|
| |
|
Archive for the ‘Economic policy’ Category
Friday, June 24th, 2011
Mortgage lenders including the Halifax and Nationwide are backing a government plan to help potential homeowners. But the pot is limited
More details emerged this week about how the latest government scheme to help first-time buyers will work, with confirmation that major lenders such as the Halifax and Nationwide will be offering mortgages to those who qualify.
FirstBuy will allow people to take out a mortgage for just 75% of the cost of the property, provided they can stump up a 5% deposit, and will help more than 10,000 first-time buyers in England over the next two years, plus a smaller, unconfirmed number across Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
However, it will only apply to newly built properties, which won’t suit everyone, and with a limited pot of money, demand is almost certain to exceed supply – especially in London, which has only been allocated enough cash to help around 940 buyers. The Midlands is getting the biggest slice of the cake, with enough money to help more than 2,400 people.
The scheme – the latest in a long line of initiatives to help people on to the property ladder – was first outlined in the budget in March, and this week ministers said more than 100 housebuilders will take part by offering their properties to first-time buyers, including Barratt Homes, Persimmon, Bovis and Taylor Wimpey. Four lenders have so far been named as backing the initiative: Halifax, Barclays, Nationwide and Melton Mowbray Building Society – though this could rise to as many as 20.
The first homes are expected to be available from September, while details of the specially designed 75% loan-to-value (LTV) mortgages that will be offered to buyers should emerge next month or in early August. In the meantime, wannabe first-time buyers can register their interest in the scheme now by contacting their local “HomeBuy agent“.
FirstBuy will be open to those with a household income of less than £60,000 a year who can put down a 5% deposit – though in London, the income threshold for families buying a home with three or more bedrooms looks set to rise to £74,000 from April 2012, to reflect the capital’s higher property prices.
Those who qualify will be eligible for an “equity loan” worth up to 20% of the value of the property, jointly funded by the government and housebuilders on a 50/50 basis. That means buyers would be able to take out a 75% mortgage for the remainder. The equity loan will be interest-free for the first five years. At the start of year six, an annual fee of 1.75% will be levied on the equity loan, and this fee will then rise by retail prices index (RPI) inflation plus 1% after that.
When you come to sell your home (or after 25 years) you will have to pay back the equity loan in full. The amount you pay back will stay at 20%, so you will have to hand over 20% of the market value at the time of the sale. In other words, buyers are signing away a share of any future “profit”. On the other hand, if prices have fallen when you come to sell, the government and the developer would take a hit, getting back less money than they put in.
“In circumstances where house prices have fallen since the initial purchase, FirstBuy provides an extra cushion for the homeowner against negative equity,” claims the Homes and Communities Agency (HCA), the national housing and regeneration agency for England. The maximum property price that will normally be considered is £280,000, though the HCA says that “on an exceptional basis, depending on location,” a purchase price of up to £300,000 may be allowed. Studio flats and refurbished properties won’t be eligible.
The government had made up to £250m available over the next two years to bring FirstBuy to life, of which up to £210m was earmarked for England, with the remaining cash shared between Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. However, the HCA says it is able to bring in a programme to help 10,450 buyers in England by only spending £180m. Some critics say the scheme does little more than scratch the surface of the problems faced by those keen to buy their first home, and that it is more about helping developers to shift their overpriced stock. Others, however, are more positive.
“A scheme that requires only a 5% deposit and offers a 20% equity loan is likely to be extremely popular,” says Melanie Bien at mortgage broker Private Finance. “But it is worth remembering that new-build homes tend not to hold their value as well as older homes in a downturn, and if you are borrowing 95% LTV, this is a risky enterprise. Buyers must consider this as a long-term purchase, not a ‘get rich quick’ opportunity, or they may be sorely disappointed, as well as left out of pocket.”
She adds: “It is not yet clear what mortgage products will be available, but a five-year fix will make much more sense than a shorter deal, as it will protect you from interest-rate rises and fluctuations in property values for a longer period of time.”
Bien says it remains to be seen how many lenders will sign up. “Many are extremely wary of new-build homes as a result of over-inflated values in the past. Even with a maximum LTV of 75%, some simply won’t be interested, deeming it too risky, which will limit choice of product and mean higher rates of interest.”
David Hollingworth at fellow broker London & Country says FirstBuy is running along the same lines as the Labour government’s HomeBuy Direct scheme, although the equity loan available is slightly smaller. “First-time buyers need to understand the implications of equity loans, and should not simply consider them a cheap way to buy. All options should be considered to make sure it is the right option,” he adds.
