| Non-motoring > Budget 2025 | Miscellaneous |
| Thread Author: sooty123 | Replies: 49 |
|
Sat 8 Nov 25 10:32
Budget 2025 - sooty123
|
|
news.sky.com/story/will-rachel-reeves-repeat-denis-healeys-1975-horror-budget-13464113 Seems the gov has had to give in and do something that hasn't happened in quite a while. |
|
Sat 8 Nov 25 12:32
Budget 2025 - Bromptonaut
|
| Income tax has been one a one way trajectory since the eighties. It's no longer sustainable if we want proper services. |
|
Sat 8 Nov 25 13:35
Budget 2025 - Kevin
|
|
>..It's no longer sustainable if we want proper services. And that begs the question of what services are most efficiently and effectively provided by the state and what should be personal or community responsibilities. |
|
Sun 9 Nov 25 01:40
Budget 2025 - Terry
|
|
In 2010 the Cameron response to the note left in the Treasury - "sorry chaps the cupboards bare, weve spent all the money" - was austerity. The 2025 Starmer/Reeves response to high borrowing and a public sector deficit seems likely to increase taxes, having demonstrated they don't have the resolve to manage costs. They may also revise the financial rules - a good smoke and mirrors move that allows the unaffordable to be perpetuated. Where the border between social support at public expense and personal responsibility should sit is a matter of personal opinion. Rather more disturbing is an inability to manage anything of consequence, preferring empty rhetoric to effective action. |
|
Sun 9 Nov 25 21:17
Budget 2025 - Kevin
|
|
>Where the border between social support at public expense and personal >responsibility should sit is a matter of personal opinion. And we've become lazy. We want the state to do everything for us. Especially if someone else is paying. |
|
Sun 9 Nov 25 11:23
Budget 2025 - CGNorwich
|
|
The idea seemingly gaining traction is to increase income tax by 2p and simultaneously reduce NI payments by 2p. This would have the effect of zero increase for employees but a 2p increase for pensioners and those living off investments. This would avoid need to break manifesto pledge. |
|
Sun 9 Nov 25 11:35
Budget 2025 - Falkirk Bairn
|
|
2p Off NI and 2p On Income tax is mooted in the Press. There was also the suggestion that this would apply to "Workers" If you earn over roughly £50K this would not apply. |
|
Sun 9 Nov 25 17:28
Budget 2025 - hjd
|
|
>> The idea seemingly gaining traction is to increase income tax by 2p and simultaneously reduce >> NI payments by 2p. This would have the effect of zero increase for employees but >> a 2p increase for pensioners and those living off investments. This would avoid need to >> break manifesto pledge. >> >> >> If income tax is increased by 2p in the £, that breaks a manifesto commitment regardless of any change in NI. The increases in NI last time also broke the manifesto commitment, which said that NI would not be increased. It didn't differentiate between employers' and employees' NI. |
|
Sun 9 Nov 25 18:36
Budget 2025 - Bromptonaut
|
|
>> The increases in NI last time also broke the manifesto commitment, which said that NI >> would not be increased. It didn't differentiate between employers' and employees' NI. I think it was pretty clear contextually that the commitment related to employees NICs which the Tories had first increased then (unaffordably) reduced. Labour would have been better campaigning on the smoke/mirrors nature of the reduction and saying they'd restore the cut in the name of stability. |
|
Sun 9 Nov 25 20:10
Budget 2025 - CGNorwich
|
|
You have to read the small print. Labour promised not to increase taxes on "working people", including National Insurance, Income Tax and VAT. An increase of the employers NI contribution is therefore not an increase for "working people" (whoever they may be). An increase in Income tax offset by a reduction in NI contributions taken overall would similarly not be an increase in taxes for those "working people" No breach in manifesto commitment then. They keep their promises :-} Dam clever these politicians eh? |
|
Sun 9 Nov 25 20:57
Budget 2025 - sooty123
|
|
No breach in manifesto commitment then. They keep their promises :-} >> >> Dam clever these politicians eh? >> >> x.com/peterstefanovi2/status/1987449732097061100 Perhaps not that clever, oops. Last edited by: sooty123 on Sun 9 Nov 25 at 20:57
|
|
Mon 10 Nov 25 12:53
Budget 2025 - Terry
|
|
