Tax on 2nd home good bad?

MorningStar

They are suggesting again that there should be a tax on people who own a second home. Personally it would effect me so maybe I have a slanted view as anybdoy who is trying to buy. What is the genral feeling? I'd suggest you state what situation you are in in comments. I own more than one property and paid a lot of tax already and pay tax regularly so I am not in favour.

yop

From my point of view, based in the country and in the West I would be delighted, I am sick to the teeth of every house in the area been bought up by tourists who bring sweet fa to the village, barely buy anything and leave the place deserted apart from holidays.
The village is taken over by 05 D merc or bmws, the rich boyz in other words.

We have been priced out of the market on both sites and house and as a result have to move outside to be able to afford a site.

In my parents house out of 15 house to their left there are 12 holiday homes.
Out of 15 to their right there are 13 holiday homes.

Go back 10 years ago, of these 30 home, 10 are new, 6 have sold up and left and the other 14 have either been retained or changed hands.

So you can see where I am coming from.

I am not an anti tourist at all, but I think if you can afford a 2nd home then you can afford to pay taxes to that area for the services and up keep.

MorningStar

yop wrote:

I am not an anti tourist at all, but I think if you can afford a 2nd home then you can afford to pay taxes to that area for the services and up keep.

But they are already and now there is talk of an extra tax on top on a yearly basis and I am not sure if there is talk of it going to local council. You may complain about tourists but consider Dublin where your entire area transforms and you can't afford to live there. On top of that you have to commute huge times to work.

jhegarty

tax the rear end off them... I might be able to afford my own cardboard box then....

MorningStar

jhegarty wrote:

tax the rear end off them... I might be able to afford my own cardboard box then....

Of course the last time they tried that they had to back track because the investors dropped out of the market. The money started leaving the country so they revesed the decision.
Tourist money keep local economies going especially in many of areas where depopulation is an issue in rural areas.

If there is no money in the economy we all end up in cardboard boxes

garred

They shoud fcuk off and leave 2nd home buyers alone. Just trying to invest for the future (no pension) and they think you have money and tax you to the hilt. They seem to forget that you borrow up to your arse and the banks technically own the home. Same old story, you try to get ahead a little and you come crashing down to earth.

Attol

If both homes are owned in the same area then in my opionion definitely. I can't see myself being able to afford anything remotely decent for a long while yet and I think that is not fair on first time buyers. The prices have gone through the roof in the past years and I know people far older than me incapable of finding anything they can afford even with decent full time jobs.

FX Meister

I bought a second home this year and paid a hefty fee in stamp duty. My first house purchase is now rented as an investment. I had to pay a stamp duty clawback on my first home and I also pay tax on the income I get from the investment house. I worked hard to make extra money so I could afford another home, paying tax in the process. I think I've paid enough to the government already without another tax. The reason I have the investment is so I can look after myself when I get old and not have to rely on the gorevnment.

Victor

FX Meister wrote:

I bought a second home this year and paid a hefty fee in stamp duty. My first house purchase is now rented as an investment. I had to pay a stamp duty clawback on my first home and I also pay tax on the income I get from the investment house. I worked hard to make extra money so I could afford another home, paying tax in the process. I think I've paid enough to the government already without another tax. The reason I have the investment is so I can look after myself when I get old and not have to rely on the gorevnment.

Fair enough, you rental income will pay the tax. The income from the property tax would either reduce other taxes or increase services.

The real problem is a minority of people (not fully) occupying a disproportionate amount of property. The list includes couples with grown up children who have moved out, people with holiday homes that are rarely occupied and people who just have oversized homes for prestige and snobbery reasons.

I live in a sub-divided Edwardian house (200m2+) with 9(10?) other people in a total of 6 flats, but some of my neighbours are couples with two children.

It wouldn't be a tax on resources, more a tax on abuse of available resources.

Of course the last time they tried that they had to back track because the investors dropped out of the market.

Make the tax smarter - tax underused property and the investors will be delighted, but the "5 bed, three car, two kid families" won't.

Impose the tax (per square metre? weighted for local services?) with a "tax free allowance" per person. Perfectly equitable.

MorningStar

Victor wrote:

The real problem is a minority of people (not fully) occupying a disproportionate amount of property. The list includes couples with grown up children who have moved out, people with holiday homes that are rarely occupied and people who just have oversized homes for prestige and snobbery reasons.



It wouldn't be a tax on resources, more a tax on abuse of available resources.


Impose the tax (per square metre? weighted for local services?) with a "tax free allowance" per person. Perfectly equitable.

I Actually feel this is a valid point that current resourses are underused. I live in a large house for two of us that has an extention on it while our nextdoor neighbours has 5 adult in it. I obviously wouldn't take to a tax on my home just because more people could live in it. Most of the houses on my road are of the retired couple kids moved out type. The local schools haven't enough pupils in general it does seem the resourses are underused. I think it would be unfair to tell a retired couple on a pension that you are going to tax them because more people could live in their house. Getting them to move to areas that have resourses gear towards aging people would be good as would moving young families into the older areas with the resourses for families. Taxing is punishment I would suggest incentives instead. This would allow people stay if they want and help pension funds aswell. My Gran is 92 and lives in a 3 bed house on her own and lives on state pension you just couldn't tax her or her generation withour people going mental.