I don't think for one moment that our unelected Prime Minister is going to do away with this "nice little earner" for MP's when they sell their second homes that the rest of us have paid for. How about a "windfall tax" on MP's second, and third homes when they sell them, or at least a refund equal to the amount they have claimed in "accommodation expenses" during the period they have been MP's.

John E.Flunder, London, England

It seems to be assumed that all second homes are bad and for profit, but what about the scenario where one buys a McCarthy & Stone type of property? i.e. Assisted housing for an elderly parent. These do not make a profit and are difficult to sell ( I have been trying for 2 years to sell one). These proposals could mean that such help for parents will not be so readily available in the future.
What government thinks joined up anyway?

Brian Hodge, Uckfield, East Sussex

I'm a tax accountant and I did not 'demand' these changes to the CGT system, why would I want to reward investment at the same rate as entreprenuership and enterprise, i.e with the same rate of CGT at 18%?

Martin, Reading, UK

Brancaster, Norfolk. Please could Dr Burgess and the government work on the actual figures. The local borough council reckons that 40% of homes in the Parish are second homes - that is for Council tax purposes. I was involved in a recent survey that showed 53% of homes are not lived in regularly. Has anyone considered making properties not lived in regularly pay double local rates so that the councils have some money to pay people to provide the services that are traditionally provided by volunteers who live here all the time.

Alister Borthwick, Burnham Deepdale, Norfolk

Oh for goodness sake! Can't they even look out of the window? Can Stuart Burgess really be so out of touch with reality?
There aren't going to BE any capital gains in the property market for some many years to come. Property is tanking, and will continue to do so. So it is going to be pretty irrelevant whether these non-gains would have been taxed at 40%, 24% or 18%.
The only immediate effect is going to be a flurry of 2nd homes (and ex-rental properties) coming onto the market in April, forcing prices down still further, as people seek to realise gains already made, but that is going to make MORE property available to these rural community purchasers.
Except that suddenly they won't want them either. When prices start going down sharply, so will demand for property, whether from first time buyers, 2nd home owners or Buy-to-let buyers.

Peter, Portsmouth,

A classic example of a non-Manifesto proposal - is it a tax reduction? or an investment present. Reading the article it seems simply to be just representative of this Government's disability to understand the meaning of "joined up thinking"

M. Cawdery, Portadown, UK

Let us try to join up this thinking. Firstly, those 'second homes' in attractive rural locations have been largely bought for investment purposes due to the growth in property values, and cheap loans, with a bonus feature of providing holiday accommodation for family and friends.

Secondly, those purchased in such as central London have also been purchased as investments as above, but also to enable the City worker to have accommodation close to his/her workplace, and enable his/her family to live in more attractive locations than that of a city centre.

Thirdly, under the outgoing rules it is surely not 'rocket science' to significantly reduce any CGT charges, as is well known by our Political Masters.

Unfortunately, the 'credit crunch' is resulting in tightening of lending rules, and the potential of more expensive financing. So who are the potential purchasers of such homes as are put on the market, and from where will they obtain affordable finance? No sale = No CGT !!!

Keith , Nottingham,

Second home owners should pay double council tax on holiday homes, not less.There is a rural housing crisis and the answer isnt to build more and spoil the countryside its to discourage second home ownership. Our village in Shropshire is plagued by the holiday home people,some owning other holiday homes in other counties too.Iit kills rural cohesion and community life.

Jill, Craven Arms, Shropshire

Basically, someone in the treasury has done the sums and realised that this will reduce government revenue. Now, the balancing act is to keep all the small businesses interested in funding the next general election campaign without the carrot of a tax reduction for the owners of the business who have invested in second homes.
Should be an interesting battle in NuLabour - the party campaign managers versus the tax-and-spend lefties for the heavyweight title of who can inflict maximum damage on the taxpayers' purse.