The promise was no increase to PAYE, NI or VAT. The message recieved by the voting public was there would be no increase in the main tax base. One would reasonably expect changes to simplify systems, eliminate anomalies, and address well established Labour policies - eg: VAT on schools fees. non-dom changes, etc. Changes to employers NI is a material change. If the switch if +/-2% from PAYE to NI impacting pensioners is true - this is a material change. Playing selective semantics over manifesto wording is one reason why politicians are rightly held in such low esteem - it should communicate the intent of those being elected. Failure to include all that is material renders it worthless or dishonest. It remains to be seen whether other rumoured changes to taxation of pension contributions, inheritance tax, property taxes etc should be judged material or reasonable. In very broad terms the Labour manifesto promised a "fully costed plan for growth" and "no new taxes" (remember G W Bush). They are failing to deliver on either. Whether in the next 3 years they will reverse a difficult start is debatable - by then blaming the Tories (however justifiably) will no longer be an option. |
|
Fri 14 Nov 25 06:43
Budget 2025 - sooty123
|
|
news.sky.com/story/starmer-and-reeves-ditch-plans-to-raise-income-tax-in-budget-13470025 Looks like a u turn. Starmer and Reeves look more and more like the dog that caught the car. |
|
Fri 14 Nov 25 08:42
Budget 2025 - smokie
|
|
You have to feel a bit sorry for them, (politicians in general I mean) - services in the country seem well broken in many areas and need more money just to keep going let alone improve (although there are efficiencies to be had I'm sure, if only workers, unions and the public would have it). "Our" expectation is to get more and more from government and the State but our expectation also seems to be we would prefer to pay less than more. That's a conundrum to which there probably isn't an answer. They've spent quite some time laying the ground for some harsh changes, maybe they should just go ahead with it this time as the problems won't go away. I suppose it could end up with the fiscal rules being changed, which would be another U turn. |
|
Fri 14 Nov 25 08:56
Budget 2025 - sooty123
|
|
I think people could get behind some tax rise plans but this gov isn't able to communicate particularly well or at all tbh. It looks like the gov is run from the back benches. I never thought much of starmer, but i didn't think he'd mess it up this badly this quickly. |
|
Fri 14 Nov 25 13:25
Budget 2025 - Terry
|
|
Government spending was 42.5% of GDP falling to 39.6% in 2019. Unsurprisingly - a spike in 2020 due to the pandemic. Since then government spending has stabilised at ~44.5% of GDP. Simple maths - government spending share of the GDP "pot" has increased by 12% since 2019. Yet public perceptions are that services have become worse. We should understand what is driving the apparent contradiction: - however much is spent by government there will always be unmet needs - huge amounts are being wasted by public officials - inept politicians are allowing huge amounts to be wasted by public officials - corruption has grown massively - the world has changed and increased expenditure is inevitable That we should balance the books is an absolute given in my view. The first step is to fix the problems that currently exist, not paper over the cracks with more taxes. Sadly as Labour seem to lack the resolve to tackle spending the only alternative is more tax and/or change the fiscal rules (somewhat dishonest). |
|
Fri 14 Nov 25 13:02
Budget 2025 - John F
|
| National psyche needs to swing back towards JFK's 1961 'ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country'. The 'something for nothing' brigade has never been so large....and vociferous. |
|
Fri 14 Nov 25 13:14
Budget 2025 - Bromptonaut
|
|
>> National psyche needs to swing back towards JFK's 1961 'ask not what your country can >> do for you but what you can do for your country'. The 'something for nothing' >> brigade has never been so large....and vociferous. Some truth there I think. My nephew is on the reception desk at a big city A&E. Based on stories he tells people's entitlement seems to be unbounded. Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Fri 14 Nov 25 at 13:15
|
|
Fri 14 Nov 25 13:36
Budget 2025 - Bobby
|
|
Modern society have limited time spans. Rarely will someone buy and listen to a full “album”, or read a full article explaining something. This is why tiktok and Facebook reels are so popular. Maybe thirty seconds long, can scroll through them and pick up what you think you need to know. It’s a lot easier in your brain finding a target for your blame rather than having to think through processes. In our community the Council get blamed for everything. They get blamed for not clearing up the mess all the quad bikers make on the Council land. They also get blamed for not providing facilities for the said quad bikers. No one is prepared to actually read the council minutes or even the document they produced in layman’s terms of the difficult budget decisions they were having to make. Back in Covid I thought community spirit came back. Folk looking out for each other. Folk appreciating “ essential workers”. But these same folk are now getting blamed cos, well it’s easier to do that. It’s lazy bin men. It’s lazy doctors. Etc. And we know that is also helping the rise of the far right. Easy to blame immigrants than look at any detail isn’t it? Stop the Boats. Catchy phrase and probably just about the attention limit of their followers. Make America Great Again is similar. |