Posted in Banks and building societies, Business, Economic policy, Features, First-time buyers, House News, Housing market, Money, Mortgage rates, Mortgages, Politics, Property, The Guardian | Comments Closed
Tuesday, May 31st, 2011
IPPR also wants more controls on buy-to-let lending to stop property speculators feeding runaway housing market
Homebuyers should be legally required to put down a minimum 10% deposit and borrow no more than three and a half times their income to purchase a property if Britain is to avoid another damaging boom-bust cycle, according to a report by the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR).
Today’s report by the thinktank also argues for controls on buy-to-let lending to deter property speculators from ramping up the market.
The report sets the IPPR against most of the mortgage industry, which is campaigning for the Financial Services Authority to use “affordability” tests rather than formal caps on loan-to-value and loan-to-income. The FSA will be issuing a consultation paper this summer as part of its Mortgage Market Review, but so far it has stated that it believes LTV caps would be “too blunt a tool” to impose on lenders.
The IPPR said that easy lending practices by British banks before the onset of the credit crunch had left UK households with bigger mortgages, relative to their income, than in any other major economy.
“Almost all of the increase in household indebtedness in the UK has been as a result of more mortgage borrowing. At the end of 2009, the UK household sector had debts totalling £1.53 trillion, of which £1.19 trillion (78%) was secured on dwellings.”
The UK has the highest levels of mortgage lending as a percentage of GDP – 81% – higher than the US (73%), Canada (49%) and western Europe (44%) – as well as the highest levels of household and business debt relative to GDP.
IPPR director Nick Pearce said: “Britain has suffered four housing bubbles in the last 40 years, each of which contributed to major economic and social problems.
“We must learn the lessons from this economic history.?A central plank of economic policy should be to target moderate increases in house prices, rather than allowing runaway house price inflation which is always damaging in the long run.
“The housing minister, Grant Shapps, has tentatively floated the idea of aiming for house price stability but he and George Osborne should go further and make it an explicit policy objective. We need tougher mortgage market regulation from the FSA, especially caps on ‘loan-to-value’ and ‘loan-to-income’ ratios.”
According to campaigning group Shelter, first time buyers back tighter rules on lending despite the fact it will stop some people getting a mortgage.
In a YouGov poll, commissioned by Shelter, 75% of potential buyers said the banks must be forced to behave more responsibly. Four out of 10 said they did not believe that the banks could be trusted to lend responsibly in the future, and nearly a third (28%) said they had been offered a bigger mortgage than they had asked for, or knew someone who had.
Campbell Robb, chief executive of Shelter, said: “People really want simple, commonsense rules in place to ensure people borrow money responsibly. What is most striking is the level of support among first time buyers who clearly want greater protection and are well aware it might limit their chances of getting mortgage credit in the future.
“So far the voice of the consumer has been completely drowned out by the mortgage industry. We must not let banks go back to the old ways of irresponsible and reckless lending.”
The IPPR report is among the first to call for stricter regulation of the resurgent buy-to-let industry. It said deposit requirements on buy-to-let mortgages should be raised and lenders should ensure that rents cover repayments.
It said: “IPPR wants to deter small time speculators from seeking excessive capital gains from the buy-to-let market, since this activity feeds housing bubbles.
“The UK has the lowest level of institutional investment in private rented housing in Europe. We should be encouraging institutional investors to ‘build-to-let’ while discouraging individual property speculators using buy-to-let mortgages which can artificially inflate our housing market.”??
Posted in Banks and building societies, Borrowing & debt, Credit crunch, Economic policy, Financial Services Authority (FSA), First-time buyers, George Osborne, House News, House prices, Housing, Money, Mortgages, News, Property, Regulators, The Guardian, UK news | Comments Closed
Wednesday, March 30th, 2011
I wonder if Vince Cable can explain how the “mansion tax” he proposes is a “fair” alternative to a tax on those with high incomes (Mansion tax could replace 50p tax rate, says Cable, 28 March). It will effectively represent a levy on pensioners who own, outright, homes with inflated notional values, but who may have small incomes.
The inheritors of such properties would, in any case, be heavily taxed after the owner’s death. How would such a pensioner pay the proposed levy out of a small income? Would they be expected to sell their home in the present depressed market in order to pay the mansion tax? The proposed tax appears to be part of the false idea that the baby boomer generation have somehow “stolen” from today’s young by benefiting from a functioning welfare state. True, many did well out of the property boom, but not nearly as well as the bankers whose bonuses enabled them to purchase buy-to-let properties that further distorted the market.
Professor Elizabeth Wilson
London
•?I am one Liberal Democrat who does not agree with cutting out the 50% tax rate. The idea that 50% is a penal rate is laughable. Vince Cable, like me, is old enough to remember when the UK (under both Tory and Labour governments) did have penal rates of income tax up to 98%, but that’s long gone.