KR, Stockport,

Obviously this point never occurred to the government which appears incapable of thinking through problems but thankfully they seem to make of a habit of going into reverse when pushed. Please push! Brian SE Cornwall

Brian Walton, Landrake, Cornwall

you are only tax slaves for the new labour communist party of civil servants and social parasites on benefits- which is about half of the population by now- look out for more Putin type rules from GB team

Micky, NY, USA

So , after Mr Brown has said we can only have one home , those MP`s with 2 or more will get more from the sale of their other homes .

Jim, Sidcup/Kent,

Mark, Berkhamsted. 'Fiddling the free market never works'. What do you call tax relief on mortgage interest to BTL investors, if not a massive 'fiddle' in favour of the property hoarders at the expense of FTBs? I'm fine with Brown and Darling taking on your point - remove this scadalous tax perk immediately and let's see what happens!

Clive, Chichester, UK

Stuart Burgess appears to be saying
-we don't want people buying second homes,
-but if they already have them, we want to discourage them from being sold

Bizarre.

Why don't they put a tax on locals selling them homes to "outsiders", as they're just as guilty (i.e. not at all) as the people buying them.

As others have commented on similar articles as this, locals may say they're against second homes but they're all too ready to sell to them. They'd rather take the money than sell to a local at a much reduced price.

Clive, Surrey,

This is the latest attempt to provide an excuse to do a 'U' turn on the proposal to lower Capital Gains tax to 18%. If Mr Darling sucumbs to this he will be lost as a meaningful chancelor. On the up side, this reduction in Capital Gains Tax may entice many BTL investors to bail out to sell into a declining housing market. This would help many first time buyers in the near future to buy at sensible prices, rather than the promise to build 3 million extra new homes in the future.

David Nammory, Liverpool,

But is it the intention to entice second home owners to put their properties on the market with the inducement of lower CGT now, and then make it more difficult for people to buy second homes via planning restrictions later this year? Will that be followed next year by much higher rates of CGT to deter speculators?
If the intention is to increase housing availablity in 'picturesque rural areas' and drive prices down over the short term, it might just work. But it's not going to defeat the influx of retiring suburbanites into these areas who drive up prices and frustrate local young people trying to get on the property ladder by doing so.

Nick H, South Coast, UK,

I know GB pulls the strings, but wasn't it Mr Darling who gave the pbr last year?

Tony, Portsmouth, England

People need one home in which to live. All else is luxury or speculation, and therefore the government and local authorities should tax second homes hard and third homes harder. No discounts, for example, should be available on council tax (how about a 100% surcharge for empty homes?), and why not a high rate of capital gains tax? And where there is a buy-to-let element, which gives rise to deduction of interest for tax purposes, impose VAT.
One objection will come from the likes of Blair, Prescott, 9 Homes Meacher, who of course would suffer. I'm sure the electorate oozes sympathy for them.

Dave, Slough,

More and more State control over what we can do.....this is just the beginning. How long before we face restrictions on where we can live.

Of course by driving down the price of homes in these areas they reduce the prospect of new home construction or renovation.

Fiddling with the free market never works - and one 'adjustment' after another will follow as each policy changes produces another distortion. And in 'correcting' that distortion the State extends its influence further and further in to our daily lives.

Mark, Berkhamsted,

Mr B should announce that the reduction in CGT for 2nd home owners will remain in place for 1 year, after which an increased level (higher than now) will resume. This should clear out some of the property hoarders and help to bring prices down to where they should be.

Graham, Oxford, UK

Why will this encourage people to buy? The current government is so unstable that they could very easily put CGT rates back up to levels even higher than now within a couple of years - hardly a secure environment in which to make big investment decisions. What is more likely - the 'take your chance whilst you have it' mentality will kick in and we'll see a wave of selling from April. This will further crash the property market.

Clint, Stafford, UK

This is madness. Brown really has disdain for people from rural counties. He is out of touch. This might be because he never goes to these counties - He has only been to Devon and Cornwall once - and has not seen the effect second homes have had on some villages.

Scott, Exeter, Devon

Second home owners are encouraged by this proposal and yet discouraged by Brown threatening them with review by Count Councils if they dare to sell to someone who is not Labour's tent - more examples of 'joined up government' by Labour.

Are we suprised? ... All together now ....

Edwin, Bucharest,