|
Fri 14 Nov 25 13:50
Budget 2025 - Manatee
|
|
It's trite but true that what joy one gets out of life is at least partly proportional to what what one puts into getting along with and especially helping others. That might be why "takers" always seem so miserable. But we must not forget that there is a lot of genuine need. I'm sure there's inefficiency but I'm not sure we can ever get back to the kind of relative prosperity working people enjoyed from around 1960 to 2010 at least until inequality is dealt with, if ever. |
|
Fri 14 Nov 25 14:59
Budget 2025 - Terry
|
|
>> >> I'm sure there's inefficiency but I'm not sure we can ever get back to the >> kind of relative prosperity working people enjoyed from around 1960 to 2010 at least until >> inequality is dealt with, if ever. I am unconvinced inequality is the problem - it seems overly simplistic. Other more plausible explanations: - demographic change means fewer workers supporting more not working and pensioners - growth of low cost international competition, loss of competitive advantage In many developed economies growth has slowed over the last 20-30 years whilst India, China etc have grown rapidly. Bluntly we now need to work a lot harder get ahead without the boost from high levels of growth. |
|
Fri 14 Nov 25 15:52
Budget 2025 - Manatee
|
|
I quite agree on the demographics point. And the loss of practically all manufacturing. But not much can be done about either of those. Unless you can come up with something big and fixable it must be concluded that we will not see the times that we boomers enjoyed though our working lives again. Nobody really knows what the supposed potential "efficiencies" might amount to. If you're going to take chunks of the welfare state away you need to fix inequality, both to reduce reliance on benefits and to broaden the tax base. The facts is that the wealthy pay tax at lower rates on income than many middle earners before even looking at their increases in wealth from the value of the assets they hold which can be many times larger than their taxable income. Last edited by: Manatee on Fri 14 Nov 25 at 15:52
|
|
Fri 14 Nov 25 18:40
Budget 2025 - Kevin
|
| What inequalities are we talking about and which are having the biggest impact? |
|
Fri 14 Nov 25 20:37
Budget 2025 - Manatee
|
|
Financial. Both income and especially wealth. Take Rishi Sunak as an example, only because we have some figures. I think Rishi is a decent human BTW. This is from memory so not exact. When he and Starmer published their tax returns, Starmer had c. 350k income and paid an average 23% tax (he had inter alia his LOTO salary and he sold a field on which there was a gain). Sunak's income was c. £3.5million, mainly unearned, on which he also paid an average 23% which was clearly a much bigger sum. Around that time Rishi was said to be 'worth' about £700 million. I don't know what his increase in wealth for the year was, and clearly it will fluctuate, but if I had £700 million invested I'd think a 5% return on average would not be an unreasonable expectation. That's £35 million a year on average by which his wealth will increase (before drawings) without him working. That £35m does not appear in his tax return for various reasons including some of it being capital growth which is not taxable until realised. We know it would be impractical to tax it directly for all sorts of reasons but the fact remains that for very wealthy people their increase in wealth from year to year never gets anywhere near their tax returns. In fact such people must constantly acquire assets. Year on year they acquire more and more, The classic four asset classes being stocks, bonds, real property, and cash (or cash equivalents in which I would include loan assets). It's interesting that as inequality has increased, on average house price inflation has run ahead of general inflation and wages, and stock prices are at an all time high despite western economies performing relatively badly. I think this is a consequence of hoarded money chasing assets rather than spent on consumption. Wealthy people don't scour RightMove every month for houses to buy (well some do) but there are funds to invest in residential and commercial property for rent. This pushes up house prices, and rents which are related. If you prefer buying on a mortgage to renting, or indeed having your car on PCP instead of buying it, those loans (your liabilities) indirectly become the assets of the wealthy. This is actually how trickle down works. We oompa loompas get the money by way of loans, not better wages. You get the drift I trust although I expect you disagree that it is a problem. In a nutshell, I think that constant increase in wealth should be tapped, for a modest proportion of the money that is not being spent but hoarded far beyond anybody's prudent need for savings. Maybe that could be offset or treated as capital gains tax on account. There are many reasons for it being difficult but that's where thought needs to be directed in the first instance. Last edited by: Manatee on Fri 14 Nov 25 at 20:39
