- cross-posted to:
- politics@sh.itjust.works
- cross-posted to:
- politics@sh.itjust.works
geteilt von: https://sh.itjust.works/post/38301389
To try to tackle this, the Welsh Labour government, alongside Plaid Cymru, introduced measures to curb second-home ownership. This included giving councils the ability to push council tax on second homes to 300% the usual rate. They also closed a loophole whereby second-home owners could register as a business in order to pay the much lower business rates.
Gwynedd council used these powers to hike council tax to 150% in April 2023. By the end of 2024, house prices had fallen by 12.4% as second-home owners tried to sell up. In Pembrokeshire, house prices fell by 8.9% after the council increased the council tax to 200% on second homes (though this was reduced to 150% recently).
You must log in or # to comment.
Good. Vacation homes should be taxed, and foreigners should get an even bigger tax. Local citizens and businesses should get preferable treatment, so that communities can be more closely knit together. The wealthy are corrosive to society, breaking down many humans for the sake of a few.
foreigners should get an even bigger tax.
Yeah, the Channel Island of Jersey only allows foreigners to buy property if they had lived in the islands for five years. They are only a handful places in the UK where they have relatively less pressure on housing. Not sure if they still do it though. Regardless, I am all for this.
The wealthy are corrosive to society, breaking down many humans for the sake of a few.
The rich co-opted being against rich, corporate landlords-- or any rich individuals-- from overseas buying local properties and contributing to housing crisis as “racist”. I feel like this is talked about less. Instead, actual decent working foreigners are scapegoated.
“The rich co-opted being against rich, corporate landlords-- or any rich individuals-- from overseas buying local properties and contributing to housing crisis as “racist.”
It’s not racism. It’s classism. I don’t care care if the rich out of town asshole is white, brown or yellow, I care that they are a rich asshole and they are wrecking things for the rest of us.
Interesting. So it sounds like this is an area with a lot of personal vacation homes? They’re pretty uncommon in general, so I doubt it would change much where I live.
I have been advocating for triple the real estate taxes on ho.es that are not the primary residence for people. And that only people, not corporations, can own residential single family homes.
And look, it works.
Note that the UK does not have a property tax, and is unusual in doing so; I recall reading that it is the only G7 member to not do so.
They do have a (mostly flat) council tax, and a transfer tax.
We have a few states in the US that don’t, but normally there is an annual percentage tax on the value of a house. That varies by state, but is typically on the order of 1%.
Council tax in the UK is banded based on the size of the property so isn’t that the equivalent of the US property tax?
The bands are why I’m saying “mostly” flat. There is a small amount of scaling, but it quickly hits a cap. If you have a mansion, you aren’t paying 1% of its value in tax annually.
kagis
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/understand-how-council-tax-bands-are-assessed
In England, the top band’s ceiling is 320,000 pounds.
In Wales, 424,000 pounds.
https://www.rightmove.co.uk/house-prices/wales-68336.html
House prices in Wales have an overall average of £441,640 over the last year.
EDIT: The price used is, for Wales, from 2003, so it’s typically about half of the current market value, in fairness, but it still illustrates that the thing cuts off at a certain, fairly low level.
Ah got you sorry. I see your point. Thanks
Wow, look at that, turns out legislative action representing the people’s best interests has been proven infinitely more effective than empowering a dictator to execute everyone who initially refuses to redistribute.
Its as if the solution to capitalism isnt whitewashing regimes that have done some of the worst crimes against humanity possibly but rather government regulations brought upon by democratic action.
Tankies hate this one weird trick!
Corporations hate this trick.
Wow, look at that, turns out legislative action representing the people’s best interests has been proven infinitely more effective than empowering a dictator to execute everyone who initially refuses to redistribute.
Er… I have to admit I’m not up to date on politics in Wales. To what is that referring?
Never engage with finitebanjo unless you enjoy talking to the human equivalent of a cork board with a bunch of red yarn connecting various unrelated pictures.
Oh
I think they’re suggesting that it’s better to enact left-leaning legislation to curb unfettered capitalism, than it is to cheer on the free market and let pressure on the working class escalate to where we get a communist revolution, which in turn often results in a violent dictatorship. Probably.
Often? Try always. Revolutions are, by definition, change in leadership brought about by force of arms. Since violence was necessary to establish the regime, violence will be necessary to maintain it.
Beyond that, Marxism is predicated on the division of the people into the “proletariat” and “bourgeoisie”, with one of the key aims of any Marxist regime being the oppression of the bourgeoisie (as well as any member of the proletariat determined to be a “class-traitor”.) Violent, oppressive dictatorships aren’t just an unfortunate side-effect of socialist revolutions, they’re the only possible outcome.
This is a reference to communist revolutions in Cuba, China, and the Soviet Union, and to a lesser extent Venezuela.
Dictators took power in violent revolutions and they did succeed in redistributing wealth but at the cost of thousands to millions of lives, most of whom were civilians.
I mean I can see that, I just don’t know what it has to do with this article. Nothing there or in this thread suggests to me that violent autocracies were ever under serious consideration as a contender for “solution to housing crisis in Wales”. It looked like the original comment was replying to some kind of previous conversation that I was unaware of.
I’m making a joke about self-proclaimed communists executing landlords.
Were there some politically motivated murders in Wales?
No, China, 1950
It’s relevant because this site is crawling with tankies and people who unironically support landlord execution.
No, China, 1950
It’s relevant because this site is crawling with tankies and people who unironically support landlord execution.
There’s no actual person doing that in that article or in this thread though, is there?
I’ve been saying that for a while that secondary residences should lose all tax benefits and should also have additional tax penalties applied to them as long as there is a housing crisis.