People whose income is over £150,000 can well afford to pay 50% income tax on their marginal income. High-income families benefit from our public services and should not begrudge paying a little more for them and helping those less fortunate than themselves. Those on obscenely high salaries, like bankers and City slickers, should pay higher rates still.
It’s not as if our tax rates are out of line. Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Norway and Sweden all have top income tax rates of 50% or higher, and Germany, Italy and Spain have rates of 45% or more. Even that bastion of capitalism, Switzerland, has a top income tax rate of 45.5%.
I agree with that great economist JK Galbraith that tax is the price of a civilised society. Let’s have the mansion tax by all means, but keep the 50% rate of income tax.
Dr Mick Taylor
Lib Dem candidate, Leeds Central 2010
•?You report Vince Cable as wishing to move away from the “extremely high” marginal tax rate of 50% (actually, 52% when you throw in national insurance). Do the sums for a prospective university teacher under the future arrangements that Cable’s department has constructed. Three years for a BSc, one year for a MSc and three years for a PhD are likely to lead to a total debt that is north of £50,000. Until earnings exceed £40,000, the annual repayments (9% of the excess over £21,000) will not even match the interest charged. Cable says that a marginal rate of 52% on earnings of £150,000 is too high. Why then does he support a system that will charge a marginal rate of 51% (40% income tax, 2% national insurance contributions, 9% student loan) on earnings of £45,000?
John Haigh
Brighton
•?Vince Cable really has gone native if he believes that 50% is an unacceptably high rate of marginal taxation. The rate was 60% even under Thatcher.
Peter Johnston
Bolton, Lancashire
•?You report that the government is considering cutting the 50% tax rate, claiming that many companies and high earners are finding ways of avoiding payment. Surely the solution is to clamp down on such tax evasion, not reward the super-rich for their refusal to pay?
Ministers are quick enough to tackle social security fraud, so why the failure to act when those on telephone-number salaries are fiddling the system?
Dr Pete Dorey
Reader in British politics, Cardiff University
•?Good news re Vince Cable’s announcement on tax. The government “will” abolish the 50p-in-the-pound rate and will “consider” introducing a mansion tax.
Dudley Turner
Westerham, Kent
Posted in Economic policy, George Osborne, House News, Income tax, Letters, Politics, Property, Tax, Tax and spending, The Guardian, UK news, Vince Cable | Comments Closed
Monday, March 28th, 2011
Business secretary in agreement with the chancellor over tax rate, but says the wealthy have to ‘pay their share’
The business secretary, Vince Cable, has confirmed the 50p rate on tax will be abolished – and revealed the government would consider bringing in a ‘mansions tax’ to ensure the wealthiest pay their way.
The chancellor, George Osborne, ordered a review of tax on top earners in the budget last week, restating that the 50p rate on those who earn above £150,000 was only temporary, and triggering speculation that the rate could be wound down as soon as 2013. Cable in two interviews raised the issue of the rate and alternatives to it.
The move would leave the government exposed to accusations that it is softening taxes for the rich, amid intense public anxiety about the fairness of the cuts. The business secretary’s intervention comes just a day after up to 500,000 people took to the streets to demonstrate against the government’s economic plans.
Labour pointed out that the coalition would be reducing the tax for the richest while forcing the poorest to lose the largest proportion of their pay packets through the VAT hike.
Cable, who argued in opposition for a 0.5% levy on properties worth more than £1m, told the BBC’s Politics Show: “I and George Osborne agree that we have to move away from extremely high marginal rates of tax on income, including that [the 50p rate of tax].”
He told BBC Radio 5 Live: “It moved up to 50p in an emergency because we had to have a sense of solidarity that everybody was bearing some of the pain, and the chancellor said in the budget that we’re going to have to move away from that. I agree with him. The Liberal Democrats agree with him.
“But it needs to be a change which is fair overall and does take account of the fact that the wealthy have got to pay their share. The emphasis may well have to shift from high marginal rates of tax on income which are undesirable, to taxation of wealth, including property, and the chancellor said that, as much as that, in his budget.”
Asked if he was advocating a mansion tax, he said: “Well, there is a very strong argument … that you need to have a proper base for taxing property and I’m sure that’s one of the things we’re going to have to look at as we change away from these very high marginal rates.”
Labour originally introduced the tax rate last year, and the Tories promised to keep it temporarily. Osborne said at the budget: “I am clear that the 50p tax rate would do lasting damage to our economy if it were to become permanent. That is why I regard it as a temporary measure.”
The Treasury expressed concern about how much revenue the higher rate was bringing in. The Office for Budget Responsibility later revealed that it expected £2bn of the revenue to go uncollected amid evidence that companies had paid large bonuses prior to its introduction to avoid paying part of the costs.
A Treasury spokesman said last week’s budget set out all existing tax plans. Treasury sources also distanced it from Cable’s proposals, saying there was “no detailed planning” on taxes for top earners currently being developed by officials.
