B1043 – Finance Bill 2016

Announcements
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    Different tax years...

    And it's showing income kept as a percentage against income paid. It isn't that hard.
    2016-17 is different to 2016-17? And you wonder why I don't trust your graphs and calculations.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    2016-17 is different to 2016-17? And you wonder why I don't trust your graphs and calculations.
    It was clearly a mistake. The graphs are sound if you bothers to check the calculations.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    Many of the measures in this Finance Bill seem eminently reasonable. However, I see no particular reason for the first time buyer allowance to be set at such a high rate, which is far above what an average Briton will be spending (with a average first home price of less than half the allowance at £308k). I do not see why the government should be subsidising the purchase of flashy homes for the fortunate. Furthermore, I do not see how this policy leads to an increase - of a 40% magnitude no less! - of annual public income deriving from stamp duty. Am I missing something here?
    The stamp duty threshold was raised to that level for two reasons..

    1) The average house price in London is close to £600k

    2) It's an existing threshold for the higher rate, hence easy to calculate.

    It's a cost to the state, not an increase in revenue.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    The stamp duty threshold was raised to that level for two reasons..

    1) The average house price in London is close to £600k

    2) It's an existing threshold for the higher rate, hence easy to calculate.

    It's a cost to the state, not an increase in revenue.
    Okay, but a small percentage of the population live in London, and I don't see why we should be making policies based on average London house prices when the same amount could buy you an extremely nice house in most parts of the country. Choosing to London (usually) entails a higher salary, and potentially having to rent for longer, and paying more tax in real terms is a price you pay. I don't see ease of calculation as a good argument.

    Also, this number is taken from the 'Public Income' portion of the spreadsheet, next to a lot of other revenues which make no sense as expenditures:

    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    Okay, but a small percentage of the population live in London, and I don't see why we should be making policies based on average London house prices when the same amount could buy you an extremely nice house in most parts of the country. Choosing to London (usually) entails a higher salary, and potentially having to rent for longer, and paying more tax in real terms is a price you pay. I don't see ease of calculation as a good argument.

    Also, this number is taken from the 'Public Income' portion of the spreadsheet, next to a lot of other revenues which make no sense as expenditures:

    Because as much as i dislike pandering to London i believe in a property owning democracy and London has a lot of aspirational would be home owners in it. Further, when applied to new builds it should spur development.

    Ah, the Chancellor should check that one.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    Many of the measures in this Finance Bill seem eminently reasonable. However, I see no particular reason for the first time buyer allowance to be set at such a high rate, which is far above what an average Briton will be spending (with a average first home price of less than half the allowance at £308k). I do not see why the government should be subsidising the purchase of flashy homes for the fortunate. Furthermore, I do not see how this policy leads to an increase - of a 40% magnitude no less! - of annual public income deriving from stamp duty. Am I missing something here?
    The Stamp Duty number is the summation of Stamp Duty Land Tax and Stamp Taxes on Shares per year, minus the expected loss of revenue of £3.4 billion from the changes. The increasing stamp duty revenue forecasts do not stem from this policy, but are forecasted by the OBR as such, minus the £3.4 billion.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Financier)
    The Stamp Duty number is the summation of Stamp Duty Land Tax and Stamp Taxes on Shares per year, minus the expected loss of revenue of £3.4 billion from the changes. The increasing stamp duty revenue forecasts do not stem from this policy, but are forecasted by the OBR as such, minus the £3.4 billion.
    ok, still seems extremely optimistic to me but I'm not about to challenge the OBR.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    The stamp duty threshold was raised to that level for two reasons..

    1) The average house price in London is close to £600k

    2) It's an existing threshold for the higher rate, hence easy to calculate.

    It's a cost to the state, not an increase in revenue.
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    Okay, but a small percentage of the population live in London, and I don't see why we should be making policies based on average London house prices when the same amount could buy you an extremely nice house in most parts of the country. Choosing to London (usually) entails a higher salary, and potentially having to rent for longer, and paying more tax in real terms is a price you pay. I don't see ease of calculation as a good argument.

    Also, this number is taken from the 'Public Income' portion of the spreadsheet, next to a lot of other revenues which make no sense as expenditures:

    (Original post by The Financier)
    The Stamp Duty number is the summation of Stamp Duty Land Tax and Stamp Taxes on Shares per year, minus the expected loss of revenue of £3.4 billion from the changes. The increasing stamp duty revenue forecasts do not stem from this policy, but are forecasted by the OBR as such, minus the £3.4 billion.
    Helping first time buyers should be based upon the cost of say a two bedroom property, not the average. It does nothing for those who can only rent in the short to medium term, and as with Help to Buy, does not build any more homes. It cannot be enforced for anyone who has property in a country without an accessible land registry, or indeed where one person in a couple owns land or property rather in joint names. So it favours those whose origins are in countries without property registers.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Assuming that Finance does not mean a return to pounds, shillings and pence for UKIP, I would be interested to know if similarly to the other parties not in Government, they are unlikely to support this Budget.
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Nay. The barnetlad said why

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I will be voting against this bill, I do not support individuals earning over £50000 paying a 45% income tax, and the Statement of Intent from the Department of Business, Innovation, and Skills has proven to be a lie because corporation tax has not been reduced as promised by the Secretary of State.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    This bill is in cessation.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Division! Clear the lobbies!
 
 
 
Updated: September 19, 2016
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Poll
Which is the best season?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Quick reply
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.