Here’s an example of a bond issue backed by rents, the key financial component of the Simple Plan.
It’s got to be better than this:
This is what 9% average price growth looks like across the whole distribution of London house prices. pic.twitter.com/2kiyArRi9h
— Neal Hudson (@resi_analyst) October 21, 2013
Or waiting for dead men’s shoes.
The Daily Mash, as usual, nails it.
Estate agent Emma Bradford said: “We are seeing more non-human buyers, especially from the vicinity of Ursa Minor.
“They have different priorities, for example vast egg underground chambers for the incubation of their drone warrior offspring. Other space clients are requesting slime-proof flooring or bespoke air conditioning that mimics the atmosphere of Jupiter.”
That would explain all those people digging out their basements. Won’t the aliens get a surprise when houses go bad.
Love the spike at 250K and the drop following at slightly higher prices; similar (weaker) effect around 500K. I would seem like houses slightly above those prices tend to be set be set back to those prices. But why? Are these some sort of breakpoints in taxation? Or just sales agent/ client preference points? i.e. 499K will sell better than 501K. But why not something similar at $300K, $400K then?
“Are these some sort of breakpoints in taxation?”
250K – Something to do with inheritance tax. Sale of houses of deceased relatives.
Its stamp duty – increases from 0 to 1% at £125,00 then to 3% at £250,000 and goes to 4% at £500,000
Yep – it’s a cliff edge – the 3% is on the whole value of the property, not the excess over £250k, so the tax goes from £2,500 to £7,500 if the purchase price goes from £250,000 to £250,001.
What I’ve never figured out is why – it’s not some historic system lost in the depths of time – stamp duty used to be historically 0.5% (and still is on shares[1]) – the differential rates on property only came in in the mid-90s.
[1] Complex caveats about SDRT, and the optional nature of stamp duty omitted here.