Cable has raised the possibility of a new mansion tax amid increasing nervousness in the coalition over the AV referendum in May. The issue will prove the biggest test for the coalition, as a totemic policy for the Lib Dems and a test of David Cameron’s leadership to his backbenchers, all of whom oppose AV. If the Lib Dems lose, the leadership will need to prove to the rank and file that it is making serious gains elsewhere. A mansions tax would appeal to the disillusioned left of the party.
Asked about the effect the referendum could have on the coalition, Cable said he was “pretty sure” the government would survive it, even if the Lib Dems fail to secure AV: “I am pretty sure it would [survive]. But there is a lot at stake and that is why we are fighting hard for it.”
He added: “We are a grown-up party, we have not thrown our toys out of the pram because things happen we disagree with. I think you will find the approach to this whole thing is a very mature one.”
The competing campaigns for the referendum step up a gear on Monday when the No to AV group launch a national advertising campaign appealing to people to keep the one person one vote system.
Matthew Elliott, director of the No campaign, said: “One person, one vote is the cornerstone of our democracy. It represents our most profound political belief. It is a statement that when it comes to electing those who lead us, we each have an equal say and an equal voice. That is why we are clear in our aim: Keep One Person, One Vote and stop supporters of extremist, fringe parties getting more than one vote.”
The Yes to Fairer Votes campaign Monday publishes the names of all its funders, demanding that the No campaign does the same. It has received £951,000 from the Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust, £909,517 from the Electoral Reform Society and £114,000 from the Electoral Commission.
Posted in Economic policy, Electoral reform, George Osborne, House News, Income tax, Liberal Democrats, Money, News, Politics, Property, Tax, Tax and spending, The Guardian, UK news, Vince Cable | Comments Closed
Thursday, March 24th, 2011
Who has gained – and who has been hit hard – after George Osborne’s budget
Winners
• People with jobs – an allowance increase means everyone who pays income tax will be up, albeit only to the tune of about 90p a week, so few will be popping open the champagne.
• Drivers, and drivers of gas-guzzlers in particular. George Osborne did not merely cancel the planned rise in fuel duty, but actually cut the rate by a penny. Fuel prices remain high, but motorists filling up cars with big tanks will be walking away with a whole handful of change that would otherwise have been snatched.
• The right sort of fat cats. Shareholders and managers will welcome an unexpectedly large cut in the corporate tax rate, and entrepreneurs will be positively thrilled at being able to claim lifetime relief on capital gains of up to £10m.
• The right sort of smokers. Under the fug of a promise of “restructuring cigarette duty”, consumers of costlier brands could escape the budget increase that long seemed inevitable, as the ad valorem (price related) part of the duty looks set to be cut in relation to the flat-rate component.
• Cash-strapped town-halls – they didn’t get any immediate bail-out, but the promise of “auctions on planning permission” could provide them with a valuable new source of revenue, and might just have the effect of kickstarting the building trade.
• Higher rate taxpayers. They will mostly share in this year’s allowance increase, which was restricted to basic rate payers last year. Much more important for the richest among them was Osborne’s commissioning of a study on the 50p super-tax rate, which could eventually presage the way for its abolition.
Losers
• People without jobs, who remain in line to bear the brunt of the £18bn raid on the annual benefit bill that remains in the pipeline. Disabled people and renters of costly housing will be among the biggest losers, with some claimants in line for losses of £80 a week or more.
• Treasury civil servants who, thanks to the creation of a fair fuel stabiliser, are landed with the virtually impossible task of figuring out when a rise in the oil price is merely a blip that invites a cut in duty as opposed to a permanent sign that the black stuff is running out.
• The wrong sort of fat cats. The banks face a levy of an extra £630m this year, and unpopular non-doms will have to stump up an extra £20,000 a year in order to avoid being taxed like the rest of us.
• The wrong sort of smokers, most particularly those who roll their own. Fears of smuggling saw the Treasury go easy on rolling tobacco for well over a decade, and rollies – which were once the preserve of long-hairs and students – made their way into the cash-strapped mainstream. Now prices will rise, as will those of cut-price cigarette brands.
• Shire Tories who, together with conservationists and other Nimbys, could find it increasingly hard to see off building developments if councils are allowed to raise serious money by selling the right to build.
• Liberal Democrats – the boost to allowances loomed large in their manifesto, but the party failed to spot how the Treasury will soon claw back the gains by restricting the way adjustments are made for inflation. By the end of this parliament, this wheeze will claw back the great bulk of the “giveaway” announced and, looking further ahead, it will start to push extra low-earners back into tax.
