Home buyers race to beat stamp duty rise
Home buyers are scrambling to complete purchases by the end of the month or face paying thousands of pounds extra in stamp duty.First-time buyers in particular, already up against affordability challenges, could be hit when stamp duty thresholds in England and Northern Ireland change on 1 April.One couple said they felt like they were "in a race, and our prize is £11,000".Lenders say a significant swathe of the country will be drawn into paying the tax, but the government says it is helping more people to buy their first home.
At the moment, buyers of homes worth less than £250,000 do not pay stamp duty. This was doubled from £125,000 under Liz Truss's mini-Budget in September 2022.The threshold is £425,000 for those buying their first property. This was raised from £300,000 as part of the mini-Budget.These higher thresholds will end at the start of April, when they will revert to previous levels.
More jeopardy for a Traitor
Paul Gorton featured in the 2024 series of cult reality TV series The Traitors.The 37-year-old and his partner Kate Waldron now face another episode of high jeopardy to complete the purchase of their first home in time."We're on a knife edge, we've got weeks, otherwise it's going to cost us a large chunk for no reason," Mr Gorton said.They are trying to buy a property in Congleton, Cheshire. Ms Waldron, 34, said it was a particularly stressful time because she only gave birth to baby Cooper three months ago. They already have two-year-old Charlie and a dog called Buddy."We're doing it all at once. It's an added stress with this deadline looming over us," she said.Missing that deadline would cost them £6,500, despite having put all their money into the deposit, and facing the prospect of regular bills and nursery fees.
Deadline fears
Karen Potter, an estate agent in Southport, has about 37 clients in the danger zone of missing the deadline."In a stressful arena anyway, we've got this panic where there's another source of strain and stress for them," she said.Property portal Rightmove has estimated that in England, some 25,000 first-time buyers and 74,000 home movers, in the buying process, would be unable to complete in time to beat the deadline.Mortgage brokers have reported buyers pulling out of deals because they could not move before the end of March.The proportion of areas in England in which the average first-time buyer home falls into the scope of stamp duty will rise from 8.4% to 32% on 1 April, according to analysis by the Skipton Group, which includes a building society and estate agency.
Stamp duty has always been a more common issue for buyers in the south east of England, where house prices are higher. Some will face higher stamp duty bills owing to the changing thresholds.Jonah Kavanagh and Elle Van Petersen are hoping to buy their first home together in Guildford. They, and their sellers, are pulling out all the stops to get the move completed in time.Failure to do so would cost them £11,000 extra in stamp duty."It feels like we are in a race, and our prize is £11,000," said Mr Kavanagh, 29, who was one of those who got in touch on the issue via Your Voice, Your BBC News as he was worried about others in a similar situation.Ms Van Petersen said there was plenty of "uncertainty, anxiety, and nervousness" now on top of the shock that came when no extension to stamp duty relief was announced in the Budget.The government has previously said that Budget was a necessary package to fill what it called a black hole in the public finances, and other changes were freeing up properties for first-time buyers."We're committed to making home ownership possible for hardworking Brits, that's why we're fixing the planning system and building 1.5 million more homes," said a Treasury spokesman.For Mr Kavanagh and Ms Van Petersen the impact, were they to miss the deadline, would be less money and sensible savings to cover living costs, furniture, and unexpected costs.
Ways to make your mortgage more affordable
Make overpayments. If you still have some time on a low fixed-rate deal, you might be able to pay more now to save later.Move to an interest-only mortgage. It can keep your monthly payments affordable although you won't be paying off the debt accrued when purchasing your house.Extend the life of your mortgage. The typical mortgage term is 25 years, but 30 and even 40-year terms are now available.Read more here
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Statesman
33 minutes ago
- New Statesman
The Tories must do more than apologise for Liz Truss
Photograph by Henry Nicholls - Pool/Getty Images. Better late than never, and better something than nothing. The Conservative Party should have distanced itself from Liz Truss at the first opportunity – emphatically, unequivocally and ruthlessly. On the steps of Downing Street on 25 October 2022, as his first act as Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak should have condemned the mini-Budget, apologised to the nation and made it clear that Truss would never be a Conservative parliamentary candidate again. It would have been a justified response to the chaos of the preceding few weeks and a signal that the party had changed. It did not happen. Sunak acknowledged that 'mistakes were made' but left it at that. He was too cautious about splitting his party. The membership had voted for Truss (he should have announced his intention to remove their rights to elect the leader, too) and a large minority of the parliamentary party had backed her. It would have been a bold gamble, and the case for such a move becomes more persuasive when one knows for certain of the electoral obliteration that lies ahead. Maybe we should not be too harsh on the last Conservative prime minister but we do now know how the infamous mini-Budget was brought up at every opportunity in last year's general election, and is continually referenced by Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves. This is not just out of habit but will be a consequence of extensive polling research. The public remain furious at the chaos and uncertainty that was unleashed. Mortgage-holders, in particular, will not be quick to forgive. The Tories can survive many accusations, and still win elections. But they cannot win while being perceived as economically reckless. Not only is it a political vulnerability, but the Truss experience prevents them from