6 comments on “Timmy Elsewhere

  1. Land Value Tax, that’ll sort this out. Either people don’t want to pay that much, so they don’t have a second home (good) or they pay up like gentlemen (also good).

  2. Remember the old adage: Don’t do as I do, do as I say . . . ?

    “Tony Blair has cleared the way for his ministers to receive an extra £18,000 a year to help them keep a second home.

    “The perk follows pressure from some government ministers who say that they are struggling to make ends meet on annual salaries of up to £128,000. They want to be able to claim the same benefit claimed by backbench MPs serving constituencies outside inner London, which is intended to help them keep a home in the capital.”
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/blair-approves-acircpound18000-allowance-for-ministers-second-homes-574737.html

    OK, so ministers need a second home to do their governing job in London and serve their constituents but what of other folks?

    From Scotland in 2004, there was this news report:

    “The council tax discounts received by holiday home owners in Scotland are set to be slashed.”
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/3536922.stm

    In other words, council taxes had been discounted for second homes in order to promote ownership of second homes . . .

  3. Back in the days of being a sprog, and of 83% income tax + 15% investment income surcharge, my accountant father used to sit and chortle about the myriad ways of getting round things that politicians could never see. All sorts of ways of paying value to people without it bothering the taxman.

    So let’s say I’m a moderately well-heeled individual wanting a second home. I don’t want to pay taxes on a second home, I don’t want to be inconvenienced by any restrictions on occupancy of second-home owners. IANAA, but why wouldn’t I just go register myself a limited company to buy the house for me? Or buy it in trust? Or my SIPP? Hmm….. yes, especially my SIPP. Or…… hell. In a country that once (allegedly) had employers leasing business suits to employees so they wouldn’t have to pay tax on the income which would otherwise have gone to buy the suit, it can’t be beyond the wit of the accounting classes to run rings round this sort of thing.

  4. Mark C, exactly! but you haven’t mentioned buying it in the name of your wife, partner, child, as trustee for somebody else (I don’t think that you can put residential property into a SIPP).

    The whole thing is totally and utterly unenforceable anyway. Plus, what is the difference between Family A having a very large home (but no second home) and Family B having a small home and a small holiday home?

  5. Yep, I can see the unenforceability. And the State control of personal assets. And again, if further proof were needed, the stupidity of the average Lib Dem knuckledragger with a headful of wooly idealism and the intellect of a ham sandwich.

    Good call on the SIPP by the way. My mistake. I’d half an idea that residential property other than main residential was still permitted; oh jeez….. half an idea…… now I sound like a Lib Dem.

    Back to the day job, I think.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.