• North Sea oil companies. While their customers laugh all the way to the pump, those parts of UK Plc whose business it is to extract the black stuff will see the taxman snatch quite a chunk of the extraordinary revenue oil is bringing in at the moment.
Posted in Budget, Budget 2011, Business, Economic policy, Economics, George Osborne, guardian.co.uk, House News, Money, Motoring, News, Oil, Petrol prices, Politics, Property, Public finance, Society, Tax, Tax and spending, UK news | Comments Closed
Wednesday, March 23rd, 2011
• Fuel duty cut by 1p and fuel duty escalator scrapped • Corporation tax cut by 2p – not 1p as expected • Annual growth forecast revised down from 2.1% to 1.7% • National insurance and income tax may be merged
George Osborne has levied a £2bn windfall tax on Britain’s North Sea oil companies to pay for a cut in petrol duties for motorists struggling because of the soaring price of crude oil on global markets.
The chancellor said he wanted his budget to “put fuel into the tank of the British economy”.
He told the Commons he was scrapping the previous Labour government’s plans for automatic above-inflation increases in fuel duties and would instead be cutting 1p a litre from forecourt prices from tonight.
In the sort of flourish that was Gordon Brown’s trademark at the end of his budgets, Osborne announced the fuel duty cut at the climax of a 56-minute speech built around the theme of boosting growth and rebalancing the economy. The cost of “filling up a family car such as a Ford Focus has increased by £10″, he said, and he wanted to do something to help.
He said he was cutting corporation tax by 2p in the pound this year rather than the 1p reduction previously planned, and announced a shake-up of planning laws and a bonfire of regulations in an attempt to stimulate enterprise.
However, the Labour leader, Ed Miliband, said Osborne’s claim to have delivered a budget for growth was undermined by a cut in the growth forecast for 2011 from 2.1% to 1.7%.
Osborne cast his second budget since becoming the chancellor in May as an “urgent call to action” in which the government would move from “rescue to reform and from reform to recovery”, building on the deficit reduction measures of 2010.
He said it was a fiscal plan designed to create an economy built on private sector growth and the “march of the makers” rather than using government spending and debt to encourage a recovery.
He added that his budget measures would be “fiscally neutral across the period, neither raising tax nor offering giveaways”.
The chancellor presented a package of measures to boost business and make Britain more competitive, help consumer confidence and claw revenue back elsewhere.
Osborne said Britain had “lost ground” in the world’s economy and needed to catch up. His budget set “four economic ambitions” for Britain: being the most competitive tax system in the G20; being the best place to “start, finance and grow a business”, with a more balanced economy and a more educated and “flexible” workforce.
Measures included a further 1% cut in corporation tax to make clear that “Britain is open for business” and an annual £1bn clampdown on tax avoidance.
“Today’s budget is about reforming the nation’s economy so that we can have enduring jobs and growth in the future, doing what we can to protect families from the high cost of living,” he said.
Presented against a deteriorating economic backdrop of rising oil prices, public sector austerity and low consumer confidence, the budget sought to appeal to Britain’s “squeezed middle” by announcing help for first-time home-buyers, and a boost for 25 million income taxpayers by raising the threshold on the personal tax allowance to £8,075 by April 2012.
With household bills and retail prices rising, the chancellor concentrated much of the money he has to play with on cutting fuel prices as the cost of petrol and diesel reached all-time national average highs (£1.33 and £1.40 respectively) to increase consumers’ spending power and help business.
The rise in fuel duty planned for next week will be delayed until 2012, and the fuel duty escalator that adds 1p to fuel duty on top of inflation each year to be cancelled for the rest of this parliament.
A fair fuel stabiliser to help keep costs down in future is to be funded by an increased levy on oil and gas production.
Osborne told MPs that helping families with the cost of living and backing enterprise and introducing “far-reaching reforms” to help the economy grow were “one and the same thing”.
He said: “It is the central understanding of this government – and core to our strategy – that these are not two separate tasks. They are one and the same thing.
“We are only going to raise the living standards of families if we have an economy that can compete in the modern age.
“So this is our plan for growth. We want the words ‘made in Britain’, ‘created in Britain’, ‘designed in Britain’, invented in Britain’ to drive our nation forward.
“A Britain carried aloft by the march of the makers. That is how we will create jobs and support families. We have put fuel into the tank of the British economy.”
But his package received short shrift from Miliband, who told him his economic strategy for Britain was “hurting, not working”.
Miliband challenged Osborne’s claim to have delivered a budget for growth, saying the government’s cuts were damaging the economic recovery.
“Every time he comes to this house, growth is downgraded,” he said. “One fact says it all, and he couldn’t bring himself to say it: growth down last year, this year and next year. It’s the same old Tories – it’s hurting, but it isn’t working.”