|
|
Fri 14 Nov 25 18:41
Budget 2025 - Robin O'Reliant
|
|
>> >> And we know that is also helping the rise of the far right. Easy to >> blame immigrants than look at any detail isn’t it? >> >> Stop the Boats. Catchy phrase and probably just about the attention limit of their followers. >> >> If you think wanting to control immigration and stop illegal entrants completely is "Far right" then you're probably out of step with over three quarters of the population. |
|
Fri 14 Nov 25 18:43
Budget 2025 - CGNorwich
|
|
The 'something for nothing' brigade has never been so large....and vociferous.“ Oh I don’t know. perhaps not so large but for a thousand or so years the aristocracy of this country managed quite well in the something for nothing stakes. For tha matter they still seem to be doing quite well. What exactly does the former prince do? |
|
Fri 14 Nov 25 20:44
Budget 2025 - Manatee
|
| Good observation CGN. The 'entitled' who are the problem include many of the people who have almost all the money. They think it is their right, and that they shouldn't have to pay tax on the growth or the money they can shovel into tax havens. |
|
Sat 15 Nov 25 00:41
Budget 2025 - Terry
|
|
A few numbers - you are free to draw your own conclusions. Median household wealth in the UK is £292k The household wealth of the top 10% is more than £1.2m The household wealth of the top 1% is more than £3.1m Household wealth is defined as property + pension + financial assets + other assets. There are apparently ~150 billionaires in the UK. I seem to recall it was Sunaks wife who had most of the money - although I doubt Rishi could be described as deprived. Household wealth is typically at a maximum age 60-65 - no great surprise. As even fairly modest houses in many parts of the country are valued at £0.5-1.0m, getting to a household wealth of £1m+ is unexceptional. Many contributors to this forum are likely in the top 10% - my guess unsupported by evidence. That wealth is unevenly distributed in the UK is clearly true. But we need to consider: - the extent to which higher taxes on wealth or income drive the wealthy away - what would happen to investment in the absence of the wealthy - impact on inwards investment with higher taxation - at what level of wealth would the internationally mobile leave the UK - to what extent would higher taxation promote avoidance and evasion One estimate by the Institute for Government of a wealth tax of 2% on those with wealth of over £10m would raise £24bn. Sounds big but hardly transformative - it amounts to ~£750 per taxpayer per annum. Fihnally, making a real difference to inequality would very directly impact many we would likely regard as “comfortable “ not wealthy. |
|
Sat 15 Nov 25 08:38
Budget 2025 - Duncan
|
|
>> As even fairly modest houses in many parts of the country are valued at £0.5-1.0m, >> getting to a household wealth of £1m+ is unexceptional. Much of the "wealth" in the country is not disposable wealth. I live in leafy Surrey. A £2 million house is nothing out of the ordinary. To make any tax "fair", it would have to be adjusted for house values around the country, so that us Southerners would not pay a disproportionate amount of our total wealth. So this means that Northerners and the Welsh, oh and don't forget the sweaty socks - they wouldn't piggy back on the Southern English like they have done for years. (Barnett Formula - anyone?) There. I think that is well balanced ant not controversial. |
|
Sat 15 Nov 25 09:58
Budget 2025 - Manatee
|
| I think you're right. Northerners can pay more as their housing costs less:) |
|
Sat 15 Nov 25 12:28
Budget 2025 - John F
|
|
>> Much of the "wealth" in the country is not disposable wealth. I live in leafy >> Surrey. A £2 million house is nothing out of the ordinary. Houses are fairly easy to dispose of - just auction them. Here is a what appears to be a perfectly acceptable leafy residence in the city of my birth for less than £100k if you're short of a bob or two. jitty.com/properties/Bo2hDVS6UIlTnNbzUrCO Just needs a few thou spent on it and a bit of tidying up. Last edited by: John F on Sat 15 Nov 25 at 12:33
|
|
Mon 17 Nov 25 06:26
Budget 2025 - Duncan
|
|
>> jitty.com/properties/Bo2hDVS6UIlTnNbzUrCO >> >> Just needs a few thou spent on it and a bit of tidying up. I may have to think about that for a moment or two. |