Like a second house should cost you double, and if you get a third, then the second and third should cost you triple, and so on and so forth, so that having multiple homes would be a sign of wealth and not an investment practice.
You roll that out with a gradual phase in and you would solve the housing crisis in like 7 to 10 years.
The penalties should be higher for short term rental properties-if it’s listed on Airbnb or VRBO or similar, taxes double.
This should be tied to the multiple properties IMO. With home prices today you may have to AirBNB out the house and live in a shed in the yard for a few years just to afford the mortgage.
Agree, and I missed the fact that I didn’t make that clear. If Airbnb stayed what their initial marketing portrayed them to be (connecting people who had a spare room or mother-in-law suite that was unoccupied with people who wanted a more genuine local experience,) I’d have no problem with them.
Yeah government needs to start ratcheting down on landlords. Tax rental properties as commercial businesses, as well as taxing rental income at a higher rate. If a landlord can’t afford that anymore, then they sell the property and get a real job.
A general wealth tax is much more effective.
I agree there needs to be some kind of exponentially growing tax rate for multiple houses. It might kick in after two houses since a single shared vacation home between a family should be fairly affordable.
That being said its basically impossible to get a vacation home now. No one should have 3+ homes without paying much much more.
I can’t wrap my head around why anyone needs or wants more than one house or flat.
Maybe because much of my life has been lived in areas with holiday homes, and the seasonal nature of life going from hardly anyone around to overrun with privileged assholes feels intensely unnatural and damaging to places where communities used to exist.
Overwhelmed with second homes / vacation homes are not sustainable. I guess my idea of a second home / cabin is much more upper Midwestern USA than what happens in the UK.
We can’t sustain everyone owning a holiday home in the UK, we are in a housing crisis.
Are the 1st second residences in places where people live (have jobs, etc)?
Because in most countries, is rather the 2nd, 3rd, etc second residences, which are a problem.
Yes, but people who live there have been priced out of the area as they can’t afford to rent or buy anymore. People whose families have lived there for generations. It’s actually causing a staffing crisis in some areas too, as some shops/cafes in the area I used to live couldn’t open as they couldn’t find anyone to work there. Everyone has had to move away to find a home and all the people came down to their holiday homes and complained that none of the shops were open. Serves them right.
Turning a place were people live into some kind of theme park for Tourists destroys it as a place to live in and to conduct any business other than Tourism.
You see it in places like Barcelona, Amsterdam and Lisbon, some of which have already started to crack down on it.
I think in my country the residential houses have different legistlation than vacation homes, like little cottages by the lake. Though the vacation home is required to not be suitable for year-around living, if you have a modern house by the lake it’s treated like a residential house.
In Scotland we have a thing on some homes - like trailers park sort of things - that requires them not to be used for living for at least one month out of the year. They’re cheap to buy (like £30k for a beachside home with a deck and shared facilities) but you’re not technically allowed to live there permanently.
Same here, vacation homes are not really usable as a full timelive in places in my country. They are relatively cheap as they’re in bears ass usually and often even lack a wc.
It’s 150% of the old tax rate, not 150% of the value of the home, in case anyone’s wondering.
Damn that is a misleading title. “Wales is increasing taxes by 50% for second homes, and…” would be better. Or more accurate, at least; probably not generate more clicks.
I was excited for a second
Well, seemingly it still works!
Why would it be 150% of the value of the home. In most places in America the property tax rate is around 1%. This would make it 2.5%. that’s still a lot for the average boomer with a second home possibly on a fixed income from pension and social security.
This is in Wales
Yes. That’s why I typed that I was referencing America when commenting on a European channel.
Does that somehow negate the information as true? Do you think other places pay 150% of the value of the home every year in taxes? You could just buy a house every year and save money if that were true.
Boomer wants a second home he can put it in his grandkids name. Not like the kid is going to be able to afford his own place anyway till grampa dies and leaves everyone that boomer gold they got hoarded away
Tax aint the problem with property. Its that its valued too high because property is an asset of profit. Hope this helps with that issue, but it seems it just limits the trend instead of reversing it.
It is valued too high because houses are seen as an investment.
Taxing them higher makes them not profitable, so they get sold.
Meaning there is more supply, which lowers prices.
It doesn’t solve the problem of rising rent. People already owning their property are not affected by this and can profit off rent increase.
Most people renting out have more than one house, so this would affect them still, while not hurting the old couple that rents out parts of their house that got too big for them
This actually doesn’t affect landlords because council tax is charged to people living in the house first, and only to the owner if no one is living there.
This primarily affects second home owners and short term lets, but there’s other renting reform coming as well, and this has already dropped house prices, so it’s a start.
Blackrock didn’t like that.
This seems to target home owners that either rent or just park wealth in a second home as asset and then also try to evade the taxes by register their second home as a business to pay a lower tax rate.
This doesn’t target landlord / asset management companies at all. Not sure if they are a thing in Wales.
But I want a small cabin by a lake at some point when I’m older. Has that dream been taken away from me, too?
As long as people can’t afford their first home, your cabin is not a priority. Plus, what’s the cost of that cabin? If it’s cheap, the tax increase won’t mean a huge increase in total numbers.
I want a small cabin by a lake
If it’s cheap, the tax increase won’t mean a huge increase
The most important bit of information for people to take away from this conversation.
If your second home is in a location people don’t want to live, i.e not a city and in a small dying rural town where everyone is moving away? People can’t afford homes where they need to live and work, a small cabin by the lake won’t impact that.
Not if you live there and this is only in Wales for now anyway.
deleted by creator
Far better than burning them…
I need to know if my uncle still has his cottage…
deleted by creator