Other measures to protect the money in people’s pockets in Osborne’s budget include:
• Raising the income tax personal allowance by £630 next year, which comes on top of the £1,000 rise next month and lifting the threshold at which income tax is payable to just over £8,105 from April next year, a real terms increase of £48 a year (or £126 in cash terms) for those earning up to £115,000 a year.
The 550,000 taxpayers who earn more than £115,000 will lose £45 a year because they no longer have a personal allowance.
The latter measure will see a further 250,000 people taken out of income tax altogether, in a move that brings the coalition a step closer to its promise of delivering a £10,000 tax threshold by the 2015 general election.
• A £250m shared equity scheme for new homes, funded from the bank levy, to help 10,000 families. Those with a household income of less than £60,000 a year who can put down a 5% deposit on a new home will be eligible for an equity loan worth up to 20% of the value of the property jointly funded by the government and housebuilders.
The loan will be interest-free for five years and only be repayable when the house is sold.
In a budget designed to shift away from spending cuts to reduce the national debt to growth-enhancing measures, Osborne also published his growth strategy for business.
His bid to boost the private sector includes:
• The removal of £350m worth of regulation on businesses.
• A three-year moratorium on new domestic regulation for all businesses employing fewer than 10 people.
• New planning rules to require planners to prioritise growth and jobs with a new presumption in favour of sustainable development, while retaining existing controls on green belt land.
• Small business relief extended to October 2012, at a cost of £370m.
• Funding for 21 new enterprise zones.
• Funding for 40,000 new apprenticeships for unemployed young people.
The chancellor presented gloomy figures based on data from the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) which confirmed that the recovery would move at a slower pace than previously forecast.
He said GDP growth estimates for 2011 had been cut from 2.1% to 1.7%, while 2012 was revised down to 2.5% from 2.6%.
He stressed that the long-term outlook was more upbeat as estimates for 2013 were held and forecasts for 2014 and 2015 were revised upwards to 2.9% from 2.8% and 2.8% from 2.7% respectively.
Osborne also revealed that the rate of inflation, currently at 4.4%, is not expected to drop back to the government’s 2% target until 2013, contrary to the Bank of England’s belief it will fall back by 2012.
But the chancellor said the government was on track to deliver a balanced structural budget and falling national debt by the end of parliament.
“Our fiscal mandate is to achieve a cyclically-adjusted current balance by the end of the rolling five-year forecast period – which is currently 2015-16,” he said.
“We have supplemented that with a fixed target for debt: so that debt should be falling as a proportion of GDP by the year 2015-16 as well.
“I can report to the house that the OBR confirm that on their central forecast we will meet both these objectives – a balanced structural current budget and falling national debt by the end of the parliament. Indeed, the forecast remains that we will meet both these objectives one year earlier.”
On tax, Osborne announced plans to make Britain’s tax system more competitive and simpler:
• Corporation tax will be reduced by 2% from April 2011 – rather than 1% as previously announced – and to fall by 1% in each of the next three years to reach 23%. In a bid to offset the effect of the reduction on banks, the bank levy rate will adjusted next year.
• “No less than 43 complex tax reliefs” would be abolished as part of a simplification of the tax system, Osborne said.
As part of the move, he confirmed widely trailed speculation that he would consult on scrapping the divide between income tax and national insurance as part of a drive to simplify taxation for business.
He said this would be a way for people to see more clearly how much they are being taxed, rather than to raise them, and make the system “fit for the modern age”.
Osborne balanced giveaways with fresh tax-raising measures, which included:
• The charge on non-domiciled taxpayers to increase from £30,000 for those here for seven years to £50,000 for those in the country for 12 years, raising more than £200m.
• A clampdown on the “injustice” of tax avoidance. Osborne said three forms of stamp duty land tax avoidance would be closed, capital gains rules for companies would be tightened and the practice of disguised remuneration, which sees highly paid employees offered tax-free, lifetime loans that are never repaid, would come to an end.
“In total, on the numbers audited by the independent OBR, the tax avoidance measures in this budget raise around £1bn a year – that’s £4bn over the parliament,” he added.
“We are doing more today to clamp down on tax avoidance than in any budget in recent years. And that gives us more resources, in a fiscally neutral budget, to help those families who do pay their taxes, but who are struggling with the daily cost of living.”
Posted in Budget, Budget 2011, Business, Economic growth (GDP), Economic policy, Economics, George Osborne, Green shoots, guardian.co.uk, House News, Money, Motoring, News, Petrol prices, Politics, Property, Public finance, Tax and spending, UK news | Comments Closed
Wednesday, March 23rd, 2011
George Osborne announces assisted deposit scheme for first-time buyers, but industry insiders give budget proposals a mixed reception
First-time buyers were thrown a lifeline by George Osborne in today’s budget in the shape of a £250m assisted deposit scheme for new homes.
