Share this post:
Chancellor Rachel Reeves has some big choices to make before November’s Budget.
Treasury officials are eyeing up a shake-up of property taxes – reforming stamp duty, cutting back capital gains tax relief on main homes, and – eventually – tackling council tax.
This is being presented as a way to “raise billions” without touching income tax, VAT, or National Insurance.
But if these are the options, we should be asking: will they actually fix the problems in our tax system? Or just shuffle them around?
Here at Vox Political, Yr Obdt Srvt has been working on something bolder and fairer: a progressive property wealth tax to replace council tax.
And when you set it against what’s on the table in Whitehall, the difference is like that between night and day.
Capital Gains Tax on main homes
What Labour is considering: Scrapping the exemption that means your main home is free from capital gains tax (CGT). If you bought a house for £200,000 and sold for £400,000, you’d currently keep the £200,000 gain. Under the floated change, you’d hand 18–24 per cent of that to HM Revenue and Customs.
Why it appeals:
The snags:
-
Politically explosive: hits families downsizing or moving for work.
-
Unpredictable: if housing sales slow, so does the revenue.
-
Encourages lock-in: people stay put rather than sell, worsening housing shortages.
Our verdict: Short-term, volatile, controversial. Not a systemic fix.
Stamp Duty reform or abolition
What Labour is considering: Stamp duty currently raises £11.6 billion a year, but economists say it’s a drag on the housing market. Getting rid of it would make moving easier, but leave a hole in the public finances. Reports suggest any abolition would need a replacement – possibly a seller’s tax on high-value homes.
Why it appeals:
The snags:
-
It blows a big hole in the revenue base unless matched by something else.
-
If replaced with a “sales tax,” it just recreates the same volatility.
Our verdict: At best a sideways move, at worst a tax cut for speculators dressed up as reform.
Council tax reform
What Labour is considering: Re-banding, or tweaking valuations to make council tax a bit less regressive. But all the reports suggest this would be piecemeal – shifting money between areas, or shaving a little from one end to add a little to the other.
Why it appeals:
-
It’s a familiar system, so easier to sell politically.
-
It avoids the heavy lift of redesigning everything.
The snags:
-
It would still be based on 1991 valuations.
-
It would still leave renters paying for a tax that’s really about ownership.
-
It would still be regressive in many areas, where modest homes pay proportionally more than mansions.
Our verdict: This is like rearranging deckchairs on the Titanic.
The Progressive Property Wealth Tax (Vox Political‘s proposal)
What I have suggested instead: Scrap council tax completely and replace it with an annual, progressive tax on property wealth. This is:
-
Fairer: Bands are tied to modern values – not frozen in 1991.
-
Progressive: Low-value homes pay less than now. High-value homes pay much more.
-
Stable: Annual charges mean predictable funding for councils.
-
A clean break: Renters no longer pay directly and property owners shoulder the cost, which is how it should be.
I’ve modelled it in full. People in a modest home worth £150,000 would pay less than under council tax. Those in a £2 million townhouse in London would pay far more. The system scales with real-world wealth.
And on revenue? It would raise more than current council tax, providing the sustainable base Reeves says she needs.
The key difference
Labour is still playing inside the old rules, with every change framed as “raising billions to plug a gap”. That’s why the current government reaches for transaction taxes like CGT and stamp duty – blunt instruments with political downsides.
My proposal thinks bigger: if you want fairness and stability, build a systemic wealth tax that directly ties contributions to real property values.
This would require no fiddling; no tinkering. It would be a genuine reform.
TL;DR*
-
The government’s floated options: CGT on main homes (unpopular, volatile), stamp duty reform (sideways move), council tax tweaks (tokenism).
-
Our option: Progressive property wealth tax – fairer, simpler, raises more, renters freed from unfair bills.
-
The test: If Reeves really wants a fair tax system, let’s see her do better than the model this amateur created.
Which would YOU prefer?
*For those who don’t know, it means “Too Long; Didn’t Read”.
Share this post:
How Labour’s tax options stack up against a real progressive alternative
Share this post:
Chancellor Rachel Reeves has some big choices to make before November’s Budget.
