Support 100 years of independent journalism.

  1. Business
  2. /
  3. Economics
  4. /
8 March 2012

Balls backs a mansion tax

Shadow chancellor offers qualified support for new tax.

By George Eaton

Ed Balls has used an interview with the BBC’s Nick Robinson to offer his (qualified) support for a mansion tax. “If the Chancellor wants to go down that road then I will support him,” he said.

However, he reiterated that Labour did not want to see it introduced as a direct replacement for the 50p tax rate. The purpose of a mansion tax should be “to help families facing higher tuition fees, higher VAT or higher fuel bills,” he argued.

Intriguingly, he also echoed the concerns of some on the right, declaring that “you can’t have people being thrown out of their homes because they can’t afford to pay the tax”.

It’s a point we rebut in our leader this week, which calls for the burden of taxation to be shifted from income to wealth.

Sign up for The New Statesman’s newsletters Tick the boxes of the newsletters you would like to receive. Quick and essential guide to domestic and global politics from the New Statesman's politics team. The best of the New Statesman, delivered to your inbox every weekday morning. The New Statesman’s global affairs newsletter, every Monday and Friday. A handy, three-minute glance at the week ahead in companies, markets, regulation and investment, landing in your inbox every Monday morning. Our weekly culture newsletter – from books and art to pop culture and memes – sent every Friday. A weekly round-up of some of the best articles featured in the most recent issue of the New Statesman, sent each Saturday. A weekly dig into the New Statesman’s archive of over 100 years of stellar and influential journalism, sent each Wednesday. Sign up to receive information regarding NS events, subscription offers & product updates.
I consent to New Statesman Media Group collecting my details provided via this form in accordance with the Privacy Policy

Opponents of a mansion tax complain that it would penalise the equity-rich but income-poor and force some pensioners to sell their family homes. Yet this is little more than sentimentalism and special pleading. There is no good reason for the elderly to occupy valuable houses that are far too large for them and that they cannot afford to maintain.