The First Buy scheme will be open to those with a household income of less than £60,000 a year who can put down a 5% deposit on a new home – but housing industry insiders claim it is “window dressing the wider problem” and will benefit the construction industry more than first-time buyers.
Those who qualify will be eligible for a loan worth up to 20% of the value of the property, jointly funded by the government and housebuilders. The loan will be interest-free for five years and only be repayable when the house is sold.
Osborne intends the fund to help first-time buyers who are currently only able access mortgages requiring much bigger deposits, as lenders tightened their criteria in the wake of the credit crunch and recession. The government hopes the fund will result in the building of 10,000 new homes and protect 40,000 jobs in the construction industry.
But Matt Griffith of first-time buyer pressure group PricedOut said the fund could be dangerous for potential borrowers: “When independent economists are predicting a 10% fall in house prices this year, having the government encouraging first-time buyers to get on to the ladder using a 5% deposit looks foolhardy at best and, at worst, pretty irresponsible.
“Osborne is behaving like a shopkeeper trying to shift overpriced stock by offering a clever financing scheme. Consumers would be wise to be sceptical and steer clear – the big problem is that prices are still far too high”.
Griffith added: “It’s main purpose appears to be to help bail out the house building sector – which is suffering from buying too much expensive land at the peak of the boom. We saw plenty of these schemes under the Brown government, and it is depressing to see the coalition continue to connive with the building industry and act against the best interests of consumers.”
Nick Hopkinson, director of property company PPR Estates, was equally disparaging about the government’s idea: “Any gimmicks around helping first-time buyers with temporary deposits on new homes will not make a meaningful difference.
“This kind of initiative should be funded through reduced selling prices by the builders or the private sector if they need to make their product more saleable. If the chancellor wants to really aid the housing market in a sustainable way I believe he should be forcing the taxpayer-owned banks to reduce their lending margins and offer fair and affordable mortgages to Britain’s hardworking households as a first step.
“Anything that reduces the high transaction costs and taxes related to buying and selling property would also really help property market liquidity – specifically outlining a fairer stamp duty sliding scale approach would help, but I’m not expecting that to happen either, unfortunately.”
The budget initiative is similar to the recent tie-up between 15 local authorities and Lloyds TSB to launch a fund to top up the deposits of local first-time buyers. The scheme, called Local Lend a Hand, allows first-timers to buy a home with a deposit of as little as 5%. But it will also only assist a small number of borrowers, while the local authorities have been criticised for using taxpayer money to encourage younger borrowers to take on debt at a time of uncertainty in the housing market.
Nicholas Leeming, business development director at Zoopla.co.uk, said first-time buyers currently pay an average deposit of £25,000, which would plummet to an initial £6,250 for those taking part in the scheme.
“This is a very appealing prospect, but Osborne’s scheme won’t go beyond scratching the surface of the problem faced by the vast majority of first-time buyers, as it is exclusively for new-build properties and only around 11,000 buyers will benefit – a fraction of the overall number of potential first-timers.
“While the availability of credit is slowly easing, it’s not easing fast enough to help those borrowers who don’t qualify. A step in the right direction these measures may be, but they’re merely window dressing the wider problem.”
Ian Ward, chief executive of Leeds building society, welcomed the support package for first-time buyers. Today announced it will increase its mortgage lending by 40% this year to £1.4bn – a significant percentage of which will be to first-time buyers. Its typical shared-ownership mortgages offer up to 95% of the borrowers’ share, so the deposit required is smaller than with a traditional mortgage; if a borrower is buying 50% of the property, they only need to find a 2.5% deposit.
Ward said: “We know from our own experience that the biggest barrier to homeownership can often be saving for a deposit, and this scheme is a positive step by the government.”
Richard Sexton, business development director of e.surv, added that the scheme would unlock the lower end of the property market and ultimately generate more transactions through the chain, “provided that other budget measures don’t so severely curtail ability to buy that the effect is completely negated.”
Posted in Budget, Budget 2011, Business, Economic policy, First-time buyers, guardian.co.uk, House News, Housing, Housing market, Money, Mortgages, News, Politics, Property, Society, UK news | Comments Closed
Wednesday, March 23rd, 2011
Chancellor to court medium earners in ‘steady as she goes’ budget despite rise in inflation and borrowing
George Osborne has told the cabinet his budget will set out the government’s plans to reform and rebalance the economy and help struggling families with the cost of living.
The chancellor will seek to appeal to Britain’s “squeezed middle” when he announces help for first-time buyers, motorists and 25 million income tax payers in a budget designed to tighten the Treasury’s grip on public spending.