|
Mon 17 Nov 25 16:54
Budget 2025 - Boxsterboy
|
|
>> >> jitty.com/properties/Bo2hDVS6UIlTnNbzUrCO >> >> >> >> Just needs a few thou spent on it and a bit of tidying up. >> >> I may have to think about that for a moment or two. >> I wouldn't think that long. Overpriced at £75,000 considering the last house in the road sold for £114,000 in average condition. |
|
Sun 16 Nov 25 00:21
Budget 2025 - expat2
|
|
>>So this means that Northerners and the Welsh, oh and don't forget the sweaty socks - they wouldn't piggy back >>on the Southern English like they have done for years. (Barnett Formula - anyone?) Can we take it that you are in favour of Scottish independence so as to reduce the burden on the English? |
|
Mon 17 Nov 25 06:29
Budget 2025 - Duncan
|
|
>> Can we take it that you are in favour of Scottish independence so as to >> reduce the burden on the English? I don't mind what the Jocks do. I think they would be very short sighted and foolish if they left the UK. Apropos of nothing, did anyone watch the Scotland v Argentina rugby game yesterday? Goodness me! Last edited by: Duncan on Mon 17 Nov 25 at 06:29
|
|
Sat 15 Nov 25 12:21
Budget 2025 - John F
|
|
>> The 'something for nothing' brigade has never been so large....and vociferous.“ >> >> Oh I don’t know. perhaps not so large but for a thousand or so years >> the aristocracy of this country managed quite well in the something for nothing stakes. For >> tha matter they still seem to be doing quite well. Compared to the mainly industrialist composition of the Sunday Times Rich List (a mere £300 million won't get you a look-in) there are hardly any 'aristocracy' there now. There are only about 30 UK dukes and few are that wealthy. What is more galling to most are examples of senior staff getting unprecedented vast multiples of lowest paid worker pay and the ability of the wealthy to transfer their income and assets to nonsense countries like Monaco and small faraway oceanic outcrops. But as I'm now a well paid up member of the 'something for nothing' brigade I mustn't complain. |
|
Sat 15 Nov 25 16:38
Budget 2025 - Terry
|
|
The aristocracy used to claim they were merely caretakers - although they did fairly well out of what today is regarded as an unremarkable calling. It is a matter of conjecture what may have happened had the land and resources been divided between the various tenants and farmers in pursuit of equality. Plausible outcome - with no lord of the manor to provide oversight and control: - farmers would compete for the best land - possibly destructively - investment in infrastructure would require the engagement of all - not leadership of one In summary - a decent lord may produce a better outcome for the community than the self interest of individual estate workers. In fairness there were also corrupt and incompetent lords! |
|
Sat 15 Nov 25 17:44
Budget 2025 - smokie
|
|
"there were also corrupt and incompetent lords!" Surely not!! :-) |
|
Mon 17 Nov 25 07:26
Budget 2025 - Crankcase
|
|
>> "there were also corrupt and incompetent lords!" >> >> >> Surely not!! :-) See episode one of “The age of Uncertainty “ on iPlayer. Who knew economics could be so interesting. |
|
Mon 17 Nov 25 20:42
Budget 2025 - John F
|
|
>> The aristocracy used to claim they were merely caretakers - although they did fairly well >> out of what today is regarded as an unremarkable calling. Ditto the modern landlord. Perhaps house prices would become more affordable if hoarding was forbidden, i.e. no-one allowed to own more than, say, three houses and only persons, not 'companies', allowed to own them, e.g. China, Switzerland. It would be good to see the modern Rachmen (anyone remember him?) forced to auction their surplus off and reinvest the proceeds into something more useful. |
|
Mon 17 Nov 25 21:36
Budget 2025 - Biggles aka B_i_G
|
| That would cause a slight problem for housing associations. |
|
Tue 18 Nov 25 07:24
Budget 2025 - De Sisti
|
|
[quote] >> Ditto the modern landlord. Perhaps house prices would become more affordable if hoarding was forbidden, >> i.e. no-one allowed to own more than, say, three houses and only persons, not 'companies', >> allowed to own them, e.g. China, Switzerland. It would be good to see the modern >> Rachmen (anyone remember him?) ... [/quote] Who he was: A landlord who built a large property empire in west London. Where: His "heartland" was Notting Hill. The infamous slumlord in London during the 1950s and 60s was Peter Rachman. His property empire was based in Notting Hill, where he profited from a network of run-down properties and a reputation for violence and extortion. His name became synonymous with slum landlords, and his methods are still referenced today in discussions about dangerous and exploitative renting practices. |
|
Tue 18 Nov 25 13:48
Budget 2025 - Terry
