly gleeful, Sir Edward and the Labour Borg collective probably much less so.

    Its going to be a fun week... *Popcorn*

    It was me who obliquely referred to more scandals.

    One thing I would caution is that the Tories and Mrs Badenoch shouldn't be too gleeful is that some of the donors such as Mr Harbone have previously donated to the Tories.

    There's also a very messy libel case being brought by Mr Harbone against Ben Habib of Restore (formally of Reform) which also has the potential to get messy for the Tories, Boris Johnson in particular, and any Tory who was involved in the 2019 campaign.
    Isn't Habib with Advance - last I heard they rejected merging with Restore?

    Also, formally/formerly.
    I thought Advance had shut down?

    It so confusing with these 87 different right wing parties, Restore, Reform, Advance, Reclaim, Retreat....there are more parties than Yaxley Lennon's nom de plumes
    It's all so weird, Tommy Ten Names thinks Restore are far too racist.

    White supremacists with links to banned neo-Nazi groups are helping to fund Restore Britain.

    Rupert Lowe’s party could hold the balance of power in Thursday’s Makerfield by-election by splitting the Right-wing vote with Reform UK, clearing the way for Labour’s Andy Burnham to win.

    Some of Restore’s supporters are so openly racist that Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, the far-Right activist detained last week under counter-terrorism laws, has questioned whether the party is too extreme.

    Yaxley-Lennon, who uses the alias Tommy Robinson, challenged Mr Lowe to ask whether black people would be allowed to stand as parliamentary candidates for the party, or whether their skin colour would rule them out. Robinson suggested they should be able to stand


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2026/06/17/white-supremacists-fund-rupert-lowes-restore-party/
    Robinson has pivoted from hating black people to hating Muslims.
    Has he converted to Hinduism?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 92,049
    edited 10:05AM
    A barrister who was kicked out of the profession after falsely claiming he attended the University of Oxford during a job interview has won a High Court appeal against the decision.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cp8r457plg9o

    Why would anybody lie about going to such a second rate university? Also claims studied medicine in 2 years....should have had warning alarms going off.

    More seriously, he has told an absolute load of lies e.g. playing cricket for various high profile clubs. How dishonest do you have to be to actually get kicked out of the profession?
  • TazTaz Posts: 29,136
    As we were discussing it earlier

    A review of one of the fans on sale via social media

    About as good as those ‘shadowhawk torches’ that used to be scammed on social media as being used by the military

    https://youtu.be/2KvGHRSVTUk?is=zwc2Aqt25VH2RKQU
  • TazTaz Posts: 29,136

    Taz said:

    Driver said:

    Cicero said:

    The Sunday Times is really going after Farage today. The £5 million bung and the dodgy houses is now being joined by a whole host of naughtiness, which may not be just against the rules of Parliament, but actually illegal.

    A few comments here last week suggested that we had not heard all of the Farage corruption story, and that indeed does seem to be the case. I am not of the view that ReformUK (proprietor N P Farage) can survive his departure. So I think the implosion of the Nationalist Right may well be incoming. Mrs Badenoch is probably fairly gleeful, Sir Edward and the Labour Borg collective probably much less so.

    Its going to be a fun week... *Popcorn*

    It was me who obliquely referred to more scandals.

    One thing I would caution is that the Tories and Mrs Badenoch shouldn't be too gleeful is that some of the donors such as Mr Harbone have previously donated to the Tories.

    There's also a very messy libel case being brought by Mr Harbone against Ben Habib of Restore (formally of Reform) which also has the potential to get messy for the Tories, Boris Johnson in particular, and any Tory who was involved in the 2019 campaign.
    Isn't Habib with Advance - last I heard they rejected merging with Restore?

    Also, formally/formerly.
    I thought Advance had shut down?

    It so confusing with these 87 different right wing parties, Restore, Reform, Advance, Reclaim, Retreat....there are more parties than Yaxley Lennon's nom de plumes
    It's all so weird, Tommy Ten Names thinks Restore are far too racist.

    White supremacists with links to banned neo-Nazi groups are helping to fund Restore Britain.

    Rupert Lowe’s party could hold the balance of power in Thursday’s Makerfield by-election by splitting the Right-wing vote with Reform UK, clearing the way for Labour’s Andy Burnham to win.

