Comment: ‘The tax-slashing mini-Budget can’t be described as good for London if Londoners don’t benefit’

A lot of the reaction to the recent not-a-Budget described Kwasi Kwarteng’s tax-slashing exercise as “good for London”.

In some ways the logic behind this is clear: faced with the UK’s most expensive homes, London first-time buyers will see the biggest reduction in their property tax bill thanks to the stamp duty cut, which has raised both the threshold at which people start to pay the tax and the upper limit on how much a property can cost while still qualifying.

Meanwhile, a weak pound appeals to international investors, especially those with dollars to burn, many millions of which are expected to find their way into the London property market.

Welcome to boom town? I’m not so sure.

Opportunistic sellers are apparently already hiking their house prices in the wake of the stamp duty cut; buyers living and working in London are facing global competition for homes in the city from those with a distinct financial advantage; and inflamed inflation means interest rates will have to rise further, making mortgages harder to come by.

Are any of these things “good” for those Londoners who don’t believe in the trickle-down fairy tale?

London is a city of 9.5 million people. Obviously the way money moves around a city is complex. But if enough of the 9.5 million constituent parts are worse off, it’s hard to see how we can say this is good policy for the whole.