Archives
January 2005
February 2005
March 2005
July 2005
November 2005
December 2005
January 2006
February 2006
March 2006
April 2006
May 2006
August 2006
September 2006
October 2006
Comment
McDowell not wrong on stamp duty
Wednesday, September 27, 2006
Michael McDowell’s opening-up of the stamp duty debate is welcome. It isclear that certain reforms of the stamp duty regime should be considered. There are three reforms of particular significance. First, there needs to be a marginal rate of stamp duty to remove the market distortions and inequity where purchasers are paying a higher rate of stamp duty on the whole amount of a property even though it is close to the threshold of a lower rate. Second, the rates of stamp duty need to be index-linked in some way. Third, the distinction in stamp duty between new and second-hand homes should be abolished. While some caution is required on this, given the importance of the construction sector, it is not desirable that new properties are more attractive for families than second-hand homes.
Deeper debate is needed on the issue in the long term, but the problems he outlined should be addressed.
McDowell says we don’t need the money. Given the problems in our health services, our under-funded education system, and the fact that parents have to think twice, for cost reasons, before visiting a GP, I cannot agree with him. However, our tax collection must be fair, and not distort the market. McDowell may have opened the debate for self-serving reasons, it is still one worth having.
Deeper debate is needed on the issue in the long term, but the problems he outlined should be addressed.
McDowell says we don’t need the money. Given the problems in our health services, our under-funded education system, and the fact that parents have to think twice, for cost reasons, before visiting a GP, I cannot agree with him. However, our tax collection must be fair, and not distort the market. McDowell may have opened the debate for self-serving reasons, it is still one worth having.