    Some of Restore’s supporters are so openly racist that Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, the far-Right activist detained last week under counter-terrorism laws, has questioned whether the party is too extreme.

    Yaxley-Lennon, who uses the alias Tommy Robinson, challenged Mr Lowe to ask whether black people would be allowed to stand as parliamentary candidates for the party, or whether their skin colour would rule them out. Robinson suggested they should be able to stand


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2026/06/17/white-supremacists-fund-rupert-lowes-restore-party/
    Robinson has pivoted from hating black people to hating Muslims.
    No

    He’s always been islamophobic but that’s it.

    Back in his days a member of the MIG firm he ran with and got on with plenty of black and other races.

    His former best mate, Kevin Carroll, has a mixed race daughter.

    The EDL was born as a response to a protest by an Islamic group in Luton against the Army. Mid 2000’s
    Nah, he's causes grief for black people too.

    Family in fear after Tommy Robinson shares video of black man with white granddaughters

    Exclusive: Olajuwon Ayeni racially abused and falsely labelled a paedophile as far right weaponises clip of family in park


    A family say their lives have been ruined after a video of a black man and his brother playing in the park with his white granddaughters was shared by Tommy Robinson and weaponised by the far right.

    Olajuwon Ayeni, a musician from Redcar, North Yorkshire, has been racially abused and falsely labelled a paedophile in the week since the family video was stolen from the TikTok account of his wife, Natalie, whom he married five years ago, and shared by extremists online.

    On Tuesday, the couple’s local MP, Anna Turley, was forced to write a letter providing a reference of good character for Ayeni when he was suspended by his management after the online disinformation.

    “I’m devastated to receive the email from my management,” Ayeni said. “Music is my life. My social media will be damaged, my career will be tarnished … but I am determined to show the truth and hopefully clear it up.”

    He and Natalie say they have been living in fear since being threatened in the street after Robinson shared the video with his 1.4 million followers. The far-right activist wrote on his X account: “Wtf is even going on here? Where are the parents?!”


    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/aug/20/family-in-fear-after-tommy-robinson-shares-video-of-black-man-with-white-granddaughters
    Not really comparable. In this case he shared a video. He’s actively campaigning against Muslims and islam.

    I stand by what I said. He’s an out and out Islamophobe.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 92,049
    Taz said:

    As we were discussing it earlier

    A review of one of the fans on sale via social media

    About as good as those ‘shadowhawk torches’ that used to be scammed on social media as being used by the military

    https://youtu.be/2KvGHRSVTUk?is=zwc2Aqt25VH2RKQU

    Unless they have managed to bend the rules of physics, something that size can never work.
  • TazTaz Posts: 29,136

    Sorry, I can't spend all day on here answering questions about my tax proposals - I've got Andy on the phone, wants to speak to me about a job - comes with a flat in Westminster apparently.

    Byes for now

    Ed

    Tell him not to hire Gary Stevenson.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 37,596
    edited 10:10AM

    A barrister who was kicked out of the profession after falsely claiming he attended the University of Oxford during a job interview has won a High Court appeal against the decision.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cp8r457plg9o

    Why would anybody lie about going to such a second rate university? Also claims studied medicine in 2 years....should have had warning alarms going off.

    More seriously, he has told an absolute load of lies e.g. playing cricket for various high profile clubs. How dishonest do you have to be to actually get kicked out of the profession?

    Morning all!

    Somewhere among my (indirect) ancestors is a solicitor who served 16 months in prison for fraud in the 1890's and apparently went straight back to practice.
  • TazTaz Posts: 29,136

    Taz said:

    As we were discussing it earlier

    A review of one of the fans on sale via social media

    About as good as those ‘shadowhawk torches’ that used to be scammed on social media as being used by the military

    https://youtu.be/2KvGHRSVTUk?is=zwc2Aqt25VH2RKQU

    Unless they have managed to bend the rules of physics, something that size can never work.
    And ye cannae change the laws of physics captain.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 33,874
    edited 10:15AM
    A genuine question forthe Brains Trust,

    Genuine interest - has anyone seen an anti-wheelchair barrier like this one *? It is one of the most unusual beasts in the local barrier zoo. It was built in about 1975 to stop rat-runners on a route close to me, out of the kind of concrete blocks used at the time to keep vehicles from overrunning roundabouts. I recall being driven to infant school down here, and cycling the unmade road on my RSW14 before 1976.


