top of page
  • Writer: Ziggurat Realestatecorp
    Ziggurat Realestatecorp
  • Aug 30
  • 7 min read

When it emerged last week that the chancellor was considering scrapping stamp duty, many will have started celebrating. However, the jubilation was short-lived as a host of alternative property tax suggestions began to surface. The Treasury is said to be contemplating a shake-up as it looks to raise billions of pounds in the autumn budget.


Stamp duty brought in £13.8 billion over the past tax year, while capital gains tax (CGT), which is charged on the sale of second homes, shares and art, raised £13 billion. Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, is now understood to be considering charging CGT on the sale of high-value homes, with the limit being mooted at £1.5 million. At the moment you do not pay CGT when you sell your main home, although it is applied to sales of second or additional properties.


Critics have long warned that high stamp duty charges stifle the housing market, but have now said that charging people when they sell their main home could cause even more damage. Is there really a better way to tax property than the present system; one that is fair and effective? We look at how the rest of the world does it.


WHAT IT’S WORTH


Taxes on property, such as council tax, stamp duty and CGT, make up 12 per cent of the total tax take in the UK. This is on a par with the US and Canada and is one of the highest percentages among the 38 wealthy nation members of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).


ree

The average across the OECD was 6 per cent in 2022. “The fundamental problem with property taxation is that what makes sense in economic terms isn’t easy in practical terms,” said Anna Clarke from the Housing Forum, a trade body. “You ideally want to tax the value of the asset annually to encourage people to vacate higher-value homes if they don’t need them. And you don’t want to tax moving, because that deters downsizing and people moving for work. But annual taxes will add to the bills of those who may not have a lot of income — such as asset-rich, cash-poor pensioners


THE VARIATIONS


Buyers pay 2 per cent stamp duty on between £125,001 and £250,000 of a purchase price; 5 per cent between £250,001 and £925,000; 10 per cent between £925,001 and £1.5 million; and 12 per cent on anything above that. There is a 5 per cent surcharge on the purchase of additional or second homes. First-time buyers pay only 5 per cent of purchase price between £300,001 and £500,000. Barring the odd stamp duty holiday, those rates have been frozen since December 2014, even though the average UK sold price has risen 52 per cent. Other countries have far lower rates of tax.


ree

The US equivalent, property transfer tax, varies by state and 12 states don’t have one at all. The highest charge is in Delaware — 4 per cent of the sale price with the bill split equally between buyer and seller. French property transfer taxes vary by region but can be up to 5.81 per cent of the purchase price whereas in the Netherlands the rate for someone buying a main home is 2 per cent and in Sweden it is 1.5 per cent.


In Canada it varies by region but all are lower than the UK. The most populous province, Ontario, has a top rate of 2.5 per cent of purchase price, charged on homes worth more than CAN$2 million (£1.07 million). An average of 4 per cent of UK homes have changed hands every year since the 2008 financial crisis, according to the investment bank Jefferies. About 25 per cent of 2,000 homeowners polled by Barclays in April said the tax was the biggest barrier to moving house. Jonathan Pierce from Jefferies said: “Most economists agree it is a bad tax that clogs up the market and weakens growth.” One big problem with council tax, which was introduced in 1993, is that it is based on out-of-date property valuations.


Council tax bands in England and Scotland, which range from A (the lowest) to H (the highest), are still based on April 1991 house prices, with Scotland’s bands set at two thirds of the value of those in England. In Wales, where bands range from A to I, values are based on 2003 prices. Northern Ireland uses the rates system instead, with what you pay linked to property values in 2005.


This means that areas where house prices have risen most since 1991, especially London and the southeast, pay less council tax relative to their property value than those where house price growth has been more sluggish. In Blackpool a band D property will pay £2,392 in council tax, which works out at 1.52 per cent of the average property price of £157,368 for the area. This makes Blackpool the area with the highest tax rate, proportionally, in England, according to the estate agency Hampplus don, the band D bill is the lowest in the UK at £990 a year — 0.15 per cent of the average property price of £652,287.