Treasury officials are eyeing up a shake-up of property taxes – reforming stamp duty, cutting back capital gains tax relief on main homes, and – eventually – tackling council tax.
This is being presented as a way to “raise billions” without touching income tax, VAT, or National Insurance.
But if these are the options, we should be asking: will they actually fix the problems in our tax system? Or just shuffle them around?
Here at Vox Political, Yr Obdt Srvt has been working on something bolder and fairer: a progressive property wealth tax to replace council tax.
And when you set it against what’s on the table in Whitehall, the difference is like that between night and day.
Capital Gains Tax on main homes
What Labour is considering: Scrapping the exemption that means your main home is free from capital gains tax (CGT). If you bought a house for £200,000 and sold for £400,000, you’d currently keep the £200,000 gain. Under the floated change, you’d hand 18–24 per cent of that to HM Revenue and Customs.
Why it appeals:
Looks like an easy win on paper – CGT raised £13.3 billion last year.
Targets the wealthy in expensive areas.
The snags:
Politically explosive: hits families downsizing or moving for work.
Unpredictable: if housing sales slow, so does the revenue.
Encourages lock-in: people stay put rather than sell, worsening housing shortages.
Our verdict: Short-term, volatile, controversial. Not a systemic fix.
Stamp Duty reform or abolition
What Labour is considering: Stamp duty currently raises £11.6 billion a year, but economists say it’s a drag on the housing market. Getting rid of it would make moving easier, but leave a hole in the public finances. Reports suggest any abolition would need a replacement – possibly a seller’s tax on high-value homes.
Why it appeals:
First-time buyers and downsizers would move more easily.
It would be popular with the property industry.
The snags:
It blows a big hole in the revenue base unless matched by something else.
If replaced with a “sales tax,” it just recreates the same volatility.
Our verdict: At best a sideways move, at worst a tax cut for speculators dressed up as reform.
Council tax reform
What Labour is considering: Re-banding, or tweaking valuations to make council tax a bit less regressive. But all the reports suggest this would be piecemeal – shifting money between areas, or shaving a little from one end to add a little to the other.
Why it appeals:
It’s a familiar system, so easier to sell politically.
It avoids the heavy lift of redesigning everything.
The snags:
It would still be based on 1991 valuations.
It would still leave renters paying for a tax that’s really about ownership.
It would still be regressive in many areas, where modest homes pay proportionally more than mansions.
Our verdict: This is like rearranging deckchairs on the Titanic.
The Progressive Property Wealth Tax (Vox Political‘s proposal)
What I have suggested instead: Scrap council tax completely and replace it with an annual, progressive tax on property wealth. This is:
Fairer: Bands are tied to modern values – not frozen in 1991.
Progressive: Low-value homes pay less than now. High-value homes pay much more.
Stable: Annual charges mean predictable funding for councils.
A clean break: Renters no longer pay directly and property owners shoulder the cost, which is how it should be.
I’ve modelled it in full. People in a modest home worth £150,000 would pay less than under council tax. Those in a £2 million townhouse in London would pay far more. The system scales with real-world wealth.
And on revenue? It would raise more than current council tax, providing the sustainable base Reeves says she needs.
The key difference
Labour is still playing inside the old rules, with every change framed as “raising billions to plug a gap”. That’s why the current government reaches for transaction taxes like CGT and stamp duty – blunt instruments with political downsides.
My proposal thinks bigger: if you want fairness and stability, build a systemic wealth tax that directly ties contributions to real property values.
This would require no fiddling; no tinkering. It would be a genuine reform.
TL;DR*
The government’s floated options: CGT on main homes (unpopular, volatile), stamp duty reform (sideways move), council tax tweaks (tokenism).
Our option: Progressive property wealth tax – fairer, simpler, raises more, renters freed from unfair bills.
The test: If Reeves really wants a fair tax system, let’s see her do better than the model this amateur created.
Which would YOU prefer?
*For those who don’t know, it means “Too Long; Didn’t Read”.
Share this post:
you might also like
Osborne wants a ‘year of hard truths’. Here’s one: He’s HIDING the truth
Divisions in Coalition as MPs demand independent inquiry on poverty
Peter Oborne is right to support the 50p tax rate