|
|
Rachman abused tenants in the pursuit of profit - it is entirely wrong to characterise all landlords similarly. Were multiple property rental to be largely regulated out of existence, the change would disrupt the market in the short term. Long term consequences would would likely create other stresses: - initially house prices would fall as landlords sought to reduce their portfolios - some may anyway be bought by landlords with few properties - rental costs would rise rapidly as fewer properties would be available - buyers of excess properties are financially stretched - poor maintenance and defaults - some folk will never have the earning capacity to put together a deposit or get a mortgage The way to reduce property prices and free up the rental market is to build more housing. In France and Germany empty properties account for ~8% of housing stock compared to ~3% in the UK. Bringing empty property and second homes back into full use could make some difference, but many will be in the wrong place for schools, jobs, transport links etc, or in a poor state of repair. Forcing existing owners to sell may be an abuse of well established ownership rights in law. Last edited by: Terry on Tue 18 Nov 25 at 13:51
|
|
Tue 18 Nov 25 14:38
Budget 2025 - smokie
|
|
I suppose building more is the way but to me it feels like more and more of the affluent would buy to let, or buy as second/third homes which lay empty half the year, which I think would keep prices high, and those less able to afford will be forever stuck with crippling rent or mortgage payments. I don't think there is any easy answer really. |
|
Tue 18 Nov 25 16:09
Budget 2025 - Manatee
|
|
There are no solutions that don't create losers, but I would like to see second homes hammered a bit more. We all know of neighbourhoods where property is expensive and half the houses are empty for most of the year. Tricky of course because those houses are often in areas with no jobs. But the retired might be able to downsize to some of them freeing up family housing elsewhere. I don't have a problem with people being rich as long as they pay enough tax to prop up those whose opportunities they limit with their hoarding of assets. |
|
Tue 18 Nov 25 16:49
Budget 2025 - Zero
|
|
Second homes is a tricky one. On one hand it does price locals out of neighbourhoods. On the other hand, if rented as holiday lets, as most are, it provides a source of punters for locals to exploit. As far as all landlords are rackman types, that is complete cobblers. A large proportion have a small number of let properties, properties they have bough cheap because of the state of repair, invested money in updating, and rent out at market rents, making about a 5% return. Thats not robbery. |
|
Tue 18 Nov 25 16:56
Budget 2025 - Robin O'Reliant
|
|
>> Second homes is a tricky one. On one hand it does price locals out of >> neighbourhoods. On the other hand, if rented as holiday lets, as most are, it provides >> a source of punters for locals to exploit. >> >> They've done that down here, traders are complaining of a negative impact with fewer visitors and many holiday homes are not suitable as permanent residences. |
|
Tue 18 Nov 25 17:50
Budget 2025 - legacylad
|
|
i rent various holiday properties on the northern C Blanca, several times a year. I have many friends who live here, and we regularly walk the narrow lanes inland of Moraira, away from the crowds. Many huge villas, which I am told, are only used for the 3 hot summer months. Empty the other 9 , only visitors are the maintenance folks. Many such properties in this affluent part of the world |
|
Tue 18 Nov 25 18:43
Budget 2025 - ORB>>
|
|
I don't have a problem with people being rich as long as they pay enough tax to prop up those whose opportunities they limit with their hoarding of assets. Oh dear. that chestnut again. My MgRover pension went mostly in the bin when that bunch failed. We have 2 rental properties managed for us. One was completely refurbished at a cost of many tens of thousands. It's in better condition than our house. The other is in v good condition too. We pay Vat on repairs, Vat on agents fees, insurance premium tax on insurance and 40% tax on one and the other split so 30% tax, so a return of 5% or so BEFORE tax. Property is still safer in our estimation and we like to think that the temants are happy and any problems (rare) are reolved quickly. Last edited by: ORB>> on Tue 18 Nov 25 at 18:43
|
|
Wed 19 Nov 25 00:18
Budget 2025 - expat2
|
|
>>But the retired might be able to downsize to some of them freeing up family housing elsewhere. Downsizers compete with first home owners to buy the smaller cheaper properties and can usually out bid them driving up prices. The larger family homes they sell are much too expensive for young families. |
Forum Version 3.0 - By Khoosys
Car4play Forum
