Updating post from Reddit.
Very clever … but of course it won’t apply to those real estate investment companies… just the small landlords.
Exactly...
i feel like this is the plan, to move renting to the big boys
Blackrock buying up loads.... won't apply to them guaranteed
With the tenants inevitably being passed the bill as a result.
Crony capitalism, at its finest.
Nope. Pure socialism.
Wouldn’t be Labour though. They’re the party of the people. They’re the friends of the normal people. They’re different to the other parties. Things will be different under them.
/s
But the owners do pay NI on dividends .....
That black hole will soon be far bigger through the destruction of the private rental market. We all know rents will also go up again to cover the increase and effectively push more people to need and ask for pay rises.
Yep, no way to cut it positively, this IS a tax on working people as it will increase rents.
So an 8% rental tax for tenants… just what we need in a cost of living crisis, thanks labour
Yep, that's a far better way to describe it it's a rental tax.
I know a landlord (and he won't be alone) that rents out the house for just enough to cover the mortgage with some saved to deal with issues and repairs.
Basically he would have to put up the rent or he would be losing money. So this doesn't help in any way and actively punishes good landlords.
Would he be losing money? Or would someone only be buying the majority of his house for him instead of all of it?
Just buy a house stupid!
At some point you’ve got to question if those in power are intentionally trying to fuck the housing market.
True, when houses are worthless, we won't need landlords. This gov (and previous) want it both ways, first pay profit on turnover, now pay employees national insurance.
This government is run by people who have ties to a lot of land value and are more interested in keeping value high I think.
Yep exactly - private rents go up to cover the costs, pushing more renters into needing social housing which the state needs to fund (or provide more housing benefit so they can stay in the private sector).
This government really are short sighted... 1 step forward and 5 steps back
Don't forget the energy crisis too this will push more people into needing help for that also
Or you know, you could sell your rentals and help ease the housing crisis. Instead of leeching off of working people?
Which is happening but this will speed it up. The crisis is that people who can't afford to buy also now can't afford to rent. This is becoming worse for anyone in that group of people.
Or you know they could close the loopholes and tax evading corporate landlords can easily do who more likely own vast portfolios of property. This targets the private landlords who more often than not have one property. But once again this government won't go after the companies they will go after people who have worked hard to get to where they are. This won't ease the housing crisis at all as only a small portion of new places will come on the market. It will simply mean private landlords will raise rents to cover the cost thus meaning people who are renting will find it even harder to save for a place. Nice one Rachel.
Edit: Yehhh go on delete your comment, can't even back your argument up.
>This targets the private landlords who more often than not have one property.
I think this is probably the goal. Labour are very close with Blackrock leadership as far as I know
I think those that will go on the market will be those that need some serious maintenance and therefore the people struggling to cover the mortgage will suddenly have to cover the extra put off costs and the landlord will buy a newly built house cheaper to run and able to put any maintenance onto the builder.
Rents will go up by at least 8%.
She's utterly brain dead.
The entire government is. They are governing by headlines not by research and well thought out policies. This policy will sound great on paper to their supporters then they will see the outcome of their rents rising and go "ohhhhh those horrible landlords!!"
Not one of them knows what unintended consequences are. They really don’t think anything through do they.
Tenants need to be in a position to afford that. I very much doubt the demand will be there if rents go up that much
Where are tenants going to live instead? This is a policy that will harm the most vulnerable tenants.
HMO, a tent, streets and live with parents.
Or a similar rental owned by a Ltd instead of an individual
It will cost more to the public taxes to sort this out unless the streets are the only option.
Ultimately, people will pay for shelter and food, and give up on anything else. While the demand on the high-end may go down a bit, the most likely outcome is that it will shift to a point of equilibrium where the rents are higher.
E.g., people who can afford a £3K rent now, will start paying a bit more (say £3.2K) and move to a place that costs less now (say £2.7K), and so on, down the market.
Tax is weird when its based on income, e.g. cover a tax increase of a £1 rent would have to be increased by £2. I wonder what the calculation is on this one.
Landlords are seen as baddies, same as farmers.
Landlords are Easy targets.
Yup. Although more people are starting to realise that the government are the ones actually pulling the strings on all of this
yes, they think landlord is rich because they have money to buy properties.
Tbf they don’t help themselves with the “influencer” property mogul accounts.