delivering effective criticism of their opponents. At a time when Nigel Farage is advocating turning on the spending taps while also implementing massive tax cuts, the Conservatives are right to say he is being fiscally irresponsible. But when they say he is 'Liz Truss on steroids', it sounds amiss coming from Truss's party (especially when the line is delivered by those who served her loyally). And if the fears that the bond market vigilantes will turn against the UK come to pass, the Tory attack on Labour will also lack real punch. These factors resulted in the most substantial criticism of the mini-Budget from the Conservative frontbench. Shadow chancellor Mel Stride acknowledged that it had damaged the Tories' economic credibility, and that the party should show contrition. Stride – a reassuring figure who was critical of the mini-Budget at the time – was right to do so, but even then there was too much equivocation. Despite the advance briefing, there was no explicit apology. The language was characteristically measured and thoughtful, but what was needed was something a little more eye-catching and memorable. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe Better still, the sentiments should have been expressed by the party leader, not the shadow chancellor. But when Kemi Badenoch was asked subsequently about the mini-Budget, she equivocated. She started to make the argument that the problem was the higher spending on energy support announced on 8 September, not the unfunded tax cuts set out on 23 September (she should check the dates of the market turmoil) and stated that she 'did not want to be commenting on previous prime ministers'. The strategy of distancing the Tory Party from Truss had been watered down after just a day. It is not good enough. Having left any serious criticisms for too long (31 months too long), this is no time for half measures. If the Conservatives want the right to be heard again by those voters who prioritise economic stability, they need to do this properly. Emphatically, unequivocally and ruthlessly. That means not just taking on Truss, but the thinking behind the mini-Budget. Contrary to the arguments made by the Trussites, tax cuts generally do not pay for themselves. Fiscal responsibility should come before tax cuts. Independent institutions such as the Bank of England and the Office for Budget Responsibility are not to blame for our economic difficulties. The events of autumn 2022 were not the result of a conspiracy but incompetence. The leadership of the Conservative Party should be making and winning those arguments now. This means that it will be impossible to offer unfunded tax cuts at the next general election as part of a retail offer, but that is the price that must be paid to recover economic credibility. While they are at it, there are other aspects of the party's recent history that should be addressed. The Conservatives were deeply damaged by the partygate scandal and the impression that the rules that applied to everyone else did not apply to them. According to a parliamentary committee on which there was a Tory majority, Boris Johnson misled the House of Commons about this matter and a 90-day suspension from the Commons would have been recommended had he not resigned as an MP. If the Tories want a reputation for economic competence and integrity (and that should not be too much to ask), they should make it clear that both Johnson's and Truss's days as Conservative parliamentary candidates are over. When distancing themselves from those aspects of their past that alienate the voters they need, what is required from the Tories are confident strides, not small, tentative steps. They have at least made a start, but it would be a grave mistake to think that the job is done. Related
Telegraph
11 hours ago
- Telegraph
Mark my words, we're headed for a monster debt crisis
All things fall apart. Orders, whether domestic or geopolitical, eventually collapse. So too do monetary cycles, typically rising and falling every 80 years or so. The big cycle that began in 1945 is coming to a close as the bond markets begin to crack. Bookmark this piece: a debt crisis is coming. Let me explain what's happening. The yield on government debt is the measure of how much interest people expect to receive to lend the government money. This goes up when the market loses confidence in the government's economic plans or think the Chancellor is going to borrow plenty more. We saw yields shoot up under Liz Truss. But after Rachel Reeves's budget, yields on the UK's 30 year bonds peaked at 5.58 per cent, up from the previous 4.99 per cent peak on the worst day of the mini-budget fallout. More worryingly, the term premium, which is the part of the yield which prices the additional risk that borrowers are taking by holding the Government's long-term debt, has risen far more sharply in the UK than in America, Germany and many other developed countries. If Reeves thought Liz Truss crashed the economy, how would she describe her own failure? The markets have concluded that Reeves's plans to stimulate growth are thin – indeed, fatally contradicted by her jobs and investment destroying tax rises – meaning she will inevitably turn to yet more borrowing to fund huge spending splurges. Borrowing for the year 2024-25 was forecast to be £87 billion in Jeremy Hunt's budget of March 2024, but over this financial year Reeves's Treasury has spent £152 billion more than it received in revenue. To put this in context, in 1976 when the UK was bailed out by the IMF the national debt to GDP ratio was running at 50 per cent. Now it is around 100 per cent – and unfunded public sector pensions take it to over 200 per cent of GDP. That's before you include huge, unquantified liabilities currently swept under the carpet, like nationalising the rail and steel industries. Some will paint my warnings as fearmongering: haven't we been in worse straits before? After WW2, UK government debt peaked at around 270 per cent of GDP and dropped steadily to 50 per cent over 30 years. The truth is that we are now uncomfortably close to that level of debt, but unlike those post-war decades we have no growth to manage our way out of it. The financial repression that was possible post-war required capital controls and fixed exchange rates under Bretton Woods. Today, aggressive measures of this kind would only lead to capital flight, currency depreciation and