Reconsider the new Dividend Tax for small businesses - Gouvernment Petition

[SueEllen]

Yes, it won't apply, however if I buy something small, then finally be able to afford something that I like, then why should I pay 3% extra because it would be 2nd house? I'd have to sell first, rent again LOL and buy big?

ATW most people end up in a housing chain.

So you find a buyer for your small property, you then find a larger property you want to buy, whose property owners find a property they want to buy and so on. Then you all exchange contracts on the same day and complete within a couple of days of each other.

However if one person pulls out the chain collapses. This is why a smaller chain e.g. one with a first time buyer or a landlord at the smaller property end and someone who is not buying at the larger property end is preferred.

Also if you could buy a larger property in a year just buy the larger property now and get a small mortgage.

[jamesbrown]

Yes, it won't apply, however if I buy something small, then finally be able to afford something that I like, then why should I pay 3% extra because it would be 2nd house? I'd have to sell first, rent again LOL and buy big? That's the whole point I am making - Osborne's new idea is now actually forcing me to rent for another year or two. At least I can afford to pay in cash, so I am not dependent on interest rates or tax reliefs, but a LOT of people will be affected - the whole market dynamic was driven by BTL in recent year, why buy now if market can crash next year? My landlord is getting out of the market and selling all flats in the building...

It depends. You'll have to read the consultation, but the aim is to exempt transactions where the intention is to purchase a main residence and dispose of the existing residence, even if there is some delay in the sale of the existing residence (of several months). However, it may involve reclaiming the 3% levy paid upfront. There are various, common, scenarios elaborated upon in the consultation.

[AtW]

ATW most people end up in a housing chain.

Yes, and many chains collapse and some houses are sold without chains - logical move would have been to buy a property that can later be rented out, however with new Osborne's 3% extra tax it would mean (most likely) I'd have to pay 3% on much more expensive house, so best to stay put right now - that's just another example how Osborne's new rushed policies will affect the marketplace.

Same with the dividend tax - he essentially forced companies with retained profits to pay them out as dividends. This would give him big jump in taxable revenue in Jan 2017, however it would mean that many companies that retained profits for safety (since banks don't lend) would be reducing safety net by paying out retained profits.

It depends. You'll have to read the consultation, but the aim is to exempt transactions where the intention is to purchase a main residence and dispose of the existing residence, even if there is some delay in the sale of the existing residence (of several months). However, it may involve reclaiming the 3% levy paid upfront. There are various, common, scenarios elaborated upon in the consultation.

I've heard it, but it's just a consultation, and we both know that Osbornes wants max tax, so it would be very bad mistake to assume that results of consultation would turn out to be in taxpayers favour - it just shows how totally unprepared this 3% move is: all detailed documents on how it works should have been made available 1 nano second after his speech. And why should I dispose of previously bought residence? Making it available for rent or just having it as spare house would have made more sense, supposed Tories are attacking aspirations - having 2nd house is something to aspire to, not to be penalized for.

The end result to me personally is clear - people who wanted to get into BTL are jumping in now to beat 3% increase, this is the reason why my landlord is forcing sales through, I'll be kicked out in a couple of months - thanks Osborne.

The bottom line is that I did NOT vote for increased tax on dividends, for 3% stamp duty (and generally much higher stamp duty on nice houses - 12% now, 15% with 3% added!!!) and other things which were NOT declared in manifesto - this is political fraud.

[Waldorf]

The bottom line is that I did NOT vote for increased tax on dividends, for 3% stamp duty (and generally much higher stamp duty on nice houses - 12% now, 15% with 3% added!!!) and other things which were NOT declared in manifesto - this is political fraud.

And your answer is to vote for that well known tax cutter and responsible economist, Jeremy Corbyn! You couldn't make it up.

[AtW]

And your answer is to vote for that well known tax cutter and responsible economist, Jeremy Corbyn! You couldn't make it up.

Yes.

If Tories are not a tax cutting party then they should NEVER get in power.