I’m a tenant and read this this morning absolutely dumbfounded. This government seem bent on making me and family homeless.
So looking at recent events I can only assume that the plan is to turn all the ‘asylum hotels’ into homeless hotels and put all the asylum seekers into the private rental accommodation that the now homeless people used to live in?
I just wished more tenants thought this way and helped to support the view points that landlords have been trying to make against recent policy changes.
I really can't see how we will have a private rental market in a few years time.
They won't house asylum seekers into private property as there won't be any landlords left for this. They effectively could build corp style flats like student accom and say it's for the rental market but house the asylum seekers in these along with all the families booted out of the rental market.
I can only guess that some renters will be able to buy some of the housing stock. The rest will end up in the hands of international corporations who will be more than happy to bleed the nation dry with high rents and move yet more wealth out of the country. Meaning the government will have to come back to the well for more.
It truly boggles the mind.
I don't love the idea of making asylum seekers the bogeymen in this debate, even tongue in cheek. We have to maintain the high road by pointing out the obvious - the government is failing the housing market.
I agree and I apologise. I’m just so frustrated. I know things are bad, but it feels like no matter where you turn there’s someone ready to raid your wallet/ savings/ assets. What the case is.
My landlord only has a few properties and he’s a decent guy. I’ve lived in this property for 15 years and it really feels like he’s going to throw in the towel soon and then I’m screwed. I know I’m being all me me me but I’m in a much better position than a lot of people and if i’m concerned I can’t imagine what folk with less are feeling.
Again, I apologise. I spoke (typed) in anger/frustration.
Agree - I wish the tenants who keep bashing landlords , and having govt punish them, would stop and think " is making landlord's position more expensive going to make my rent go down? orrrr.......UP !??"
lol, rent never goes down.
Anecdotally from myself and all my friends, the bad experiences far outweigh the good ones.
And I’m someone who has had every single deposit returned because I am actually a respectful tenant.
I just want to say I’m sorry you’re dealing with this. I honestly am. I’m so sick of the government being underhanded bastards - they are hell bent in maintaining the idea to at they are ‘not increasing tax on the working man’ or whatever it was so instead they quietly force up the price of everything the working man needs.
The u-turn on benefit reform really highlighted it for me. Trying to paint themselves as the hero’s knowing fine well now taxes need to go up all over the place
Which they will pay for by collection more tax from the tenants and landlords.
Housing prices are set by the amount tenants are able to pay right now, not by the amount landlords decide they want to charge, since demand far outstrips supply, any effect on rents from this tax will be negligible
Tax raid on landlords means tax raid on renters. Are they working people Rachel?
Amazing what happens when someone lies their way to power.
She created this current economic mess, why is she looking to make tenants lives even harder? She really is a vile dishonest woman who was promoted well beyond her level of competence working in a bank, before she was sacked for dishonesty.
Literally as soon as this leaked I had my biggest landlord on the phone, any property not on fixed term rents up 15% as of today. 20 minutes later another guy who we manage 50+ properties for, doing the same.
Exactly the point I was raising with the anti landlord comments it's pushing rent up and if tenants still pay it landlords will be happy else they will just sell leaving more people homeless and nowhere to rent.
Tenants don’t have a choice but to pay it. We have to live somewhere. And not like we can save the vast sums required for a deposit whilst renting
You realise if there's a massive Exodus of landlords from the housing market it will drive property prices down? As an ex-landlord myself I find it very funny that this sub is full of people who think being a landlord is providing a service. The commoditisation of property for the purpose of extracting rent is exactly why houses are unaffordable.
I did it as I had to move with work, whilst I kept my rent low I was under no illusion that it was a service I was providing. I did so for my own financial gain, it would have been better for the economy to release that property to market.
>You realise if there's a massive Exodus of landlords from the housing market it will drive property prices down
It will not. Those properties will be bought up by big players like Blackrock who are laser focussed on maximising revenue and have the legal firepower to do hundreds of evictions a week. Out of the frying pan and into the fire for tenants.
> You realise if there's a massive Exodus of landlords from the housing market it will drive property prices down?
That remains bad news for tenants, its good news for buyers - two different markets.
However the home buyers may need more deposit if house prices sink to any notable level, as lenders will tighten criteria on low deposit mortgages as they always do.