John Muellbauer, a professor of economics at the University of Oxford, said it was “probably the most regressive property tax in the world. In each local authority the poorest homes pay the highest tax as a percentage of their property value.” In the US property taxes are usually regularly revalued — sometimes annually or every two to three years. Homeowners pay a percentage tax made up of as many as 14 separate levies set by states, counties and school boards to fund them.


Yet a UK revaluation could be divisive because those in London and the southeast, where property values have increased most since 1991, could be hit with much higher bills. “I remember chatting to someone a few years back who’d just spent the last two years of her life working on the government’s revaluation of council tax only for that to be abandoned as too political,” Clarke said. “The longer we leave the system the more out of date it gets and the bigger the shock — to Londoners mainly — of reform would be.”


SHOULD WE TAX SELLERS INSTEAD OF BUYERS?


 Applying CGT to the sale of your main home would mean that you would be taxed twice — once when you bought it, and again when you sold it, assuming that it had gone up in value. CGT is charged at 24 per cent for higher-rate taxpayers and 18 per cent for basic-rate taxpayers.


Main homes are exempt from any kind of CGT in 19 of the OECD countries, excluding the UK, while another 16 offer some kind of relief, depending on how long someone has lived in their home, so charging capital gains on main homes would be unusual. Taxing sellers’ gains might sound like a good idea, as they would have the funds from a property sale to pay the bill, and the Treasury could cash in on soaring house prices.


HM Revenue & Customs says that not charging CGT on someone’s main home costs it £31 billion a year. Yet changing the rule may not necessarily raise that much because homeowners would simply not sell. Jonathan Brandling-Harris from the estate agency House Collective said: “If you knew that selling your home would trigger an additional tax bill on top of the cost of moving and buying, you simply would not move unless you absolutely had to. That means fewer transactions, less choice, and a market that grinds to a halt.”


WHAT’S THE ANSWER?


While the government cannot afford to make tax cuts, Pierce said halving stamp duty rates for those buying their main home, which would lose the Treasury about £3.5 billion a year, could pay for itself. That’s because there would be more sales, while homeowners would free up housing wealth that they could then spend by downsizing. He said there was as much as £5 trillion of trapped wealth in privately owned homes. During the stamp duty holiday from July 2020 to June 2021, when purchases of up to £500,000 incurred no tax, Pierce said house sales rose 25 per cent.


Reductions of housing equity, either through downsizing or remortgaging, exceeded mortgage repayments for the first time since the financial crisis. “When a chain completes it tends to release equity from the stock, as those trading down often have less debt than is needed to purchase the same property by those trading up,” he said. “Older homeowners releasing equity might deposit the money in the bank, but some of that would almost certainly find its way into the real economy.”


Other suggestions are more radical. Muellbauer proposed replacing the top two council tax bands G and H, which cover 1.4 million of the highest-value properties in England and Wales, with a 0.5 per cent a year tax on their value. Foreign and second homeowners would pay 1 per cent. This would raise about £10 billion a year, he said. In turn higher rates of stamp duty for more expensive homes would be cut, which could boost sales. A proportional property tax similar to the US is something several campaign groups have called for.


The Treasury is reportedly looking at proposals from the centre-right think tank Onward, which would involve homeowners with properties worth more than £500,000 paying a 0.54 per cent annual tax on any value above £500,000 to replace stamp duty. Any home worth more than £1 million would pay 0.81 per cent on the portion over that threshold. The 5 per cent stamp duty surcharge on second homes would remain and those owners would also pay the annual property tax. It would also scrap council tax and replace it with a 0.44 per cent annual tax levied by councils on house value between £800 and £500,000 (a maximum of £2,196 a year). Someone with a £650,000 home would pay £3,006 a year — 0.44 per cent of £499,200 (the maximum £2,196) to their council and then another £810 a year — 0.54 per cent of the £150,000 portion above £500,000 to the government.


