Perhaps it's 24 hours late but it still seems worth making a few comments about the Budget, particularly as there has now been time to absorb more of the details.

 

There's not a lot of good news. The cut in employers' National Insurance could be good news if it means smaller employers are more likely to take on an additional member of staff.

 

The help with the costs of childcare is good news for lower earners but there is no justification for extending it to couples with incomes as high as £300,000. They don't need any help with childcare costs. Why should a single person on £18,000 p.a. subsidise the childcare costs of a couple on £150,000 each?

 

The increase in the tax-free allowance to £10,000 is good news. It's time the Lib Dems made more noise about this. It was the first promise in their manifesto and they have achieved it. The shouldn't let the Tories get away with claiming the credit for it but that's what is happening.

 

The penny cut in the price of a pint of beer is all about grabbing headlines. It's not exactly a massive cut.

 

The help for people struggling to find the deposit on a home is tackling the wrong side of the equation. The problem is that house prices are too high. If anything, this measure will increase prices even more. On the radio this morning Osborne more or less admitted that it could also benefit people buying a second home. If somebody wants a second home, why should they be eligible for a cheap loan from the government to help them buy it? Again that will just drive prices up and make it harder for some people to buy a home in the area where they grew up.

 

Then there's the usual rhetoric about tackling tax avoidance from a Chancellor whose sums don't add up (Labour did this as well). Osborne has used this line every year but hasn't yet provided any evidence that any extra revenue has been raised.

Given that I don't drink beer, the reduction in duty on beer doesn't affect me at all. The £10,000 tax-free allowance is good news for me, but apart from that there's nothing here to get my personally excited.

It's all ifs and buts really isn't it. The housing scheme needs be challenged, and maybe this isn't the right way as it can be exploited, but what can't be exploited these days by people? As someone who is looking to be a first time house buyer within the next 3-4 years, it's certainly a good initiative to help people get on to the property ladder as currently it is ridiculous.

It's all ifs and buts really isn't it. The housing scheme needs be challenged, and maybe this isn't the right way as it can be exploited, but what can't be exploited these days by people? As someone who is looking to be a first time house buyer within the next 3-4 years, it's certainly a good initiative to help people get on to the property ladder as currently it is ridiculous.

 

Sounds a good idea. The up to 20% deposit, interest free, on newly built houses only they said, up to value of 600k.

It's an excellent idea IMO as someone who it could potentially benefit. It should definitely only be for first time buyers though who genuinely can't afford it currently.

It's all ifs and buts really isn't it. The housing scheme needs be challenged, and maybe this isn't the right way as it can be exploited, but what can't be exploited these days by people? As someone who is looking to be a first time house buyer within the next 3-4 years, it's certainly a good initiative to help people get on to the property ladder as currently it is ridiculous.

The share price of various developers soared as soon as this was announced. That gives a pretty good idea of who the real gainers will be.

No rabbits. Which makes fighting the next election all the more delicieux as it doesn't give the economy much ground for expansion in the next two years.

It's an excellent idea IMO as someone who it could potentially benefit. It should definitely only be for first time buyers though who genuinely can't afford it currently.

 

Yes but why on newly built houses only? Definitely said that on Ch.4 news. How many new houses are there being built and say you don't want a new one? :rolleyes:

Edited March 21, 201312 yr by Common Sense

Sounds a good idea. The up to 20% deposit, interest free, on newly built houses only they said, up to value of 600k.

 

It's an excellent idea, although is it interest free? It's ridiculously hard to get on the housing market at the moment. You're probably looking at saving for 3-4 years minimum then you need either a spouse or a friend to buy a house with usually. Perfect as it will be benefiting graduates, young professionals, people who are renting etc. - a lot of whom have had it tough over the past few years.

 

I don't like the idea that second home owners may potentially benefit, but just look at student loans etc. - people who don't actually need the loan can stiff get it. There's always loopholes.

It's an excellent idea, although is it interest free? It's ridiculously hard to get on the housing market at the moment. You're probably looking at saving for 3-4 years minimum then you need either a spouse or a friend to buy a house with usually. Perfect as it will be benefiting graduates, young professionals, people who are renting etc. - a lot of whom have had it tough over the past few years.