Well this myth has been promoted by some for a number of years. About 400,000 rental properties have left the rental market since 2016, tell me how getting rid of these has helped tenants? In 2016 a studio here would be £475-525pcm, adjusted for inflation that is about £655, currently we would expect £1050-1100
LLs is a service business, LLs provide a service, accountants, hairdressers, prostitutes, drug dealers etc. no one in their right mind would expect any of those businesses to provide their service for any reason other than profit. I dont think I have seen any LL on here who claims to act altruistically, its done for profit.
All ranting and raving and hate spouted by the crazies has done is reduce the quantity and quality of properties available for rental. Tenants pay more and get less.
Why are your landlords requesting 15% increases based on what is, at present, pure kite flying?
I'm afraid (as a landlord), that sounds greedy to me.
No, you impose cost on a business, the business adds margin to the cost prior to passing it on to its customer. Especially when that cost is put on the entire market.
Assuming 8% NI, adding 8% to your rents will in effect be reducing them.
Can you tell me what cost has actually been added by this piece of kite flying?
NI can be as high as 8%, I think. Yet increasing rent by 8% won't cover the new cost because that is charged at 8% also, which means you need to go much higher for it to cover itself.
Someone else can do the maths; it will break my brain at this point in the day.
NI is 8% for income under £50k. Above that it's 2%.
If you want to increase to cover an additional 8%, the increase needs to be 8.7%, not 15%.
I think Reeves is doing a terrible job, but to assert that she “created this current economic mess” is obviously absurd.
In 2024 things were looking good, the Ukraine situation had stabilized, inflation was more normal after the energy price shocks, people were spending again. for the first time in 2 years things looked ok.
Then this shower of fools get elected. How many people voted the last bunch of idiots out as "labour cant be worse?" WOW how wrong can anyone be.
Instead of getting elected and using the natural optimism created by such a a change to encourage a bit of growth, even if it was only for 6 months let the economy recover from 22&23. She started from day 1 talking everything down, the made up black hole that the OBR say did not exist etc etc etc.
It should come as no surprise to anyone that has ever run a business or had to generate revenue that having a chancellor say I am going to take a load of money off you, not sure how, not sure how much but I am going to take it, will result in a LOT of people stopping spending. So from July till the budget a lot of people stopped spending, put pans on hold to see what she did.
Then she did her job tax and people realized this was just the start of the taxing, so have wound their necks in. She really is an utter clown of the highest order.
So yes the mess we are in is 100% down to her and her idiot choices.
Inflation was better but sticky. The underlying causes were almost all pre ‘24.
Energy price shocks were and still are to a large extent out of govt control.
The monster issue Reeves has is two fold, primarily. One, we have an enormous debt pile that needs to be nursed (again, all pre ‘24). Two, there is a massive gaping wound in the public finances that needs to be plugged. Again, all pre ‘24. On both these points the Tories left a disastrous legacy and on neither of these two points was anything looking good in 2024. Reeves has not caused either of these things. You may argue that her fiscal rule leaves little room, but I would suggest not adding to debt for operating spending is a good thing and is keeping the bond market in check.
Again, I think Reeves is having a shocker and the NICs raid is a big clanger dropped, but I simply can’t see any way she has caused the current economic malaise beyond that. Is she making the best of the hand she’s dealt? No. But has she caused this? Also no.
Having a shocker??? Having a shocker??? She has done more damage than any chancellor I can think of. If she had not done anything, just sat in her office and played solitaire we would be in a VASTLY better situation than we are now.
Debt and borrowing did not look good in 2024, no, they look a whole lot worse now, she added £70bn borrowing in her budget, so clearly debt and borrowing are not that big a deal for her, she also slackened the borrowing criteria.
Not borrowing money to piss away on day to day public sector spending and pay is not fiscal prudence it just not being an absolute moron.
Keeping the bond market in check? Not sure about that, look at gilt rates.
Best of the hand she has been dealt? she has put her cards down, shat in her hands and is now clapping away.
I can sense you feel personally attacked by the chancellor and are not being rational or objective. I was commenting on your initial assertion was that she has caused this mess. That is patently false. Has she made things worse? Yes. But that is different from causing the problem.
More damage than any chancellor you can think of is, again, absurd. Kwarteng and Truss? Hunt, a ‘steady hand’, left a gaping hole in the books for the next govt. Osborne’s punitive austerity is at the root of much of this, as public services teeter toward collapse and now need vast injections of money to just plough on.
