Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

All right I give up.

you pay tax at 2%o on 125 to 250 then from 250 5%

so a house of 250000 you neither save nor make tax before 2500 now 2500

now you pay no tax up to 125.000 but its now 2% instead of 1% up to 250.000

a house of 500.000 you pay2% on 125.000 £2500 then 5% on 250.000 = £15000

yesterday you would pay £ 15000

as Gracie was from Rochdale whence came Big Cyril and all sorts of other paedos, what does it say about Rochdale?

it was a repo against a bad debt so not a bad deal though i had to spend a fair bit to do it up
tenant is the young chap with the broken leg + his gf and child

it's actually a very good location for commuting and also with good schools - to allow those of the up-and-coming classes to queue-jump to give their children an unfair start in life :-)

a Osborne con trick .

well that hardly favours the wealthy does it!

now try your calcs on a house costing £1.5m and another costing £2.5m, neither of which would be remotely out of the ordinary in the home counties

on the new basis, i reckon that's stamp duty of £91,500 and £211,500 respectively

what would it be under the old regime?

cynic just pointing out that for the avge home up to 500000 their is no change as such Osborne told fairy tales on 98% would save that is the case up to 15000 home

the rich have bben stung but c/t will not go up

c/t?

out of curiosity, what would have been the stamp duty per above?

it would be interesting know what % of homes across uk are sold at or below £125k and again between £125k and £250k

if no difference at £500k that's also fine, but again what % sold between £250k and $500k?

those are much fairer questions

Of course Stamp Duty only affects you if you decide to buy a home so won't really bother me as I'm not a greedy landlord looking to purchase property to let...!!

"The debate about the economy effectively ended in June 2013, when the ONS revised its figures, and announced that there had been no double-dip recession after all. That was the moment the Labour Party’s increasingly desperate hopes of regaining their economic credibility finally died. And there was nothing Ed Balls was ever going to be able to do or say today to bring them back to life.

So now the political struggle that defined the parliament is over. The two rivals are hurtling through the air, locked in one final, fateful embrace. Soon they will strike the water, and disappear from view.

Only one of them can survive the fall. His name is George Osborne."

The Telegraph

Stamp duty will result in most people paying less. The comments above are incorrect. The difference was the previous system was a 'slab' tax. That is once you exceeded a band figure you paid an amount based on the whole price of the property. Now you just pay tax on the amount that you exceed the lower band. When you hit band figures exactly then the figures are similar to the old system, exactly £250k or £500k.

52054 - a complete non seq, but you couldn't wait to try to make a sensible comment, and thus failed dismally :-)

i'm not passing judgment but have asked what i thought were some quite sensible questions which neither you nor MrT seems remotely able to answer

Have to say I haven't been following this thread today, I just saw the amount of posts and felt rather left out so quickly got my penny in.. When it comes to stamp the small difference between the old system and the new in money terms is hardly worth comment... But I suppose George had to fill his air-time with something..

You need to read this again shortie!!


The Osborne reform of stamp duty is more revolutionary than it looks. By bringing its logic into line with income tax – in which you pay an increasing charge only on that proportion of the price which exceeds a given limit, rather than on the whole amount – Mr Osborne has significantly helped those at the lower end of the market while clobbering those at the highest end. That makes it very difficult for Labour to sustain the charge that the Tories are the "party of the rich". His policy is also eminently more fair than a mansion tax because it will not affect people living in houses that happen to have increased wildly in value over the decades, due to forces completely beyond their control. It will be a one-off charge on those who are purchasing, not a wealth tax which would fall on those who are staying put. It will free up the bottom end of the market thus helping first-time buyers and liberating the property-purchase chains in which many middle-market houses are trapped. Above all, it will give a great deal of trouble to Labour's campaigning pitch. That, presumably, was the whole point.

The Telegraph

i hope that that's a fair appraisal, notwithstanding that it comes from the fascist gazette :-)

i'ld still like to see a table with the % of sales across the country in each price bracket

England cricket team in another mess now, they need a good innings from Buttler or Root, or it's curtains.

Db4

You seem to c+P a lot from the same rag.

I thought one only saw that news paper in old fashioned toilets.

It would poison the fish if used to wrap fish and chips.

But I can see where you get your indoctrination from.