The annual tax would be paid by anyone who bought a home after it was introduced. Clarke suggested this transition could help to get round the political difficulties caused by some households suddenly paying a lot more — although the suggestion is you could avoid a new tax by not moving. Any changes would come with tradeoffs, and it is possible there is no perfect way to tax property that would leave everyone satisfied — simply piling more taxes on already stretched households will certainly not do that. 


 
 
 
  • Writer: Ziggurat Realestatecorp
    Ziggurat Realestatecorp
  • Aug 27
  • 2 min read

The Philippines registered a significant improvement in its adjusted misery index in June 2025, reflecting a more favorable balance between inflation, unemployment, and underemployment. The index fell to 16.1 percent, compared to 18.5 percent in June 2024, signaling relief for Filipino households amid easing price pressures and stronger labor market conditions.


What is the Adjusted Misery Index?

The traditional misery index is calculated by adding inflation and unemployment. The adjusted version, however, includes underemployment—a more comprehensive gauge of economic distress. This provides a clearer picture of how many Filipinos are struggling not only to find jobs but also to secure stable, decent-paying work.

Formula:

Adjusted Misery Index = Inflation Rate + Unemployment Rate + Underemployment Rate

Key Economic Indicators (June 2025)


  • Unemployment: Fell to 3.7 percent, equivalent to 1.9 million unemployed, an improvement from 4.5 percent a year earlier.

  • Underemployment: Declined to 11.0 percent from 12.7 percent in June 2024, showing progress in creating better-quality jobs.

  • Inflation: Registered 1.4 percent, a sharp drop from 3.3 percent in the same month last year, with food inflation almost flat at just 0.1 percent.


Putting these figures together:

June 2025 = 3.7 + 11.0 + 1.4 = 16.1%
June 2024 = 4.5 + 12.7 + 3.3 = 18.5%
ree

What Drove the Decline?


  1. Rice Price Stabilization

    • Government interventions, including tariff cuts and expanded supply programs, led to a historic decline in rice prices—down by 14.3 percent, the steepest fall in three decades.

  2. Improved Labor Market

    • Expanded government hiring in education and healthcare, combined with job matching, internships, and training programs, reduced both unemployment and underemployment.

  3. Lower Inflationary Pressures

    • Cheaper food commodities such as vegetables, corn, and sugar helped pull down consumer prices, benefitting especially low-income households.


Why This Matters


  • For Households: The decline translates to greater purchasing power and better job security, particularly for vulnerable groups.

  • For Policymakers: The results highlight the effectiveness of targeted programs in controlling food prices and promoting job creation.

  • For Investors: Lower inflation and stronger employment signal a healthier macroeconomic environment, boosting investor confidence.


Outlook


While the drop to 16.1 percent is a promising sign, risks remain. Potential volatility in global oil markets, El Niño–driven food supply challenges, and animal disease outbreaks affecting pork prices could put upward pressure on inflation in the months ahead. Sustaining momentum will require continued government vigilance, particularly in keeping food affordable and strengthening inclusive job opportunities.


The Philippines’ adjusted misery index in June 2025 shows a clear improvement from last year’s 18.5 percent, reflecting easing inflation and stronger labor conditions. If these trends continue, Filipino households may enjoy a period of greater economic stability heading into 2026.


 
 
 
  • Writer: Ziggurat Realestatecorp
    Ziggurat Realestatecorp
  • Aug 24
  • 3 min read

State spending on infrastructure bounced back in June, as disbursements for public works projects resumed after the election ban was lifted in early May, the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) said.


In its latest disbursement report on Thursday, the DBM reported that expenditure on infrastructure and other capital outlays increased by 6.5% to P148.8 billion in June from P139.7 billion in the same month last year.