all manner of other knock-on effects. How might this crisis unfold? Typically in a bond market crisis the most indebted countries are targeted first by bond vigilantes who sell their bonds, force their prices down and the premium up. Buyers of newly issued bonds dry up, demanding ever higher yields. The UK is exposed and the markets sense it. The US has certain advantages as the world's reserve currency, but even it is heading for trouble. In Washington, the latest debt fuelled spending spree has attracted fierce criticism from the likes of Elon Musk. If passed it would set the US on a path to record debt. Even the world's biggest economy cannot be immune from the laws of fiscal gravity forever. So worried are some in Trump's circle that in the so-called Mar-a-Lago Accord and elsewhere, Scott Bessent, now Secretary of the Treasury, and others considered how the US could reduce debt by devaluing the dollar, and even renegotiating debt to force down its liabilities. The backdrop to this is a highly unstable geopolitical world. A quarter of our debt is foreign held. China and other adversaries hold many of the cards. Not that there are friends when it comes to the markets making decisions. As Truss discovered, when there is a loss of confidence in a government's ability to service debt, markets ruthlessly intrude upon democratic government. They effectively dictated the reversal of almost all measures in the mini-budget and removed a Prime Minister. A future debt crisis would see the markets demand spending cuts of a magnitude and scale we've never known before. They will despatch Reeves back to her old job in customer relations in no time. The woman who once preposterously posed as the Iron Chancellor is now seen by the markets as a spendthrift with no growth plan – and unable to resist the unaffordable demands of her backbenchers. Egged on by Nigel Farage, she wants to fork out billions more on benefits by lifting the two-child cap. The economic growth needed to fund this debt boom is not materialising – she is funnelling money to the public sector and crushing the private sector, the engine of growth. Industrial energy prices are now the highest of any developed country, decimating the ceramic, petrochemical, glass and car industries. If Reeves can't persuade the markets she has a plan, and quickly, yields could rise even higher. She is dancing on the edge of a precipice. Of course, the roots of the present challenge go back some way. Covid lockdowns and the money printing that paid for them cast a long shadow. Unlike many who cheered the opening of the spending taps, I warned in Cabinet of the inflationary impacts and sought to run a tight ship in my department. Even before the pandemic hit, the Bank of England's QE had created the illusion that deficits could be financed without end, and that hard trade offs could be avoided. That was fantasy economics. The UK will hit the rocks if we don't change course. There is too much debt because there is too much spending. Labour may try and offset that with more taxation, but they can't do that without crushing growth altogether. If you thought you knew the depth of anger and resignation about the mismanagement of the country, you haven't seen anything yet.
North Wales Live
17 hours ago
- North Wales Live
Brits more interested in home makeovers than making them energy-efficient
A recent survey of 2,000 homeowners discovered that more than half are favouring aesthetic enhancements such as kitting out with a swanky new kitchen or bathroom suite over energy-saving measures, because they feel these refurbishments add more value and grant instant gratification. Many are opting to splurge on glamorous home updates rather than investing in insulation or efficient heating systems. As revealed by the study organised by Skipton Building Society, part of the Skipton Group, a substantial number of property owners admit that eco-friendly improvements lack the allure of a luxurious makeover, with 16 percent confessing their love of a new home feature. This insight accompanies the release of The Big Retrofit report, which details the energy efficiency overhaul of a home previously dependent on fossil fuels. The report, a collaboration between Leeds Beckett University and the University of Leeds, demonstrates how retrofitting—a process of upgrading a building to improve its energy performance—has increased comfort and progressed the EPC rating of a typical 1930s detached house from D up to B. Phil Spencer, the TV favourite and founder of Move iQ, offered his perspective: "It's easy to get caught up in choosing statement tiles or bold paint colours, but the most valuable home improvements aren't always the most 'Instagrammable'." To emphasise the long term benefits, he further mentioned: "Green upgrades not only save money in the long run, but they can also boost comfort, value and sustainability, all without spoiling the look of your home." A recent survey shows that over a quarter of people in the UK know someone who has made eco-friendly home improvements, with 53 per cent feeling encouraged to follow suit. As a result, interest in green technology is growing, with 48 per cent considering solar panels and 24 per cent exploring better loft insulation, while 15 per cent would think about fitting triple-glazed windows. For 38 per cent of homeowners, learning about the reduced energy bills neighbours enjoyed was the catalyst for their own interest. The report found that nearly half of the homeowners now see making sustainable upgrades as a mark of success in today's world. Being able to charge an electric vehicle at home, having underfloor heating powered by renewable sources, and owning a heat pump are now seen as top indicators of having 'made it'. Michaela Wright, head of group sustainability at Skipton Building Society, commented: "As more people see their neighbours investing in greener technologies, it naturally sparks curiosity and motivation to do the same. "There's something powerful about seeing these changes up close – it makes the benefits feel more real and achievable. It's a positive sign that more energy efficient choices are becoming aspirational, not just practical. "We understand that making energy-efficient home improvements might not be at the top of everyone's priority list. That's why we took on the journey ourselves – to help demystify the retrofit process through The Big Retrofit project.
