Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Mansion / Property tax question for Ruth Cadbury / Guy Lambert | |
Posted by: | Paul Green | |
Date/Time: | 01/05/15 11:54:00 |
Tom Firstly you seem to be arguing for an overall reassessment of local rates, which is fine but then why don't you support that, rather than the imposition of an additional levy at an entirely arbitrary vale Secondly, you say that 'recent stamp duty increases mean that any additional tax will be associated with a smaller, not greater, revenue loss'. Sorry this makes no sense at all. The stampy duty was changed to be broadly revenue neutral, with more revenue raised at the top end (with a 12% marginal rate) and less at the lower ends. Many would accept that. However, if you then introduce a new tax that lower both number of transactions and prices achieved at the top end of the market, you will lose MORE stamp duty revenue than before. That is self evident. |