<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
	<rss version="2.0">
		<channel>
			<title>Green Building Forum - Stamp Duty</title>
			<lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 Apr 2026 22:25:08 +0100</lastBuildDate>
			<link>https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/</link>
			<description></description>
			<generator>Lussumo Vanilla 1.0.3</generator>
			<item>
		<title>Stamp Duty</title>
		<link>https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=11275&amp;Focus=186622#Comment_186622</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=11275&amp;Focus=186622#Comment_186622</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Oct 2013 18:38:03 +0100</pubDate>
		<author>Triassic</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[Why is Stamp Duty applied in steps rather than a sliding scale.<br /><br />Having steps just distorts the market at the step points.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/sdlt/intro/rates-thresholds.htm#1" target="_self" rel="nofollow">http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/sdlt/intro/rates-thresholds.htm#1</a>]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Stamp Duty</title>
		<link>https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=11275&amp;Focus=186643#Comment_186643</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=11275&amp;Focus=186643#Comment_186643</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Oct 2013 23:00:46 +0100</pubDate>
		<author>TimSmall</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[Yes, it would be better if it tapered.  OTOH, as I recently ranted in another thread, why isn't it directly proportional to the energy performance figure for the building instead, much like car tax now is?<br /><br />OK, EPCs are pretty inaccurate, but they could be made better.  It'd be a good start...]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	
		</channel>
	</rss>