    It is a public footpath so this is an unlawful obstruction, and the width blocks most mobility aids and some pushchairs. On one side is a popular local pub, and on the is a Coop mini-supermarket, so movement matters and there is no easy alternative.

    I can force it to be removed, but it needs consideration. That gate is to 10 acres of allotments, and they take their wheelbarrows through with planks on sideways and do not want bollards for that reason. I'll probably suggest replacing that gate on the left with 3 locking bollards at 1.5m spacing.

    * I only seen these in 2 places - out here, and in the Lenton area of Nottingham to make an LTN in the late 1970s. It looks like onme designer who moved jobs. You can drive over them (I tried in ~1987 for interest), but I would not do it in a car with modern tyres. My Polo Mark 1 could do it with a lightly held wheel as in heavy snow at about 1mph.
    https://maps.app.goo.gl/PSSJgk7nYMDRkbTA9
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 92,049
    edited 10:12AM
    Taz said:

    Sorry, I can't spend all day on here answering questions about my tax proposals - I've got Andy on the phone, wants to speak to me about a job - comes with a flat in Westminster apparently.

    Byes for now

    Ed

    Tell him not to hire Gary Stevenson.
    Another grifter with a fake backstory....I love his interview in Times where he claims wealth tax is for the ultra wealthy like him, except he isn't ultra wealthy is he. He had 2 years where he earned good money at a bank. And when his publisher cut off his funding for his YouTube channel as they had finished promoted his book, he claimed he needed his fans to help fund in order to continue the channel as was expensive (a camera person to film / edtior to produce content from his kitchen). People who are ultra wealthy don't need the begging bowl to fund somebody to film once a week video (for 6 months a year as he goes on vacation half the year).
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 90,514

    Dura_Ace said:

    DavidL said:

    I've yet to see any real evidence that Restore are a thing but a disintegrating Reform party is surely their best opportunity to prove me wrong.

    Big Roop is going on the Human Big Toe's fucking terrible podcast. That's the Fields Medal for right wing shitbags and an honour that has conspicuously not been extended to Big Nige or Olukemi.
    My Duraglese is letting me down again. Who's the Human Big Toe? And should I care?
    Rogan.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 6,400
    edited 10:19AM
    HYUFD said:

    Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.

    ''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

    Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.

    It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.

    In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.

    Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.

    It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'

    https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15953425/Burnham-plots-homes-tax-raid-middle-clas.html'

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/tax/income/burnham-50pc-income-tax-rate-would-be-a-disaster/

    Obviously nothing about cracking down on freeloaders and parasites or encouraging self-reliance.

    Just screwing the hard-working and enterprising even more and wasting the proceeds.

    As the Wall Street Journal once said, "Goodbye, Great Britain, it was nice knowing you".
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 37,596
    Fishing said:

    HYUFD said:

    Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.

    ''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

    Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.

    It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.

    In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.

    Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.

    It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'

    https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15953425/Burnham-plots-homes-tax-raid-middle-clas.html'

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/tax/income/burnham-50pc-income-tax-rate-would-be-a-disaster/

    Obviously nothing about cracking down on freeloaders and parasites or encouraging self-reliance.

    Just screwing the hard-working and enterprising even more and wasting the proceeds.

    As the Wall Street Journal once said, "Goodbye, Great Britain, it was nice knowing you".
    To be fair, 'something' has to be dome about house prices in the London and the Home Counties.
  • BlancheLivermoreBlancheLivermore Posts: 8,014

    HYUFD said:

    Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.

    ''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

    Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.

    It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.

    In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.

    Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.

    It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'

    https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15953425/Burnham-plots-homes-tax-raid-middle-clas.html'

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/tax/income/burnham-50pc-income-tax-rate-would-be-a-disaster/

    I don't believe, even in London, 4 bed houses are "relatively modest".

    Has a rather perverse interpretation of the word relative for that to hold.
    Some people also have a perverse interpretation of the word 'modest'
    And ‘subtle’
Sign In or Register to comment.