Idiot. It’s a home, not an investment vehicle. Will you be selling your house for what you paid for it? Will you be paying tax on the difference of what you paid for it and what you sell it for?
Multinational forced to pay some tax
- Thread starter JohnD
- Start date
There’s no capital gains due on your home.
They are not her beneficiaries until she dies and even then, she may give it all away to the cats home, it’s her asset to do what she likes with.
So, it's doing her no good, and doing no-one else any good either.
Hoisted by your own petard
Eh? Firstly, it’s not her responsibility to do anyone else 'any good'. Secondly, she's in her own home, able to afford the running costs and is happy there. Why on earth should she move anywhere?So, it's doing her no good, and doing no-one else any good either.
Hoisted by your own petard
Last edited:
She doesn't "have" to move anywhere.
The discussion was whether income or capital should be taxed.
She's sitting on a lot of capital.
You say you voted Brexit because you want this country to be better, and you're happy to accept that it might take 50 years to achieve that.
I too want this country to "be better", and I currently don't see housing being a scarce resource, and more of an investment vehicle than somewhere to live, as being a situation that is making the country better.
So, to my mind, housing as an investment has to go.
And, for it to go, we have to start somewhere.
There’s no capital gains due on your primary home.
You are allowed to nominate your primary home.
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 15,782
- Reaction score
- 2,371
- Country
same rules apply to all of us.
If you are being deliberately stupid again, you might think that.
The grass is always greener..
Last edited:
If she doesn’t have to move anywhere and doesn’t want to, why should she pay tax to stay in her own home? She may well just have enough to run the house and get by. I can understand it with council houses - if a family has left home and mum and/or dad are sitting in a 3 or 4 bedroom house then as it’s not their house, they should trade down and let others on the housing trade up if they have a need for those extra bedrooms but not a homeowner. That’s why you work hard and make sacrifices - so that you can choose the home you can live in. You shouldn’t be penalised for not being in social housing.
What you on mate? TT's super, home alone? 99% of the time you have a fair point, valid view, useful input. On this thread you've turned into Noseall. Are you and him drinking buddies?So, it's doing her no good, and doing no-one else any good either.
Hoisted by your own petard
Stop cherry-picking: I clearly said that we - as a country - can't carry on as we are.
Houses were affordable for the likes of you and I to - if we "worked our bowlogs off" - afford.
Much less so nowadays.
If the trajectory doesn't change, private ownership will be out-of-reach for all but the most well-off / lucky. No matter how hard you graft.
What happens when - not if - most people, even those who
can't afford to buy their own house?
And don't forget, where house prices go, so do rents.
Where do those who can afford neither go then?
After all, there's nowhere near enough
as it is.
Yeah but why Mottie's MIL. What's she ever done to you.
Spend your better years grafting yourself every hour God sends, doing without, just to get arthritis and live on a diet of heart and blood pressure pills............
............to pay for an artificially-expensive house?
Wouldn't you rather have had the opportunity to buy a house at a reasonable price, treat it as somewhere to live and enjoy, and had time and money to enjoy things you really wanted to do, when you had the energy and health to do so?
There's no pockets in shrouds
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 15,782
- Reaction score
- 2,371
- Country
You can't flip them, to avoid gains tax or second property tax. You are entitled to a discount on any period you have lived in the property.