Month on month, it increased by 20.2% from P123.8 billion.


This came after the month of May saw an annual 9.2% decline.


“This was largely attributed to the recovery of DPWH’s (Department of Public Works and Highways) spending performance following a two-month decline in April and May amid the election ban,” it said.


The Commission on Elections’ 45-day ban on public works spending started on March 28 and ended with the May 12 elections.


In June, the DPWH resumed payments for mobilization fees as well as made progress payments for newly awarded projects. It also settled outstanding obligations from previous years.


However, the DBM noted the pace of infrastructure spending was tempered by base effects from substantial releases for the Department of National Defense’s Revised Armed Forces of the Philippines Modernization Program in June last year.


The Philippines has been ramping up its military capacity under the $35-billion military modernization program since 2012 in response to rising tensions in the South China Sea.


The DBM said big-ticket releases for infrastructure are expected in the second half of the year.


Budget Secretary Amenah F. Pangandaman earlier explained that disbursements are expected to pick up toward the latter part of May to June after the 45-day election ban is lifted.


Rizal Commercial Banking Corp. Chief Economist Michael L. Ricafort said that increased infrastructure spending is crucial for economic growth.


“(This will translate to) more inclusive economic growth and development, as better infrastructure boosts the economy’s productivity, as well as help attract more foreign tourists and more foreign investments/locators,” Mr. Ricafort said in a Viber message on Thursday.


For the first half of 2025, overall infrastructure and capital outlays disbursements inched up by 1.4% to P620.2 billion from P611.8 billion in the same period last year.

This was 0.1% or P800 million below the P621-billion program for the first semester.


“Although infrastructure expenditures posted a notable 20.8% (P45-billion) annual growth in first quarter this year, it contracted by 9.3% (P36.6 billion) in second quarter amid the election-related prohibition on public spending covering the entire month of April up to the first two weeks of May,” the DBM said.


Meanwhile, overall infrastructure disbursements, which include infrastructure components of subsidy or equity to government corporations and transfers to local government units, were flat at P720.3 billion in the January-to-June period from P720.5 billion a year ago.


It also exceeded the overall infrastructure spending program of P718-billion for the first half by 0.3%.


The DBM said growth in infrastructure transfers to local government units, particularly their development fund equivalent to 20% of the National Tax Allotment, was offset by lower National Government-implemented infrastructure activities and reduced subsidies to state agencies like the National Irrigation Administration (NIA).


Subsidies provided to state-run firms stood at P7.45 billion in June, 26.68% down from P10.16 billion a year earlier.


Budgetary support to the NIA plunged by 68.21% in June to P2.39 billion from P7.52 billion in the same period in 2024.


“Nevertheless, the total infrastructure spending for the first semester was registered at 5.3% of GDP (gross domestic product), in line with the 5.3% full-year target for this year,” it added.


Based on the 2026 Budget of Expenditures and Sources, the government set its full-year infrastructure spending program at P1.51 trillion, equivalent to 5.3% of the GDP.


In the following months, the DBM said line agencies are expected to ramp up requests for release of allotments for their programs, activities, and projects in the second semester as implementation activities normalize post-election ban.


“These may also include unutilized cash allocations from the second quarter that line agencies can still request this second semester so they can process payments and make disbursements to suppliers or contractors for completed and delivered goods or rendered services,” it said.


Among the anticipated spending drivers for the succeeding months are progress billings from multiple finished or partially completed road and transport infrastructure projects and releases for defense modernization program.


“Increased infrastructure spending at around 5%-6% of GDP for the coming years, as also seen in recent years, would still lead to sustained growth in infrastructure spending,” Mr. Ricafort said.


 
 
 

© Copyright 2018 by Ziggurat Real Estate Corp. All Rights Reserved.

  • Facebook Social Icon
  • Instagram
  • Twitter Social Icon
  • flipboard_mrsw
  • RSS
bottom of page