Business live: House prices rise as buyers shrug off stamp duty
House prices rose again last month as the buyers continued to return to the market after a slowdown in demand following the end of the stamp duty holiday, data from the mortgage lender Halifax showed.
House prices rose by 0.4 per cent in July, the biggest monthly increase since the start of this year. The average house price is now £298,237, 2.4 per cent higher than a year ago.
Amanda Bryden, head of mortgages at Halifax, said: 'Challenges remain for those looking to move up or onto the property ladder. But with mortgage rates continuing to ease and wages still rising, the picture on affordability is gradually improving.'
She said the second half of the year will see a notable rise in homeowners coming to the end of fixed-rate deals. 'While most borrowers coming to the end of five-year fixed-rate mortgage deals will see their monthly repayments rise. Those coming off a two-year fixed-rate are very likely to see their monthly payments come down.'
The central bank's monetary policy committee (MPC) is expected to cut interest rates by a quarter-point to 4 per cent at midday. However, the committee is once again expected to be split. Jack Barnett has more on why economists are forecasting the reduction in borrowing costs here.
The decision is likely to weigh on investors this morning, with the FTSE 100 forecast around 8 points lower when trading begins. Last night the index closed up 0.24 per cent, or 21.56 points, at a new high 9,164.30.
Asian stock markets rose and Japanese shares hit a record high this morning, lifted by tech-led gains on Wall Street, upbeat earnings, growing expectations of US rate cuts and the prospect of a meeting between President Trump and President Putin over the war in Ukraine.
Markets seemed to shake off Trump's latest tariff moves, including an additional 25 per cent tariff on India over purchases of Russian oil. Trump's threat of a 100 per cent tariff on chips and semiconductors was also taken in stride, as the president promised to exempt companies such as Apple that move production back to the United States.
The dollar weakened against a basket of currencies on hopes of US rate cuts and concerns about Trump's attempts to interfere with key institutions such as the Fed and the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
12 minutes ago
- Times
Ignorant government plans to tax bookies more could destroy racing
Tax the bookmakers more. It's a policy sure to garner public support, isn't it? The problem is not the idea of taxing the betting industry at a higher level, it is the way that the government is proposing to do it. It is not far-fetched to say that the changes, if introduced in the autumn statement, could be the death knell for horse racing in Britain. The government needs cash and the bookmakers are a soft target. The idea is to harmonise tax on bookmakers' profits on all their income streams. At the moment there is a division between tax paid on online casino profits (21 per cent goes to the government) and sports/racing betting (paid at 15 per cent). The suggestion is to charge 21 per cent across the board. There are exceptions, such as George Freeman (Conservative, Mid Norfolk) and Sally Jameson (Labour, Doncaster Central), but many MPs do not appear to understand the differences between betting on sports, which involves an element of skill, compared with casino betting, where bookmakers cannot lose. They also appear to be oblivious of the damage it will do to the racing industry, which provides jobs for 85,000 people. A further 10 per cent of bookmakers' profits from bets placed on horse racing are paid back to the sport. This levy came into force when betting shops were legalised in 1961 as a means to help fund the sport. It was introduced to combat the fact that fewer people would go racing once off-course betting was permitted, while also recognising the symbiotic relationship of the racing and betting industries. As a result, though, betting on racing is less profitable for bookmakers, making them keen to push punters towards higher-margin products, with online casinos being top of their list. The reason that racing will be badly hit by the proposed tax changes is that it will make bookmakers even less keen to promote betting on the sport, which provides the lifeblood of the industry. Modelling commissioned by the British Horseracing Authority suggested that increasing tax on betting on racing to 21 per cent, to level it up with betting on online casinos, would cost the sport £66million a year in lost income from levy, media rights and sponsorship. That would be ruinous for a sport that is already struggling. A hike in tax on online casino betting would make more sense and could generate the same level of revenue for the government. There is zero skill in betting on online casinos — bookmakers take a fixed margin, set by themselves, on a product on which they literally cannot lose in the long run. A higher level of tax on online casinos would have the added bonus of discouraging bookmakers from promoting a product that causes the majority of problem gambling. The Gambling Commission has already inflicted damage to racing's finances. In 2023 it produced a white paper suggesting that bookmakers should 'check for financial vulnerability' if a gambler lost either £125 in a month or £500 in a year. Bookmakers saw the proposals and, keen to avoid being hit with large fines, started making intrusive checks on their customers' financial situations to the extent that many punters now use offshore gambling companies that provide no income for racing or the government purse. The latter point is not hearsay — betting on racing has dropped 16 per cent in three years and polling carried out by YouGov for the Betting and Gaming Council recently found that 14 per cent of punters admitted to gambling on a black-market site. The public, many of whom are only cognisant of the biggest events, will perhaps believe that racing is a wealthy sport that can well afford the hit. That is a misconception. Flat racing in Britain has been kept competitive at an international level by the largesse of wealthy foreign owners, primarily from the Middle East. Even so, it is struggling at the top end, with prize money that compares badly with other leading racing nations. Much of the best bloodstock that is bred in Britain has been heading overseas for some time and it is now approaching a tipping point where British breeders will not be able to compete with similar operations abroad. Prize money at the bottom level is so poor that a horse can win eight races in a year and still not cover its costs. The vast majority of trainers and jockeys are struggling to make a living. The effects of overtaxing racing can be seen from recent events in India. In 2017 the government introduced a goods and services tax on money bet on racing at a rate of 28 per cent. Punters paid the price and as their returns dwindled many turned to illegal bookmakers who paid no tax. Government revenues from racing more than halved in five years. British racing has been revered throughout the world for decades. Its history has maintained its place in the minds of leading owners but the point is fast approaching where that is no longer the case. If the sport is to continue to provide work for so many, and continue to attract inward investment to the UK, the government needs to rethink its proposed tax changes.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Plans to convert empty units into migrant housing in deprived Hampshire town are axed after furious local protests
