If you rent and it's same cost as mortgage. How do you afford your retirement when pensions basically evaporate?
House prices rose 7.3% this year, average now almost £250k
- Thread starter HACO
- Start date
- Status
If you rent and it's same cost as mortgage. How do you afford your retirement when pensions basically evaporate?
The US average house price is significantly cheaper than the UK though.
US is currently averaged at 119k vs UK 254k, so a 1% property tax would be quite different.
which is why there are different rates, but that average is very misleading due to many people living in relative poverty in the US.
The average house price in California across the entire state is $750,000. The median house price in a city like San Jose is $1.4 million.
Average salary in San Jose?
Switzerland has a tiny population and US has lots of land, not really the same as the UK is it?
because I pensions don't evaporate. Proper financial planning and strong pension contributions will ensure a stress free retirement.
If you rent all your life that's 100s per month you are chucking away.
If you are close to the breadline you are going to have to rely on the state pension. And who knows how pathetic that will be come end of life.
Main reason for me to get a house is I fully expect to have to use it to pay for my retirement
A load of white elephant projects.
Lots of people can't be bothered to work either, someone needs to pay for them too.
I don't disagree that average price is misleading, same can be said of the UK though. I.e. average house price in County Durham is around 60k, whereas average price in Knightsbridge is £3mil+.
This is entirely rational.
What isn't is people being up in arms about not being able to hand their house down as inheritance due to care costs.
Extend that argument... so collectively we all have to pay for your care because you want to save your entire life then hand it all to your kids?
Or even further.. basically I'm giving my money to your kids via inheritance?
It's nonsense.
I get there is an issue around the "fairness" of someone who worked/saved bought a house having to liquidate their assets to pay for care when someone who didn't clearly doesn't. There are ways to combat that such as allowing a time to wind down your assets/unlock equity to pay for a proportion of your care or apportion an element of NI contributions to care for all which you can reclaim as a rebate or something if you're likely to have assets to pay for your own care.
I'm not sure but all of us essentially being taxed to allow the relatively more wealthy to accrue money then pay it down to their offspring is incoherent in an age where we're all likely to start living well beyond a point where we can either look after ourselves or positively contribute to the economy.
Associate
- Joined
- 20 Mar 2014
- Posts
- 2,361
I think if you need to go in a home or have carers when you are old it should be free to use. Like the NHS. And it should be paid for via tax. Council tax does need updating to reflect house prices today.
I dont think you can complain at home owners not wanting to give up thier home when they get old or die. It's fair enough to keep it and pass it on if you like. You could have always got out the equity and spent it and not paid for care that way. Why encourage that?
Big companies need to pay UK tax. The online sales tax could help get Amazon to contribute.
I dont think you can complain at home owners not wanting to give up thier home when they get old or die. It's fair enough to keep it and pass it on if you like. You could have always got out the equity and spent it and not paid for care that way. Why encourage that?
Big companies need to pay UK tax. The online sales tax could help get Amazon to contribute.
How will this tax stop people handing property to their children? You can just change the title deeds in good time before you die.
No you can't. Not if you still live in the house.
*well, you can, but it doesn't avoid tax.
What tax? I'm not talking about this proposed property tax I'm talking about a more generalised point.
In terms of making yourself look like you don't own a house for the purposes of avoiding inheritance tax or having to liquidate your assets to pay for your care that is relatively straightforward with legislation because it's tax avoidance. We do quite a a lot of it already.
Again the fact that setting up things like shell companies to own houses to avoid taxes is a thing and yet 1 mistake on my PAYE and I have a new tax code within seconds that I can't argue with tells you everything about who the government are more interested in taxing.
The problem isn't so much the money doesn't exist, it's that we're not going to get it.
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 15,991
- Location
- Fareham
People have multiple homes. Like say you have a couple of BTL houses, you can change deeds on one of them to be in your childs name once they are 18 or something.
Maybe for a very small number of wealthy people. Most who have rental property are using the rental income to pay for other things and wouldn't be able to just give up that income.
So we climbed the ladder over 10 years, 1-bed flat, 2-bed flat, and now a 3-bed house, with a view to start a family, but now we should downsize just because?
The SDLT we paid on this house ate up 75% of the 'gains' we made on the previous flat, so it's not like we massively benefited from rising prices either.
We can take the extra £250 a month hit, but it means less disposable income to put back in to the economy in general, and it will extend the time to clear our other debts by a few years (so hitting us with even more interest charges) and wipe out our monthly contingency fund.
If we got a rebate from the SDLT we paid (which effectively is 5 years worth at 1% per year), making the next 3 years property tax exempt, then I wouldn't be as annoyed, but we already got taxed big time buying this place.
- Status