Where I have one shred of sympathy for her, is that Labour is now unsustainable as a brand. Their values contradict, eg the welfare u turns, and this is the result. The country needs an honest conversation about what it thinks the state should do, because the cost of running the country ‘as is’ is spiralling. She is not having that dialogue because it’s Labour. Debt is relatively stable, but it’s the cost of debt that is hurting more.
Ah yes the poor blameless small landlord with 50+ properties having to raise rents by 15% in response to a potential 8% tax raise, how will this poor wretch handle having to lower their portfolio to under 10 million, they'd starve surely. Won't someone think of the landlords.
The vast majority of landlords could take an 8% tax hit whilst still making profit, but much like any parasite or large corporate landlords, nothing is enough as long as there is still more to take.
Most landlords avoid raising rents for existing tenants unless nudged by government policies like this one.
It will trigger rent reassessments, increases, evictions, and a reduced rental supply—worsening the housing crunch.
If enough landlords exit (especially individuals), we could hit the Laffer curve, yielding less overall tax revenue as their numbers dwindle.
Even without sales or hikes, lower returns mean skimping on maintenance, degrading property quality.
This contradicts Labour's housing goals and ignores supply shortages. It's driven by two motives: funding more spending and appeasing socialists - prioritizing money and ideology over logic and outcomes.
There’s no more to take, it’ll simply have to be passed on to the tenants.
The tenants don’t have the money for it either
That's true, but with margins so low rent will have to go up, otherwise there will a few less to pick from.
Make less profit?
The loss the landlords make by these changes will just be passed onto the renters in terms of increased rent. When the government say "we need more houses" they are doing everything they can make being an landlord unviable and increase rents. A majority of landlords are selling their properties in favour of other investments because there's more risk and no benefit to being a landlord anymore.
Whatever she puts on in tax I’ll just decide to raise rents.
Yep same here
So you don’t raise rent unless there’s an expense added on?
I'm a single property landlord. If this happens I'll propose an 8% + fair market increase at renewal next year and if my tenant doesn't accept it then I'll sell my property. It's just no longer a good investment (unless you're a corporate landlord).
Good ! Should be sold to allow more people to buy!!
Ditto.
Check around and see what sales are doing - so many people are trying to get out of property at the moment that you can't shift tenanted properties without tens of thousands discount. Ask me how I know!
Awesome, 1 less housing scalper.
The whole point is to kill of private rentals and turn it into corporate which in turn will come under the yoke of government policy.
Same technique with small farms eg IHT and myriad other ways to turn the screws.
All this points in the same direction…
I very much doubt any of these policies add up to a hill of beans on “filling x black hole” while blowing money like it is going out of fashion (maybe it really is!). That is just overt bs.
This will increase rents for the poorest in society. Everytime any government makes changes to the BTL market the result is higher rents.. thanks Labour for lying and screwing over tenants. When most people are poorer in 4 yrs it will guarantee Labour are not re-elected.
But poorer people got, the higher chance they will vote labour.
Really? Even with the landslide that was the last election it seems likely that the trend would just be to push people to Reform.
Just look at the similar post that got removed from housinguk this morning, many people still believe that taxing the landlord will fix the rental market.
Voting for Labour will make them even poorer.
Not while they are in government, reform from the looks of things.
Think tank tells them landlords don’t vote labour whereas many of those who are ideologically against them do. Politicians always go after votes first, often at the expense of stability and fairness. And stability is the thing, it’s not so much the policies and taxes themselves as the constantly changing goalposts that is such a disincentive.
Thank gos I’m selling my rental now
Glad I sold the last of my BTL recently
Good on u.
They know rents will go up, thats not their concern. Landlords are just the excuse they can hide behind doing it
Tax raid on rentals owned by individuals.
If this (or any) government had sense, it would standardise taxation of income. Currently, how your income is taxed depends on where you get it from and how old you are.
If you earn your money through working and are under the state pension age, your income is taxed more heavily than if you've not earned it though work, or you're of pension age. Does that make any sense? I'm not sure it does.
If you put your rental(s) in a company and take income via dividends, as well as being able to claim capital costs, you're taxed at a lower rate than if you own them directly. (Dividends are taxed at lower rates than other forms of income, and are the last form of income to be considered when calculating your tax bill.)
