In a dramatic intervention in the sales market, Labour says it will scrap stamp duty for first time buyer purchases of properties valued up to £300,000.
The announcement, made this morning in an exclusive story in the Financial Times, comes after a weekend when Labour set out plans for rent caps in line with inflation and longer private rental tenancies.
Stamp duty is currently payable on homes with a value above £125,000. It is charged at two per cent for the first £125,000 after that, and the rate then goes up to five per cent.
So a first-time-buyer purchasing a property for £150,000 would save £500. If the property was sold for £250,000, they would save £2,500.
Labour leader Ed Miliband will today say: It is simply too expensive for so many young people to buy a home today, saving up for the deposit, paying the fees and having enough left over for the stamp duty. So we're going to act so we can transform the opportunities for young working people in our country. For the first three years of the next Labour government, we will abolish stamp duty for all first time buyers of homes under £300,000.
Labour will also insist that developers agree to give first-time-buyers a chance to purchase homes as a condition of the planning permission they need to build them.
There's nothing more British than the dream of home ownership. But for so many young people today that dream is fading with more people than ever renting when they want to buy, new properties being snapped up before local people get a look-in, young families wondering if this country will ever work for them. That is the condition of Britain today, a modern housing crisis which only a Labour government will tackle Miliband will say.
%20-%20IMAGE%20Client%20Accounting%20%E2%80%93%20what%20are%20your%20options.jpg)
Comments
Promises, promises. The only answer is more houses (will never be met on the scale required), OR less people (can be met).
On the current path it will be very interesting to see just what a mess this country will be in a couple of years time.
"Lots of bleating about how this is a disastrous, badly thought out move. It's all about the profit, profit, profit. No wonder estate agents have such a terrible reputation."
WHAT What "profit" is there in SDLT to an Estate Agent Reducing it or removing it completely is MORE LIKELY to increase sales by a hairsbreadth than not - so your 'point' is completely without point.
I agree that lowering deposits would be a step forward, but why not go the whole hog and try and make house prices cheaper. We need to build more houses - until we do that, all of this is a little bit redundant. We're too busy thinking about short-term measures, we need to think more long-term.
We need a proper, well-regulated housebuilding scheme. Not gimmicky initiatives like Right to Buy or Help to Buy, not allowing wealthy investors to sit on empty homes, trying to find steps to reduce the number of buy-to-let landlords, etc.
"Allowing developers to sit on land while its value goes up is not going to solve that issue, is it"
You mean "...until it creeps back up to what they bought it for...", don't you
Sorry, Mr Davies - but your ignorance of the new-build world is glaringly obvious.
@GB - under 300,000, UNDER. It's there in the article. I think that will help quite a lot of people.
Lots of bleating about how this is a disastrous, badly thought out move. It's all about the profit, profit, profit. No wonder estate agents have such a terrible reputation.
[quote]taken over by Millepede and his cronies[/quote]
Resorting to childish insults, nice. And also, why is a use or lose policy such a bad thing. We have a housing crisis - supply failing to keep up with demand, a problem we've had for years. Allowing developers to sit on land while its value goes up is not going to solve that issue, is it
[quote]Once again the Looney party illustrates doesn't have a clue about business, the property market or what fairness actually means[/quote]
Tell us why. To me, Miliband is at least attempting to make things fairer for all, rather than fairer for only those that have.
You don't think foreign buyers buying up property and leaving it empty is unfair on first-time buyers How exactly. It's a major issue. Buying up property just because you can, then sitting on it until the price goes up, then selling on, while never actually living in it, is just wrong.
How much will Labour set stamp duty at above 300,000 No mention of that or have I missed it Will he hike up the stamp duty on all those properties being sold over 300,000 to claw back the revenue he will be losing, if so, we will have the threshold issues we had before with the old stamp duty system The current stamp duty levels are working very well for the property industry, why do we need to take a step back or do the Labour party permanently live in the past Leave well alone Mr Milliband especially when you have no idea what you are talking about.
How is it anti-London The mansion tax and this stamp duty promise is trying to close the gap between the rich and poor, which has become ever wider in the capital in the last five years.
And it's no more buying votes than the Tories shameless Right to Buy. At least this will affect more than a very small minority of people.
But I bet they can spell.
It's a start, at least. Many young, first-time buyers live in London or the South East.
It just goes to show how much this so called peoples party is out of touch with the real world (ie. north of Watford).
How many first time buyers can afford to buy property at 300,000
Labour knows nuffink!
Another miss-judged look at the housing market, why not look at systems that actually did work and abolish stamp duty in disadvantaged areas, this actually worked. First time buyers are only part of the crisis we need investors to purchase in areas to give people homes to live in, its not just about the first time buyers. Most who can't afford to move can't scrape 5% deposit together so 500 saving here and there will not solve the issue. Also how are they going to pay for it. Higher taxes and VAT!!! I bet, what a joke!!
A totally disjointed and pointless policy. On R4 this morning one of the apparatchik was justifying the policy by claiming that it was unfair on first time buyers that foreign buyers could purchase a property in the UK and leave it empty. Once again the Looney party illustrates doesn't have a clue about business, the property market or what fairness actually means. He also commented that under Labour developers would have to use or lose their planning permissions. God help us all if our asylum gets taken over by Millepede and his cronies. I hear Australia's quite a pleasant place to live
Yet another stunt by Labour which has probably just killed the remaining market, As reported in other posts transaction numbers are down across the country, does the Labour government really think that this is what we need A pathetic attempt to BUY young people Votes, What a Waste of space he is. If they want to help the industry the main thing they need to look at lowering deposits as saving someone on average 500 is not going make a whole lot of difference.
This is another example of 'buying votes' as it will offer no benefit for those in London and surrounding areas who need more help than others areas - especially the key workers and working families. Coupled with the 'mansion tax' it appears Labour are anti London.