Stamp Duty Land Tax Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: HM Treasury

Stamp Duty Land Tax

Andrew Lewin Excerpts
Tuesday 28th October 2025

(1 day, 17 hours ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mel Stride Portrait Sir Mel Stride
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

We built 2.8 million homes since 2010, and a million in the last Parliament. It remains to be seen how many homes this Government will build.

Another huge advantage of abolishing stamp duty is that it will generate more transactions, which will benefit more plumbers, electricians, builders, designers, estate agents, surveyors and conveyancers, and allow local economies to thrive. Above all, it will increase the effective supply of housing, and that means a fairer society and a stronger economy.

Andrew Lewin Portrait Andrew Lewin (Welwyn Hatfield) (Lab)
- Hansard - -

The shadow Chancellor talks about the huge advantages of his proposal. Is he aware that someone who owns a home worth £2 million would benefit to the tune of £150,000? This is a tax cut for millionaires. Is that what he wants?

Mel Stride Portrait Sir Mel Stride
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I have already apprised the hon. Gentleman of the fact that on his party’s watch, 16,000 high-net-worth people have left the country, to the huge detriment of our economy. We cannot tax our way to growth. We have to abolish this tax across the piece, and that is recognised by think-tanks across the political spectrum. Indeed, the Institute of Economic Affairs says:

“Abolishing stamp duty is the single best reform any government could make to Britain’s tax system.”

The Resolution Foundation, which may be more to Labour Members’ taste, says of stamp duty that it is

“one of the most economically harmful ways of raising revenue”.

That is a simple fact.

--- Later in debate ---
Andrew Lewin Portrait Andrew Lewin (Welwyn Hatfield) (Lab)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

Let me start by saying that I welcome a debate on how we incentivise home ownership. I am a Labour MP who wants more of my constituents in Welwyn Hatfield to have a secure home of their own and to build a life in our community, and people’s ability to buy a home should not be so dependent on their access to the bank of mum and dad. The Conservatives’ proposition that we are discussing today is that the abolition of stamp duty is the answer. Before we assess that claim, let us look at how we got here.

Home ownership went backwards over the 14 years of the last Conservative Government. There are 600,000 fewer homeowners in the UK than there would have been if home ownership rates had remained at the levels they were at in 2010—that is more than the population of Liverpool. Twenty years ago, 50% of people aged 25 to 34 owned their own home; by 2022, the figure had fallen to fewer than four in 10. Members from across the House will recognise that that is a record of failure. I think they will also agree that there is no panacea that will increase the level of home ownership, and that it requires a range of policy solutions.

That being said, there is one fundamental truth that we need to recognise: if we do not build more homes, we will not have more homeowners. The last Government dropped mandatory housing targets, and I have lost count of how many Conservative MPs have used departmental questions, statements and even today’s debate to say, “I like the idea of homes in the right place, but it doesn’t happen to be in my constituency.” I have to say that the Liberal Democrats have been just as guilty of that as the Conservative party.

Where the Conservatives failed, the Labour Government are acting. We are delivering the return of housing targets for every local authority, ambitious planning reform and a record £39 billion for the affordable homes programme. Do we have further to go? Yes, absolutely, but new housing starts in the first quarter of 2025 were up by 17% on the same period in 2024, when the Conservatives were still in power.

Let us look more closely at the proposition that abolishing stamp duty is the answer. First of all, who benefits most? If someone’s home is worth £1.5 million, they will save £93,750 under this proposal. As I said earlier, if someone’s home is worth £2 million, they will save £150,000—that was cheered by the Conservative party, which is telling—whereas if they buy a home that is worth less than £300,000, this proposal will save them no money at all. That is the threshold at which stamp duty cuts in at the moment, and 40% of first-time buyers buy homes that are worth less than £300,000.

As my hon. Friend the Member for Loughborough (Dr Sandher) said, the Conservatives’ proposition is to ask ordinary taxpayers either to accept deep cuts in social security, or to pay more taxes to subsidise a tax cut for millionaires. Liz Truss would be proud. We have no Reform colleagues in the Chamber today, but I suspect that they would be pleased as well. Of course, their leader famously said at the time of the mini-Budget that it was the best Budget since 1986.

If we seriously want more homeowners, the real answer lies in building more homes of all tenures; in offering mortgage guarantees to help those who earn enough but cannot raise the deposit to get on the ladder; in continuing to support low-cost home ownership models, such as shared ownership; in planning reform; and in embracing a new generation of new towns. In the first 14 months of being in office, this Government have done more to make progress on identifying sites for the next generation of new towns than the Conservative party did in 14 years.

If our objective is to give millionaires a tax cut, abolishing stamp duty in one sweep is a good way to implement that policy. But if we are serious about helping people on to the housing ladder, we should reject the Conservatives’ motion today, reject their failed approach over the last 14 years, and support a package of reforms to get Britain building again.