At the moment, this appears to be (as with other property tax proposals in the news), a government floating ideas in the press to gauge the reaction to them ahead of a possible budget, and this has been going on for a few weeks.
The last government was anti-small landlord (but pro-big business, build to rent landlord - I guess such companies generate enough money to be able to write decent sized cheques to party election funds). This one seems to be going down the same route.
The government always forgets that they pay a huge amout of those rents and conequences of the housing crisis. Sure they may raise extra income but will end up spending it on 1. higher housing benefit as rents rise and 2. emergency housing for those that cannot find anywhere to live.
No tax on third 700 grand homes then?
That already exists, with the additional Stamp Duty costs and higher Council Tax rates on 2nd homes.
If the proposal floated last week of scrapping Stamp Duty and replacing it with an annual value tax on homes over £500k happens, then such homes would also pay that annual tax.
Having said all of that, scrapping Stamp Duty and Council Tax and replacing them with a locally-determined Land Value Tax to fund each local authority would be a better idea. Value-based taxes disincentivise improvements and enhancements. LVT does not as the value of the underlying land isn't changed by doing something to improve the value of the house. Land values tend to increase for other reasons.
The answer — taxing corporations and the wealthy — is staring her in the face, but her cronyism will not permit her to take the obvious action, so she'll throw the baby out with the bathwater and destroy everyone else.
Labour, I suspect, has calculated that a tax on small landlords appears to be a tax on the wealthy but isn’t. It placates their base and doesn’t upset the genuinely wealthy.
The PRS is a total mess and frankly broken and landlords are a big part of that. But this latest raid by Reeves is beyond stupid.
After getting the tax credit on interest paid, and effectively paying tax on money i already paid to the bank, the interest payments themselves and all the other expenses, if they add this in i will barely break even.
People often get a bit confused by how these things make rents go up.
It’s not that landlords all across the country have a set amount of profit they need to make and if a cost is added they just whack rent up to keep that number the same.
Gov make it more expensive to be a LL -> the LLs who were closest to selling now sell -> If LLs aren’t buying (generally they aren’t atm) statistically the property is lived in less (2.1 owner occupier vs 2.6 renter density) meaning demand doesn’t go down as much as supply does -> therefore net demand increases -> when net demand increases -> rent goes up
don't trust her one bit
I was on the fence over whether to sell ours. I thought we might ride out this government, even with the RRB, EPC and other costs, because we don’t have mortgages.
It’s now got to the point where we would get a better return just selling up and putting the money in a building society. Also less hassle, no compliance with hundreds of laws etc (I know there will be better investments)
I’m now faced with selling up and evicting our lovely tenants or putting in a massive price increase, neither of which I want to do. We don’t usually increase prices during a tenancy so this would be upsetting for us and the tenants.
Labour will lose the next election if rents keep increasing. They will alienate the 8.6 million renter households who will see their rents go up due to decision of this Labour government to introduce a “ renters tax” . When a voters rent increase multiple times during a governments tenure they are highly unlikely to re-elect.
As being a landlord becomes less profitable more and more will quit the market, reducing the number of rental properties available, and pushing up demand for those which are left. This increases rent as more people compete for the same homes.
The purchase prices of smaller flats has been depressed for some time (partly due to landlords selling up, partly due to concerns with leasehold and service charges) but renters aren't going to suddenly start buying them because (1) they're unattractive for the reasons above, and (2) the average renter doesn't have the deposit saved because, well, rents are already very high. So they stay renting, potentially get turfed out of a home they've been in for several years as the landlord needs to sell, have to find moving costs, probably move to somewhere with a higher rent... and remain unable to save... 🔁
Unfortunately the average Joe sees landlords as the enemy and will support these sorts of moves long before they recognise the issue is just a lack of new construction. When there are more homes, home-seekers have more choice, and are better able to bargain for a better price. It's economics 101 but that seems to go right out the window in any landlord vs tenant conversation.
I'm sat discussing this with my Dad he only has 1 rental but said he will sell if they bring this in.
if u can sell... property market is frozen atm
I've just sold my btl no issues.
Won’t this just increase rental rates for tenants? Since landlords would want to maintain their base
I don’t understand the willing to make landlords sell up. Where are the tenants going to get the deposit form to buy the house?
From what I can see it shouldn't affect those of us that invest through Limited Companies..
So few details but it should not effect LTD Company Landlords.