 

I don't like the idea that second home owners may potentially benefit, but just look at student loans etc. - people who don't actually need the loan can stiff get it. There's always loopholes.

 

From what I heard on the Ch.4 news piece about it tonight, it's interest free.

Yes but why on newly built houses only? Definitely said that on Ch.4 news. How many new houses are there being built and say you don't want a new one? :rolleyes:

 

Well it's to encourage developers to build more houses I'd assume. Not that that's always a good thing as there are so many derelict houses as it is, but whether it helps boost the economy or not we'll see. It's certainly a nice idea.

The load would be interest free for five years. After that there is an annual fee which goes up by inflation plus 1% each year.

 

No doubt the Tories would say that it is restricted to new homes because they want to encourage new building. A more cynical observer might point out that the developers are major donors to the Tory party.

The load would be interest free for five years. After that there is an annual fee which goes up by inflation plus 1% each year.

 

No doubt the Tories would say that it is restricted to new homes because they want to encourage new building. A more cynical observer might point out that the developers are major donors to the Tory party.

 

Well regardless if it benefits the people who donate to the Tories, it also massively benefits young people and first time house owners.

Well regardless if it benefits the people who donate to the Tories, it also massively benefits young people and first time house owners.

One reason lenders are asking for such a large deposit is to guard against negative equity (i.e. people owning more than the value of the property if prices fall). This scheme does nothing to reduce that risk.

 

As I said before, the biggest problem is that prices are too high. If anything this scheme will exacerbate that.

One reason lenders are asking for such a large deposit is to guard against negative equity (i.e. people owning more than the value of the property if prices fall). This scheme does nothing to reduce that risk.

 

As I said before, the biggest problem is that prices are too high. If anything this scheme will exacerbate that.

 

Yeah but a big problem with house prices is people are still warped up in pre-2007 prices and it puts people off buying them. My house has lost little valuation in comparison to other houses in my area, but that's mainly down to the location. Go 3/4 miles further out and people are being quoted 30-40k+ less than a few years ago. People will out off selling in the hope the market will stabilise again and prices will rise. Catch-22 really, you can't please everybody.

The entire idea of encouraging new builds is flawed though. It's a little hypocritical to say we're in the middle of a housing crisis when no new social housing has been built for decades, and in some areas there's an awful lot of empty housing that it's currently financially unviable to do anything about.

It should definitely only be for first time buyers though who genuinely can't afford it currently.

I just don't see that there is anyway they can ensure that it is first time buyers getting the benefit. All I can see is that a way will be found around it for property investors to boost their portfolio all with a helping hand from the Government. If they could 100% ensure that it is only for first time buyers then I don't think anyone could argue that its a good thing - but it WILL be exploited and I doubt many first time buyers will see any benefits from this.

Yeah but a big problem with house prices is people are still warped up in pre-2007 prices and it puts people off buying them. My house has lost little valuation in comparison to other houses in my area, but that's mainly down to the location. Go 3/4 miles further out and people are being quoted 30-40k+ less than a few years ago. People will out off selling in the hope the market will stabilise again and prices will rise. Catch-22 really, you can't please everybody.

 

House prices are rising now though aren't they, average £745 a day I read the other day? We've just bought the one we've rented for 14 years and the estate agent said we did it just at the right time as they're going up now.

The entire idea of encouraging new builds is flawed though. It's a little hypocritical to say we're in the middle of a housing crisis when no new social housing has been built for decades, and in some areas there's an awful lot of empty housing that it's currently financially unviable to do anything about.

 

 

Just as a matter of interest, how is it financially unviable when it costs councils a lot to keep families in emergency accommodation, in B&B's and local hotels when there are houses unoccupied? There are some Council houses near us empty and boarded up. Why not do those up? Doesn't make sense. Think I'll write to my Councillor and ask him that. Also some privately owned ones. The Council should buy those to refurbish and then let.

And where exactly are the council going to get the money to buy or refurbish homes?