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.
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.
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.
What is stamp duty and how much do I pay?
This is not a Budget we want to repeat, says Reeves
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
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
The treaty Gibraltar wants, for the future we all need
For over five years, Gibraltar has been at the centre of one of the most complex, technical, and geopolitically sensitive negotiations undertaken by the United Kingdom and the European Union since Brexit. The process has consumed me. It has occupied close to half of my time in elected office, taken over almost every waking hour of the last five years, and, in truth, deprived the people of Gibraltar of their Chief Minister in the way they are used to having him, that is, from fixing housing and parking complaints to defending their sovereignty in the international arena. For much longer than I would have wanted, I have been behind closed doors, in physical or virtual boardrooms, working through the details of a document that will shape the next generation of our people. It has been a relentless, exhausting endeavour. Throughout this time, the UK and Gibraltar teams have worked together seamlessly, 'hand in glove', without a flash of daylight between us. We have worked in close partnership with both Conservative and Labour prime ministers and foreign secretaries; from Dominic Raab, Liz Truss and James Cleverly to David Cameron and now David Lammy. What we have negotiated is not the product of fragmented agendas, but the position of a unified British family determined to find a solution worthy of our people. Without a treaty, Gibraltar could be staring down the barrel of a hard border, marked by endless queues, disrupted supply chains, and a deeply uncertain future for many of our businesses. Our hospitals and elderly care homes would face chronic understaffing, and the surrounding region would suffer the almost certain loss of employment for many of the 15,000 cross-borderworkers who depend on Gibraltar's economy to support their families. The services we deliver to our people would all come under strain. Our public finances would be pushed to the brink. The self-governing Gibraltar we have built would be diminished, replaced by something poorer, more isolated, more inward-looking, and ultimately less able to thrive as a proud, British European Territory. Instead, we now stand at the threshold of something remarkable, and not just for Gibraltar, but also for the United Kingdom, for Spain, and for Europe and our people. Something bold. Something forward looking and hopeful. Something that finally breaks free of the negative inertia that has defined too much of our recent past. This is politics at its most elevated. The service-led principle of working for our people's benefit and not the performative personal antagonism that too often infects public life. Real, hard graft that overcomes challenges to deliver progress. This is the kind of result our people demand when they voice distrust and decry the political 'establishment'. Our Spanish and EU counterparts, for their part, have brought to the table a seriousness of purpose that also reflects the gravity of the moment. They, too, have recognised that this treaty is not merely about fluidity of movement, but about unlocking human and economic potential across borders. Make no mistake: the treaty that is now within reach is not one that the Gibraltarians have been forced to accept. Our people voted for us to have a mandate to turn our New Year's Eve agreement of 2020 into a UK/EU agreement/treaty. So we say 'yes' to this agreement, but not because we don't know how to say 'no' when we have to. We did so, emphatically, in 2002, when we triggered a referendum to reject Jack Straw's proposal of joint sovereignty with Spain, and I am just as adamant today that this treaty will not in any way compromise British sovereignty over Gibraltar. That will be set out, black upon white, in the treaty when it is published. It is a legal undertaking given by both sides in clear and unequivocal terms. So to be clear: in this treaty we have not ceded any control of Gibraltar to any authority. Just like today, only Gibraltar will decide who enters Gibraltar – exactly as we agreed in 2020 when Dominic Raab was foreign secretary and Boris Johnson was prime minister. This treaty unleashes the potential to usher in a new era. One in which we move beyond the tired narratives of the past on constant sovereignty disputes, towards a future defined by hope, cooperation and shared prosperity. It will pave the way for better jobs, more investment and lasting stability for Gibraltar and the wider region. It can deliver more harmonious human relations and a better quality of life for all our people. When you read it, I ask that you to look up from the pages of this treaty and see that better reality as it peers back at us from the future. This will be the treaty Gibraltar wants. It will be a treaty the UK and the EU can be proud of. And it will be a treaty that will propel us all to the better future politicians are elected to deliver. When the time comes, back Gibraltar and its proudly British people by backing the Gibraltar treaty. Fabian Picardo is the chief minister of Gibraltar Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
If you're in the private sector, get ready to take a massive hit
It should have been called the Spending More Review. Or even better, the Spending More Without Saying Where the Money is Going to Come From Review. You have to wonder how much longer this Government can go on running against Liz Truss. Or against those other favourite panto villains: Austerity and the £22 Billion Black Hole. And how much more mileage can there be in swearing fealty to the interests of 'working people' when you clearly mean 'people who work in the public sector' – because you are busy putting the other kind, the ones who work in the private entrepreneurial sector, out of business. So it was a billion here and a billion there: lots and lots of money to be spent on what are obviously thought to be the most vote-winning recipients, most of whom happen to reside in the Red Wall constituencies which Labour is terrified of losing to Reform. There was, of course, a large funding increase promised to the NHS without any demand for the kind of reforms that might actually see that money better spent. Even Gordon Brown, who hugely increased health spending, had demanded reform in exchange (although he never actually got it). But to fail even to mention such a condition seems insulting to