A landlord on the radio this morning complaining that he only makes £150 profit each month of his interest only mortgage properties and he will be soon making a net loss on them lol my heart bleeds
I think a lot already do, I'm a sole trader and rent my only house out, and live with family, (business is struggling and this is helping me keep it going). All my income is lumped together and goes on my self assessment, so I pay tax and NI on all of it, I'm sure others do as well.
Any profit (or loss) I make on renting goes on my self assessment. I don't currently pay NI on the property part.
Good 👏👏👏👏
Everyone pays national insurance on hard earned money and landlords pay nothing while getting paid doing nothing. This is a great step. Finally some good things from Rachel Reeves
Treasury’s Tax Plans Would Hit Renters in Their Pocket from NRLA
Government plans to increase taxes on landlords could lead to higher rents for tenants, the National Residential Landlords Association (NRLA) has warned ahead of the Autumn Budget.
The warning comes in response to media reports suggesting that the Treasury is considering increasing Capital Gains Tax (CGT) rates and removing key reliefs, including Business Asset Disposal Relief. Such changes would hit landlords when they sell their properties.
Analysis by Capital Economics, commissioned by the NRLA, found that aligning CGT rates with those of income tax could see landlords with an average property facing a tax bill of over £32,000 when selling—almost three times the amount they would pay under the current system.
This would exacerbate the existing crisis in the private rented sector, where demand for homes far outstrips supply. The research notes that increasing CGT could lead to fewer rental properties being sold, further reducing the availability of homes to rent. Alternatively, landlords might seek to recoup higher tax bills by increasing rents, placing further financial pressure on tenants.
Commenting, Ben Beadle, Chief Executive of the NRLA, said:
>The private rented sector is under enormous pressure, with tenants facing record rent increases due to a shortage of available homes. Increasing Capital Gains Tax will only make things worse—either by reducing the number of properties available or by pushing up rents further as landlords try to cover their losses.
The NRLA is urging the Government to reconsider any plans to increase taxes on landlords and to focus instead on policies that support the growth of a sustainable private rented sector.
- The NRLA commissioned Capital Economics to model the impact of aligning Capital Gains Tax rates with income tax rates. The report is available upon request.
- Under the current CGT system, landlords pay 24% on gains above the tax-free allowance for residential property sales (assuming they are higher rate taxpayers). Aligning CGT with income tax could see rates rise to 40% or 45%, significantly increasing tax bills.
Good.
Labour should probably give up and let someone else have a go cant be much worse
You sure about that? Or just stirring up some shit?
What stupid woman...
Landlords won’t foot this bill, renters will.
The comments on this speculative article are borderline hysterical.
-
Rents are generally set at the highest available level regardless of tax regime
-
NI is 2% for higher rate taxpayers and wouldn't affect those held in a Ltd
The country has been living beyond its means for a while and we have a high level of debt to finance in a rising interest rate environment. We need to get a grip before the markets do it for us.
There's going to be plenty of pain to go around.
> Rents are generally set at the highest available level regardless of tax regime
Thats new rents, and the "highest avaliable level" today, can change tomorrow depending on market conditions. It's not static, thats obvious to anyone.
Existing rents remain largely unchainged, unless their is an event or trigger that starts a re-evaluation. Such as this, a tax rise.
Good, it’s the only correct place to start. Landlords have had the biggest gain from the property boom and should be taxed accordingly
So once ever single rental is owned by the banks and private companies that make huge profits
You will be happier ?
And not complain 👌
Of course the left wing HATE buy to let as it gives fairly normal people the abilty to survive without thew state.
Not a problem when they pay tax on the gains. Not many renters particularly want to rent from dodgy small time landlords or individuals with large buy to let portfolios, they could not care less about the wellbeing of the renters or least of all affordability. They are typically less off and seem to think the renters owe them something for paying their mortgage. Properly better to get this under large corporations that follow the law
If you run the sums though it's really not worth it so effectively this is either going to cause the private rental market to end or rents to increase a fair sum. It is neither a win for renters too.
It will just get passed onto the tenants
Won't be any properties left for tenants
Yeh if only there was something like CGT to account for that. Oh and if only they had already raised that tax too...
Inflation you idiot. Property taxes are already high CGT
That's a good point imagine if they slapped a CGT style tax on salary increases when moving jobs for higher pay I hope Rachel isn't on this sub to get an idea 😅