Opinions differ on stamp duty changes Haart has seen a 15% - TopicsExpress



          

Opinions differ on stamp duty changes Haart has seen a 15% increase in house inquiries following the changes to stamp duty, prompting the Guardian to examine how the new system looks to push up house prices and energise the market in a period where a lull in transactions is usually registered. The FT features exclusive research from Hometrack which shows how the stamp duty overhaul looks to benefit the South East the most, specifically the commuter belt. The Times’ carries research conducted by Santander Mortgages which says the changes could help 4m second-steppers make the jump to their next property. Also in the Times, Claire Carponen draws attention to the large number of first-time buyers who are now more likely to be able to afford a place of their own. The Mirror’s Fiona Philips disagrees, however, claiming the measures will push up prices and mean homes are equally, if not more unaffordable than ever before, a sentiment echoed by Green Party candidate Tom Chance, who writes in to the Standard to criticise the fact the government is doing “more to drive up prices than it is to build more homes”. Charles Haresnap, MD of Mortgages and Commercial Lending at Aldermore, agrees with this point, calling for more to be done to incentivise housebuilding. Elsewhere, the Independent’s Simon Read supports the new system, labelling it fundamentally fairer. Andrew Grice, of the same paper, applauds the ingenuity of Mr Osbourne for formulating a “tax cut for millions”, despite having no money to finance it, and predicts that stamp duty revenues will actually rise significantly due to the increase in number of market transactions. The Yorkshire Post speaks to agents who believe the new system will boost the region’s market, while the FT cites Institute for Fiscal Studies think-tank director, Paul Johnson, who says the overhaul is “most certainly not the substantial overhaul of the taxation of housing we need”, and has merely gone from a “very bad tax” to a “bad tax”. thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/article4289481.ece
Posted on: Mon, 08 Dec 2014 14:33:45 +0000

Trending Topics



Recently Viewed Topics




© 2015