It is apparent to me that stamp duty has unintended side effects : 

An increase in the distance people commute, and theferefore an increase in pollution and carbon consumption.

An increase in stess and a decrease in the time people spend with their families as a result of commuting.

People change jobs more frequently than they used to, either forced or through choice.  Because of the more temporary nature of employment, it is often not worth selling and buying a new property due to the high sum paid in stamp duty.  The other alternative, to let one's property and to rent closer to your new job also has an unintended consequence : income tax is payable on the property you let.

In short, your mobility is taxed, either through stamp duty, or income tax on property income.

As a result I see many people staying in the same property, and choosing to commute long distances, instead of moving.

I understand that the government needs to raise taxes to pay for services, and that stamp duty no doubt raises a considerable sum.  I am suggesting however that the effects of stamp duty on workforce mobility be measured, and the possibility of moving the tax burden elsewhere be considered.

Why is this idea important?

To create a more mobile workforce, to reduce carbon consumption, reduce stress, and to increase the quality of life.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.