Middle classes are taxed to the hilt already, thanks Osborne, at least Corbyn will get some of Tories rich mates with inherited and offshore wealth who won't be paying those levels of dividend tax since it's their offshore trusts getting the dividends.

[jamesbrown]

I've heard it, but it's just a consultation, and we both know that Osbornes wants max tax, so it would be very bad mistake to assume that results of consultation would turn out to be in taxpayers favour - it just shows how totally unprepared this 3% move is: all detailed documents on how it works should have been made available 1 nano second after his speech. And why should I dispose of previously bought residence? Making it available for rent or just having it as spare house would have made more sense, supposed Tories are attacking aspirations - having 2nd house is something to aspire to, not to be penalized for.

The end result to me personally is clear - people who wanted to get into BTL are jumping in now to beat 3% increase, this is the reason why my landlord is forcing sales through, I'll be kicked out in a couple of months - thanks Osborne.

The bottom line is that I did NOT vote for increased tax on dividends, for 3% stamp duty (and generally much higher stamp duty on nice houses - 12% now, 15% with 3% added!!!) and other things which were NOT declared in manifesto - this is political fraud.

I don't really see why anyone, with any sense, would've been waiting to get into BTL in order to move only now given the stretched valuations and tax changes coming. I can see why many landlords would want to sell-up OTOH, because it will certainly become more difficult to sell post April, and that's probably what's happening, at least among the more highly-leveraged speculators.

On the latter, you're either posing a straw man or you're unfamiliar with how politics works. Show me a party that declares, in their manifesto, all of the vote-losing initiatives that they're going to introduce early in the next parliament. Sure as night follows day, they never do, and it always happens. The only thing bordering fraudulent is the way the Tories would like to have their traditional electorate believe that they're traditional Tories, when the reality is that they're somewhere close to (or to the left of) Blair and both the Tories and Labour are responsible for that. Gidiot isn't a principled politician (very few are), he's a pragmatist. They don't give a **** what you think, providing the numbers stack up when it matters.

[SueEllen]

Yes, and many chains collapse and some houses are sold without chains - logical move would have been to buy a property that can later be rented out, however with new Osborne's 3% extra tax it would mean (most likely) I'd have to pay 3% on much more expensive house, so best to stay put right now - that's just another example how Osborne's new rushed policies will affect the marketplace.

The aim of his tax is to force people especially married couples to have only one residence in the traditional sense.

If you happen to have one residence and inherit another as it will be tax free - then you are OK.

[AtW]

I don't really see why anyone, with any sense, would've been waiting to get into BTL in order to move only now given the stretched valuations and tax changes coming. I can see why many landlords would want to sell-up OTOH, because it will certainly become more difficult to sell post April, and that's probably what's happening, at least among the more highly-leveraged speculators.

I think some people who planned to get into BTL are rushing to beat 3%, certainly real estate agents would be using this tactic to get quick sale for landlords that was to sell.

On the latter, you're either posing a straw man or you're unfamiliar with how politics works. Show me a party that declares, in their manifesto, all of the vote-losing initiatives that they're going to introduce early in the next parliament.

Sure, but usually the party that gets power actually does things FOR THEIR CORE voters rather than totally destroying core vote in order to hope they'll buy off votes from the other party.

The important part is this - in politics one party should be tax cutting and the other one tax increasing, now Tories messed it all up by massively increasing taxes, well beyond reasonable even though their mandate was on CUTTING SPENDING, NOT increasing taxation, which is high as it is!

Who stopped Osborne from increasing taxes like this in last 5 years when they were in Govt with LibDems? It wasn't Lib Dems who stopped them, they'd be more than happy to increase taxes and reduce cuts, at least that's was Osborne's line ... this sort of lies should be punished severely in next elections.

[AtW]

The aim of his tax is to force people especially married couples to have only one residence in the traditional sense.

To achieve that they need to require the Pope to approve every divorce settlement ...

[SueEllen]

To achieve that they need to require the Pope to approve every divorce settlement ...

Not in this country. It's the politicians who rule while pretending to be mostly Protestant.