Osborne briefed senior ministers including the prime minister, David Cameron, on the contents of his second budget at an 8am cabinet meeting at 10 Downing Street
Despite disappointing news for the public finances, the chancellor is expected to say that he has scope to raise the income tax personal allowance by £600 next year, fund a £250m shared equity scheme for new homes and defer the above-inflation increase in petrol duty due next month.
But he will balance tax giveaways with tax-raising measures, a crackdown on tax avoidance and “special measures” for overspending Whitehall departments in what sources insisted would be a “steady as she goes” package.
Cameron’s official spokesman told reporters: “The chancellor took the cabinet through the budget and set out the main aims … which are to set out our plans for reforming and rebalancing the nation’s economy and steps to help families with the cost of living.”
Osborne will outline a range of measures including a shake-up of planning laws, deregulation of employment laws affecting small businesses, and long-awaited plans for a green investment bank as the coalition seeks to shift the focus of the economy from deficit reduction to boosting growth.
The chancellor will admit that the UK’s growth prospects for 2011 have worsened since the autumn, with the independent Office for Budget Responsibility likely to pencil in an increase of around 1.8% in gross domestic product this year against the 2.1% it forecast in November.
But Osborne will signal his determination not to let the government’s deficit reduction plans slip, with controls designed to intensify pressure on ministers to rein in spending.
Departments failing to manage their budgets properly will be placed in special measures – akin to the Ofsted rating given to a failing school – with tough penalties.
These could include fines for overspending or being forced to seek Treasury authorisation for larger spending decisions.
City hopes that public borrowing for 2010-11 would come in £10bn below the £148bn forecast were dented by news that the deficit in February topped £10bn – the highest for the month since modern records began in 1993.
Meanwhile, inflation according to the consumer price index rose from 4% to a 28-month high of 4.4% last month, pushing up government spending on state benefits.
Dearer food, fuel and clothing were the main factors behind last month’s jump in inflation, which is now more than double the government’s 2% target.
The increase in the CPI measure of inflation was matched by a rise in the alternative yardstick of the cost of living, the retail prices index, which rose from 5.1% to 5.5% last month, its highest for 20 years.
In a move that will please the Liberal Democrat wing of the coalition, Osborne will say that the income tax personal allowance – due to go up to £7,475 next month – will be raised by more than inflation from next year.
The increase of around £600 – which comes on top of the £1,000 rise next month – will be worth an average of £45 a year for taxpayers earning up to £115,000 a year.
The 550,000 taxpayers who earn more than £115,000 will lose £45 a year because they no longer have a personal allowance.
Osborne will announce a joint scheme with the construction industry to help some of the potential first-time buyers currently frozen out of the housing market.
First-time buyers with a household income of less than £60,000 a year who can put down a 5% deposit on a new home will be eligible for an equity loan worth up to 20% of the value of the property jointly funded by the government and housebuilders.
The loan will be interest-free for five years, and will only be repayable when the house is sold.
With most first-time buyers only able to secure mortgages worth 75% of a property’s value, Osborne is expected to say his scheme will give some young people the chance to meet the exacting loan standards demanded by lenders in the wake of the financial crisis, lead to the building of 10,000 new homes and protect 40,000 jobs in the construction industry.
The year-long cabinet battle over Britain’s ability to invest in the next generation of green infrastructure will be resolved when a green investment bank is established with access to up to £3bn of funds, and an ability to borrow from April 2015.
Green groups will be disappointed about the deferral of borrowing powers but pleased at the higher than expected interim funding.
The battle over the bank was resolved on Sunday, and the outcome reflects a wider political struggle to ensure plans in the budget to ease pressure on the squeezed middle, including freezing planned fuel duty rises, do not strip the coalition of its green credentials.
Ministers admit the deferral of the bank’s borrowing powers to 2015-16 reflects Treasury determination to ensure net debt as a percentage of GDP is falling by 2015-16.
But they also argue that decisions on the next big wave of green investment projects, including offshore wind farms, do not need to be made until after 2015.
In a negotiating success for Chris Huhne, the energy secretary, the bank will be given access to £1bn of funds from 2012-13, as opposed to the earlier plan to wait until 2013-14.
The bank will also be given access, from 2012-13, to £775m from the asset sales from HS1, the superfast rail track between London and the Channel tunnel.
In addition, the bank will have access to £1bn from the sales from 2013-14 from Urenco, the company that makes enriched uranium from nuclear power. The government owns one-third of Urenco jointly with the Dutch government and German energy companies RWE and E.On.
The Treasury has given a guarantee that if the income from the sale of Urenco is not forthcoming, the green bank will have access to other funds.
Posted in Budget, Budget 2011, Business, Economic policy, Economics, Editorial, George Osborne, Global economy, guardian.co.uk, House News, Money, Motoring, Petrol prices, Politics, Property, UK news | Comments Closed
|
|
|
|
|
|