the intelligence of voters who can see the inefficiencies and waste in the system with their own eyes. But the most depressing recurrent theme was a return to the sentimental pre-1980s idea of a working class that cannot imagine any life beyond its local industrial roots. The aspiration and social mobility which Blair's New Labour had been compelled to embrace is gone now. The commitment was to save 'local communities' of 'working people' by developing government-run projects: precisely the conditions that gave rise to the suffocating trade union power of the 1970s. (Ms Reeves explicitly stated her determination to give 'public service workers the pay rises they deserve.') This was a spending programme that a Government led by Jeremy Corbyn would have been proud of. But the biggest hole in all of this was any explanation of where this money would come from. There was a clear hint in her reiteration of the Government's commitment to pay for increased 'day-to-day' spending through current income rather than by taking on more debt. That means tax rises. But you knew that didn't you? And if your earnings come from the wealth-creating private sector, even though you may consider yourself at least as much of a 'working person' as those who are paid by the state, you had better be prepared to take a very substantial hit. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
PM picked ‘wrong Chancellor and wrong priorities', claims Badenoch
Kemi Badenoch has accused the Prime Minister of 'running away' from a 'U-turn' on winter fuel payments for pensioners. The Conservative Party leader accused Sir Keir Starmer of appearing at the despatch box 'all puffed up and self-righteous', and claimed he has 'the wrong Chancellor and the wrong priorities'. Sir Keir listed 'three trade deals, record investment, breakfast clubs, social affordable housing, defence review' and the decision to pump £14.2 billion into building Sizewell C nuclear power station in Suffolk as being among his achievements. At Prime Minister's Questions, Mrs Badenoch told the Commons: 'Last year he said he was taking the winter fuel payment away to balance the books. 'But the books are not balanced, in fact they are worse. 'This year the deficit is forecast to be £10 billion higher since the budget. 'Not since last year's election, since the budget. 'In what way are the books now balanced?' Chancellor Rachel Reeves last year announced that the Government would strip pensioners of the universal winter fuel payment, unless they claimed certain means-tested benefits. But the Government has since said pensioners with a gross taxable income of less than £35,000 will be eligible for payments of up to £300 each winter. Sir Keir replied: 'She's obviously missed the interest rate cuts, the growth figures for earlier this year, the strategic defence review, local transport – £15 billion going in, free school meals, Sizewell, social housing. 'She stands there to lecture us, and I see Liz Truss is obviously back in vogue. 'Advising Reform officially now, haunting the Tories, and I remind her that the shadow home secretary (Chris Philp), I think he was then chief secretary to the Treasury, he gave a Liz Truss budget 9.5 out of 10. 'The Leader of the Opposition said what was wrong with Liz Truss's budget was not necessarily the package, that was alright, it was the way it was sold. 'They've learnt absolutely nothing.' In a follow-up question, Mrs Badenoch said the Prime Minister mentioned Ms Truss because he 'wants to hide from his own economic record'. She added: 'He's a coward. 'Every time he stands up there and talks about Liz Truss it's because he is scared about talking about his record and what is happening to the economy out there. 'Let's bring it back to the U-turn which he's running away from. 'A U-turn on the policy his MPs went out defending time and time again.' Mrs Badenoch continued: 'This is laughable. 'He stands there all puffed up and self-righteous. 'Why can't the Prime Minister just admit that he made a mistake?' In his response, the Prime Minister said: 'Three weeks ago I said that I wanted more pensioners to be eligible for winter fuel. 'I'm really pleased we've set out the threshold for the certainty that is needed. 'She says I don't want to talk about record. 'What about three trade deals, record investment, breakfast clubs, social affordable housing, defence review, Sizewell, we could go on all morning.' He added: 'At the weekend she said that she would be getting better in the role. 'She could start with apologising for the Liz Truss budget, that would be better.' Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle rebuked laughing Labour MPs after Mrs Badenoch said her PMQs performances 'get better every week'. He told them their behaviour was a 'very bad look'. In her question, Mrs Badenoch said Ms Reeves said the winter fuel payment 'U-turn won't be funded through higher borrowing'. She asked: 'So, will the Prime Minister admit that it will be funded by putting everybody's taxes up?' Sir Keir said: 'At the budget, we put record investment in our NHS and our public services – record investment – but she comes every week to carp on about national insurance, but she doesn't stand there with the courage of her convictions and say she'll actually reverse it, and the reason she won't? 'Because she won't stand up and say she's against the investment in the NHS, she won't stand up and say she's against the investment in our public services, and we'll all listen very carefully in just 20 minutes when the Chancellor lays out more record investment as to whether they welcome it, or whether they'll say they wouldn't support it.' In her final question, Mrs Badenoch said Ms Reeves had 'made bad choices – bad choices that mean higher inflation, bad choices that have led to lower growth, bad choices that have meant that jobs have been lost every single month since Labour come into office'. She said 'thousands of families' had 'lost their incomes in Stoke, in Grangemouth, in Luton', before she asked: 'Isn't the truth that we've got the wrong Chancellor and the wrong priorities?' Sir Keir said: 'A wrong choice they made was making her Leader of the Opposition.' Turning to the Government's plan to hand the Chagos Islands to Mauritius, where the UK maintains a military presence on Diego Garcia, Mrs Badenoch had earlier claimed 'Mauritius is scrapping income tax' and asked: 'Why on earth should the British taxpayer pay £30 billion for tax cuts in Mauritius?' The Government risked jeopardising the 'vital intelligence and strategic capability' on Diego Garcia without a deal, the Prime Minister warned. 'Legal uncertainty would compromise it in very short order,' he added.