Plans to convert empty units into migrant housing within a deprived town have been axed after thousands of locals protested against the proposals. The Home Office planned to relocate 35 asylum seekers to a new development in Waterlooville, Hampshire, in a bid to lower the numbers in hotels and 'disperse' migrants across UK towns and cities. But nearby residents argued the new arrivals could bring 'chaos' to their already 'dead' community hub following unrest at other migrant sites in recent weeks. Havant Borough Council has now said the Home Office confirmed the proposals will not go ahead. Suella Braverman, MP for Fareham and Waterlooville, previously dubbed the plans 'wholly inappropriate' and argued they would send the area's regeneration scheme 'backwards'. The Home Office previously said the blocks would be 'best suited for the use of couples, or single parents with young children. There is one single flat which would most likely be utilised for a single adult female'. On July 30, around two thousand people packed into Waterlooville precinct to protest against the plans. The area used to be a 'thriving' high street but lost many big name stores including Waitrose, Wilko, Game and Peacocks in recent years - with much of the footfall being 'taken' by a nearby retail park. Now, the 'barren' high street still houses a Wetherspoons but little else, and some residents have feared the lack of life in the town centre would lead to migrant men loitering aimlessly. The development was a newly converted block of 19 flats called Waterloo House. It is owned by Mountley Group whose Director, Hersch Schneck, also owns a migrant hotel in nearby Cosham. At the top of the market, the flats could fetch £250,000 each but falling house prices mean taking them off the market and entering into a deal with Clearsprings, a company which procures accommodation for asylum seekers on behalf of the Home Office, could have been a far more profitable move for Mountley Group. That's because the government could offer top of the market fees in order to get migrants into housing. As well as private rentals, the Home Office has been seeking medium-sized sites such as former student accommodation and old tower blocks to house migrants. The flats are located above a bric a brac store called The Junk Emporium which was once a Peacocks clothing store and before that, a Tesco. Havant Borough Council said in a statement: 'The Home Office considered the consultation response from HBC alongside other evidence and has decided not to purchase the property as the accommodation has been deemed unsuitable for asylum dispersal accommodation.'
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
End of student digs! Third of those going to university now live at home to save money
Almost a third of university students now live at home while studying as many are unable to afford rent, new data reveals. Figures from admissions body Ucas show 30 per cent of 18-year-olds who applied for the 2024/25 academic year said they would be living at home rather than in student accommodation. This compares to just 14 per cent in 2007, and 21 per cent in 2015. The change is likely down to the soaring cost of living and an expansion of students from less wealthy families going to university. Rent in some university towns can reach as much as £1,000 a month, and many families are unable to help out financially. A typical student leaves university with debts of £53,000, including tuition and maintenance loans. Jo Saxton, chief executive of Ucas, said the high cost of studying away from home could be stopping youngsters pursuing the best course for them. She told the Sunday Times: 'If students choose to stay at home during their studies because it's the best course or institution for them, or because of caring or family responsibilities, of course that's the right thing, but more needs to be done to ensure the cost of living doesn't become a limit on young people's ambition.' Separate data showed large variation between universities. Glasgow Caledonian University has the highest rate of home-dwelling students in the UK, accounting for 45 per cent of its intake, according to Ucas. By comparison, 1 per cent live at home while studying at Oxford and Cambridge, which famously provide three meals a day and room cleaning in the colleges. Ben Jordan, director of strategy at Ucas, said: 'If you drive along any motorway in September, you will see car after car full of duvets, pots and pans, and clothes as students head off to university for the first time. 'However, this stereotypical view of a literal journey into higher education isn't the case for everyone and far more students now live at home during their studies than you may think.' In 1984-85, only about 8 per cent of young first-degree entrants were living at home, according to a report released in 2020 by the now-defunct Higher Education Funding Council for England. The proportion of stay-at-home students began rising in the 1990s, which coincided with the introduction of tuition fees in 1998. Fees now stand at £9,250 a year, due to increase to £9,535 next month. A report from the Higher Education Policy Institute last year found the maximum maintenance student loan of £13,348, which is only paid to those from low-income families, is now less than the average annual student rent in London of £13,595. In contrast to old-fashioned student 'digs' with shared showers and toilets, student accommodation blocks are now run by private companies and are often aimed at a high-end market. For those on a budget, living with parents who can help out with meals and washing is an attractive alternative.
