Should billionaires and multinationals pay fair tax?

[JohnD]

I don't get your angle - landlords do not pay council tax- the tenant does in most cases of private rentals.

Ah, I see you don't understand.

Currently, a house has a liability for a tax that bears some (very inaccurate and variable) relation to its value.

If it had a tax with a different name, why do you assume that would be a problem?

 

[aveatry]

Ah, I see you don't understand.

Currently, a house has a liability for a tax that bears some (very inaccurate and variable) relation to its value.

If it had a tax with a different name, why do you assume that would be a problem?

Because the tax would fall onto the landlord and so increase the rent whereas council tax falls to the tenant not the landlord- unless we are talking about empty houses.

 

[carmanmemoranda]

An investigation by the BBC revealed that the supply of rental homes in the UK had contracted drastically. This steep decline has caused a surge in demand and inevitably driven the cost of rent up by an average of 11%.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65090846

Yes. But whether a house is sold or rented it doesn't change the number of houses

 

[JohnD]

Because the tax would fall onto the landlord and so increase the rent whereas council tax falls to the tenant not the landlord- unless we are talking about empty houses.

Your assumption does not follow.

If there is a hundred pounds tax due on a house, then it is a hundred pounds.

 

[aveatry]

Yes. But whether a house is sold or rented it doesn't change the number of houses

Right but if the house is sold to another landlord = no decrease in houses to rent but if it is sold to a private buyer then = less houses to rent = rents increase - that is exactly what the BBC report is saying is happening.

 

[denso13]

Because the tax would fall onto the landlord and so increase the rent

Why do you think an LVT would increase the landlord's tax burden?

 

[aveatry]

Why do you think an LVT would increase the landlord's tax burden?

It wont if it is only applied to vacant unbuilt on land.

 

[carmanmemoranda]

Right but if the house is sold to another landlord = no decrease in houses to rent but if it is sold to a private buyer then = less houses to rent = rents increase - that is exactly what the BBC report is saying is happening.

Except that buyer may have been a renter.
So 1 less renter and 1 less house to rent = no change in numbers.

If the buyer rents it out its still available = no change in numbers

 

[JohnD]

It wont if it is only applied to vacant unbuilt on land.

And what if it replaces the current tax on houses, as is expected?

 

[aveatry]

Except that buyer may have been a renter.
So 1 less renter and 1 less house to rent = no change in numbers.

if they could afford a house then they would not be renting in the first place

 

[aveatry]

And what if it replaces the current tax on houses, as is expected?

Like i said it depends on who has to pay it - the landlord or the tenant.

 

[denso13]

Like i said it depends on who has to pay it

The land owner.

 

[aveatry]

The land owner.

So you are saying that the landlord will have to pay for the tenents schools, street repairs, parks and leisure facilities and refuse collection police and fire coverage. And that will not have an effect of increasing the rent

 

[denso13]

And that will not have an effect of increasing the rent

They could keep the rent the same and pass it on as a separate charge. It could cost the tenant less with no council tax.

It will make a bigger impact on house builders holding back thousands of acres of land.

 

[JohnD]

A hundred pounds of tax charged on a house is no more expensive than a hundred pounds of tax charged on a house.

You are trying to imagine reasons for objecting to land tax, but you make no sense.