Oct 26 2009, 09:04 AM
QUOTE(sshahar9 @ Oct 26 2009, 01:46 AM)
its good what..
for a first time buyer like me who cant afford my first house yet, means i can save more to get that first house.
if the investors and flippers get taxed more thats fine by me, coz theyd already be a bit well off i reckon. also tax on first property means less speculation possibly in the market if i got my judgement right.
i think its a good move to help the middle or lower income group like myself to have higher chances of gaining more. the 5% rpgt doesnt really come to play for someone or a family that can only afford 1 house for a very very long time.
definitely a move to help the less fortunate
A flat 5% RPGT is more likely to be passed to buyer i.e. buyer will be forced to pay 105%, and this will generally contribute to driving up house prices.for a first time buyer like me who cant afford my first house yet, means i can save more to get that first house.
if the investors and flippers get taxed more thats fine by me, coz theyd already be a bit well off i reckon. also tax on first property means less speculation possibly in the market if i got my judgement right.
i think its a good move to help the middle or lower income group like myself to have higher chances of gaining more. the 5% rpgt doesnt really come to play for someone or a family that can only afford 1 house for a very very long time.
definitely a move to help the less fortunate
Since whether you sell now or later you're still taxed 5%, it doesn't help to curb speculators. A progressive tax rate that discourage selling within the first 3 years will do much better at that.
Quote
0.0272sec
0.80
7 queries
GZIP Disabled