L00b Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 They can if they already own a house which they sell for £200,000 to buy this more suitable property,in which case their income would be immaterial.Tw people buying big houses taxed at £10,000 would paybtax at different % rates if they had large but differing incomes.Y are looking at the tax,I am focusing onn the effect on the individual.Adam Smith chose the latter emphasis.You forgot to mention what level of equity they have in the first property they sell at the time of the sale - which would bring the matter of their combined income straight back to the issue The effect of tax on the individual cannot be dissociated from the choices available to that individual as regards personal expenditure (from which the tax liability arises). This couple of your example is not coerced into selling and upgrading: falling liable to stamp duty by purchasing a more expensive property is a choice, the effect of which is entirely predictable before that choice is made. Considering the value of the assets involved, whether stamp duty can be called a progressive or regressive tax is a bit of a sterile debate IMHO, since anyone who can afford a £125,000+ house, on the pump or otherwise, is hardly 'poor' (the usual yardstick for assessing the affordability of the tax liability). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 Even so http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_tax In wikipedia Stamp Duty is used as an example within the description of a progressive tax. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnvqsos Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 What qualifications in economics do you have then, I assume that you're not a laymen otherwise you'd be guilty of straying as much as I am. (Although my full degree was Computer Science with Business Administration, which happened to include some economics)... I could start an entire topic about people in glass houses, maybe I will, in honour of you. I am not going to be drawn into an intellectual version of ebay,its a rather infantile suggestion,and the type economics taught on business modules is necessarily simplified.An economist may transfer to business,but the reverse is rather difficult.If you wish to launch a glass houses thread please go ahead,but I do not want to take any credit for the suggestion. ---------- Post added 22-02-2013 at 12:54 ---------- Even so http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_tax In wikipedia Stamp Duty is used as an example within the description of a progressive tax. It also describes a cyclone as inwardly spiralling,destructive,and often arises inn an unpredictable fashion. I think wikipedia is a it of fun and seldom definitive. ---------- Post added 22-02-2013 at 12:56 ---------- You forgot to mention what level of equity they have in the first property they sell at the time of the sale - which would bring the matter of their combined income straight back to the issue The effect of tax on the individual cannot be dissociated from the choices available to that individual as regards personal expenditure (from which the tax liability arises). This couple of your example is not coerced into selling and upgrading: falling liable to stamp duty by purchasing a more expensive property is a choice, the effect of which is entirely predictable before that choice is made. Considering the value of the assets involved, whether stamp duty can be called a progressive or regressive tax is a bit of a sterile debate IMHO, since anyone who can afford a £125,000+ house, on the pump or otherwise, is hardly 'poor' (the usual yardstick for assessing the affordability of the tax liability). Are you an accountant as I cannot follow your thinking.Why mention equity? ---------- Post added 22-02-2013 at 13:02 ---------- Even so http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_tax In wikipedia Stamp Duty is used as an example within the description of a progressive tax. Read this is Money 24/3/2010 and they say it's regressive.This is areputable source and employ economists to write for them,Wikipedia relieson volunteers so the reference might stem from George Osborne or even Alistar,darling! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L00b Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 Are you an accountant as I cannot follow your thinking.Why mention equity?Why would me being an accoutant make my post any easier for you to understand? They can if they already own a house which they sell for £200,000 to buy this more suitable property,in which case their income would be immaterial.Tw people buying big houses taxed at £10,000 would paybtax at different % rates if they had large but differing incomes.Y are looking at the tax,I am focusing onn the effect on the individual.Adam Smith chose the latter emphasis.Of course -pre-empting your next dodge - if the meaning in your second example quoted above is that they own the 1st house outright (rather than partly), that would indeed make the bit in bold correct. But then, how representative of the national average is that situation (person on £20k or £40k owning a £200k house outright)? Not very (but happy to stand corrected by your stats ). Meantime, that makes the second example pretty irrelevant in the context of a discussion about a national tax policy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 I am not going to be drawn into an intellectual version of ebay,its a rather infantile suggestion,and the type economics taught on business modules is necessarily simplified.An economist may transfer to business,but the reverse is rather difficult.If you wish to launch a glass houses thread please go ahead,but I do not want to take any credit for the suggestion. You started it. By pointing out that I'm not an economist. I guess you feel a little bit silly now I've pointed out that neither are you. ---------- Post added 22-02-2013 at 12:54 ---------- It also describes a cyclone as inwardly spiralling,destructive,and often arises inn an unpredictable fashion. I think wikipedia is a it of fun and seldom definitive. I'm not a cyclone though, I'm not sure what you're point is, other than that wikipedia isn't 100% reliable. ---------- Post added 22-02-2013 at 12:56 ---------- Are you an accountant as I cannot follow your thinking.Why mention equity? ---------- Post added 22-02-2013 at 13:02 ---------- Read this is Money 24/3/2010 and they say it's regressive.This is areputable source and employ economists to write for them,Wikipedia relieson volunteers so the reference might stem from George Osborne or even Alistar,darling! Link please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnvqsos Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 I do not feel silly at all-as I said I wont play ebay GCSE,and am not getting into a silly squabble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 I do not feel silly at all-as I said I wont play ebay GCSE,and am not getting into a silly squabble. You started the silly squabble. Stick to computer science and leave economics to others.Adam Smith also emphasised the benefits of specialisation and the danger of laymen straying into foreign fields. Now you're the one that looks silly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnvqsos Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 Why would me being an accoutant make my post any easier for you to understand? Of course -pre-empting your next dodge - if the meaning in your second example quoted above is that they own the 1st house outright (rather than partly), that would indeed make the bit in bold correct. But then, how representative of the national average is that situation (person on £20k or £40k owning a £200k house outright)? Not very (but happy to stand corrected by your stats ). Meantime, that makes the second example pretty irrelevant in the context of a discussion about a national tax policy. To save wasting further time can you explain why AT is regressive.If yu cannot do this then it will mean we see that term differently,rendering debate futile.I do not like your mention of dodges,as it is you who sounds like an accountant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L00b Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 To save wasting further time can you explain why AT is regressive.If yu cannot do this then it will mean we see that term differently,rendering debate futile.I do not like your mention of dodges,as it is you who sounds like an accountant.What's AT? If you meant stamp duty, sorry but I'm with Cyclone and others on this. Stamp duty is a progressive tax. Accordingly, I respectfully decline to "explain why AT is regressive" BTW, you're still not making any sense with your labelling me as an accountant. What's with the obsession? FWIW, plenty of peeps in the biz section on here know what I do for a living, and it's not accounting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manlinose Posted February 22, 2013 Author Share Posted February 22, 2013 a regressive tax is one that is charged at the same rate irrespective of income, so that the lower your income, the higher the proportion of your income you pay on that tax e.g. tax expenditure of £10,000 out of an income of £100,000 is 10% - tax expenditure of £10,000 out of an income of £50,000 is 20% so, two people buying similar properties at the same price are paying the same amount of stamp duty, but, as a proportion of income, the rate paid is different - that is why stamp duty is regressive - the amount payable is a proportion of the asset value, not the income of the purchaser i accept that, the higher earner, as a general rule, may buy a more expensive house which has a higher rate of stamp duty payable on it, but that only means that the rates are progressive, not the tax itself and i'm not an accountant either Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.