Old people competing on the property market

SIR – We strongly support your campaign to reduce stamp duty on downsizers (Comment, August 10). This would free up chains in the market for housing and at the same time increase income to the Treasury.

There is no point, however, in those climbing down the property ladder competing for the same homes as those trying to climb up.

What is needed is a rapid increase in the supply of specialist housing for the active retired, with care available as they age. This can be provided by specialist retirement villages, but the supply of these has been constrained since 2009, when the Office of Fair Trading investigated event fees (for things such as sale, sub-letting or change of occupancy) charged by retirement village operators.

Now that the Law Commission has made proposals to regulate event fees, introducing a statutory code of practice, it is essential this passes into law soon, in order to provide a secure framework for confidence and funding to return to the sector.

Executive Chairman, Retirement Villages Group Leatherhead, Surrey SIR – The mark of a successful modern economy is mobility of labour. To ensure through stamp duty that moving house is taxed, and thereby discouraged, is insanity.

Marlow, Buckinghamshire

SIR – A number of letters from readers propose introducing Capital Gains Tax on the principal private residence.

If this was done, why would anyone spend money improving a property, knowing that any added value would be taxed at the point of sale?

Sherborne, Dorset

SIR – John Naylor (Letters, August 11) suggests that sharing the burden of stamp duty equally between buyer and seller would be fairer. I’m not sure those scaling down from a more expensive to a modest property would agree.

While paying 50 per cent less duty on buying a less costly home would be good news, paying half the stamp duty on the proceeds of the larger home being sold would certainly not.

Yelvertoft, Northamptonshire