Will Burnham cut stamp duty? Here’s what PM hopeful could change to property taxes

Andy Burnham gave his first major speech on Monday as he prepares to enter No 10 and become the new prime minister.

As yet, there are few clear details of what will change as Mr Burnham laid out a “ten-year mission” to raise living standards.

But, his stance on property tax reform in particular is well-documented and, given time, Brits could see one of the biggest changes in generations across this area of their financial lives.

Stamp duty, council tax and wider costs around owning properties or land could all be changed. Here The Independent looks at what those changes might be.

Stamp duty or LVT?

One of the biggest talking points will quickly become whether a Burnham government will really abolish stamp duty – a painful extra cost for homebuyers, as well as an irritating additional expense for investors buying British shares.

Economists have long criticised stamp duty for discouraging people from moving home. Speculation has grown that a future government could consider replacing it with some form of annual property or, as Mr Burnham has spoken about before, a Land Value Tax (LVT) – an annual payment based on how much the land is worth.

Burnham previously described LVT as a “very productive form of taxation because you make sure land is used for good, productive purposes, and if people are sitting on it and hoarding it, they get taxed and that money can come back and be redistributed.”

Peter Stimson, director of mortgages at lender MPowered, believes few would shed tears if stamp duty disappeared. “No-one would mourn the passing of stamp duty,” he saod. “It’s a crude and hated tax that needlessly distorts the property market.”

He argues the tax penalises workers moving for better jobs and discourages older homeowners from downsizing. Its absence would “make it easier and cheaper […] to move to somewhere better suited to their needs,” he adds.

According to Stimson, abolishing stamp duty could trigger a surge in market activity as one of the biggest barriers to moving is removed. However, replacing it with a Land Value Tax would create a new set of winners and losers.

“If the replacement is a Land Value Tax, mortgage lenders will need to completely rework their affordability criteria,” he said, because the charge would become a permanent household expense rather than a one-off cost.

Joseph Lane, founder of Mortgage Lane, noted that these proposals – and others made by Burnham in Manchester on Monday – were considerations rather than something to plan around for homebuyers or movers right now. “A serious focus on building is one of the few things that genuinely helps affordability over time, and any move to reform or scrap stamp duty would lower the upfront cost of getting on the ladder. But these are long-term possibilities, not changes you can plan a 2026 purchase around,” he said.

The biggest divide around LTV could be geographical. Areas with lower property values, including much of northern England, could end up paying less than they do under the current council tax system. Homeowners in London and the South East may face significantly higher bills.

“There’s every chance it will be great news in the north but painful for the south,” Mr Stimson says.

He adds that for “the King of the North to rain goodies on his northern powerbase while his southern subjects pick up the tab would not be a good look”.

The ‘Fairer share’ property tax

Elsewhere, Mr Burnham has previously expressed interest in the idea put forward by Fairer Share campaigners that council tax could be replaced by a property tax based on the value of said property, equivalent to 0.48 per cent annually.

Some experts have previously suggested that could lead to rental properties being sold – reducing supply and pushing up prices – especially in areas where rental margins are weak.

However, Nicholas Smith, head of tax at Duncan and Toplis, said there were real barriers to such reform, with regional differences again visible.

“Andy Burnham’s historical backing of the Fairer Share campaign is an ambitious concept, but the practical hurdles are significant,” he said. “One of the key challenges is that regular, accurate property valuations across the entire UK are difficult to assess.

“Furthermore, the regional impact would be heavily skewed. For instance, under a 0.48 per cent proposal, a £1m property would face an annual charge of £4,800 – which is significantly higher than the average current council tax bill. This would hit the south east of England hardest, potentially encouraging migration away from the region to other parts of the country, or even overseas, while causing some families to struggle with additional costs without the funds available to pay the proposed tax.

“The broader net economic effect of these property tax shifts remains unclear and could give rise to unintended consequences.”

On a wider lens, Antonia Medlicott, founder of financial education firm Investing Insiders, pointed out there could be changes to make property taxed more in line with other incomes and wealth.

She said: “Burnham has spoken about his belief that land and property are undertaxed relative to earned income, pointing toward greater taxation of assets over time.

“He has also mentioned the possibility of reintroducing the 50p income tax rate on income above £125,140, floated replacing inheritance tax entirely with a care levy to fund social care.”