Andy Burnham’s Property Tax Policies Detail Explanation: What’s Confirmed, Proposed or Inherited

Andy Burnham is the new Prime Minister, and if you’re a landlord, that’s worth more of your attention than a change of face at Downing Street usually is.

That's because Burnham has long argued that Britain doesn't tax property and wealth in the right way. Over the years, he's backed ideas ranging from replacing Stamp Duty Land Tax (SDLT) with an annual property tax to broader reforms of Council Tax. So, when someone with those views walks into Number 10, it's only natural to wonder whether your tax bill is about to change.

The problem is that the lines have blurred. Some commentators are treating his personal views as if they're government policy, while others are lumping together measures introduced by previous governments with ideas Burnham has merely supported. For landlords and property investors trying to understand the steps they need to take, separating fact from speculation in the current noisy atmosphere isn't easy.

Luckily, this guide does that for you. It breaks down Andy Burnham's property tax proposals into three categories – confirmed policies, proposed reforms, and inherited legislation. You'll see what's already changing, what remains political ambition, and what each proposal could mean for you.

When are Property Tax Changes Happening: A Timeline

Before we get into any of it, here’s the whole thing at a glance. If a row has a solid date, it’s law. If it’s marked “proposal,” there’s no timetable behind it yet.

What are Andy Burnham’s Property Tax Proposals?

So, what has Burnham actually said he wants to do to property? Three things, broadly:

• Replace Council Tax and stamp duty with an annual charge based on what your land or property is worth
• Drag Council Tax off its 1991 valuations
• Shift the tax burden off income and onto assets

Here’s the important part, though. None of this is close to becoming yet. And he isn’t expected to reveal his actual plans until his first Budget in the autumn.

Understanding this matters. Changing your investment strategy based on Burnham’s proposals that never become law could leave you paying unnecessary tax or making costly decisions for no benefit. It's better to separate enacted legislation from political ambition before deciding whether your property situation needs to change. So, here’s a quick chart:

Looking at Burnham's proposals together, a clear pattern emerges. As wealth and investment management company Rathbones notes in its analysis of Burnham's tax agenda, the common thread is a gradual shift away from taxing income and towards taxing wealth. For most people, that's an interesting policy debate. For landlords and property investors, it's much more personal because property is the asset these proposals target.

So, let's examine each proposal in turn, separating what's confirmed from what's merely proposed and assessing what each could mean for you.

Will Andy Burnham Reform Council Tax & What is a Proportional Property Tax?

Possibly. Andy Burnham has repeatedly argued that England's Council Tax system is outdated and unfair, and he has backed replacing it with a proportional property tax. At his campaign launch, he described the tax as “highly regressive” and “not justifiable.” While he hasn't published detailed legislation explaining what would replace it, he's made little secret of his desire to overhaul the current system.

The reason is easy to see. Council Tax bands in England are still based on what properties were worth in 1991 and, according to the House of Commons Library, England has never carried out a nationwide revaluation since. Successive governments have considered reform but stopped short of implementing it. The result is that a modest terraced house and a property worth several times more today can sit surprisingly close together in the banding system, leaving owners of lower-value homes paying a proportionally larger share of their property's value in Council Tax.

So, what would replace it?

The proposal most frequently associated with Burnham comes from the campaign group Fairer Share. As reported by The Times, Fairer Share proposes abolishing both Council Tax and Stamp Duty Land Tax on main homes and replacing them with a single annual proportional property tax based on a home's current market value. The organisation suggests a rate of 0.48% for owner-occupied homes and estimates that around three-quarters of households would pay less than they do under the current system.

For landlords and property investors, however, the proposal looks very different.

Under Fairer Share's proposal, second homes and investment properties would pay double the standard rate, i.e., 0.96% each year. Unlike Council Tax, which is generally paid by the tenant, this annual charge would fall on the property owner. It's also worth noting that Fairer Share's proposal would retain Stamp Duty for second homes and overseas buyers, meaning many landlords could still pay Stamp Duty when purchasing a property while also facing an annual proportional property tax thereafter.

Will Andy Burnham Abolish Stamp Duty Land Tax (SDLT)?

He can’t do this immediately. Andy Burnham has long argued that Stamp Duty Land Tax should be replaced by a different way of taxing property, but personal arguments and government policies are different things and there have been no changes on the latter front as of the time of writing.

Burnham's opposition to Stamp Duty isn't new. During his 2010 Labour leadership campaign, he described it as a tax that made it harder for younger people to get onto the property ladder. More recently, as noted by the Chartered Institute of Taxation (CIOT), he has supported replacing Stamp Duty with a land value tax or another recurring property-based tax.

For now, however, nothing has changed. There is no published legislation, no implementation date and no confirmed timetable for abolishing Stamp Duty. Until that changes, landlords and property investors remain subject to the existing SDLT rules and rates.

What is Andy Burnham’s Land Value Tax Proposal?

You may have noticed the same idea humming under the last two sections. Whenever Burnham talks about reforming Council Tax or binning stamp duty, a land value tax is usually what he’s reaching for underneath. And it is exactly what it sounds like – an annual charge on the value of the land a building sits on, ignoring the bricks on top.

According to the Chartered Institute of Taxation (CIOT), Burnham has described a land value tax as a more productive way of raising revenue because it discourages land from being left idle or “hoarded.” He has also argued that the revenue generated could be used to replace stamp duty.

The attraction is fairly obvious. Land can't be hidden or shifted into another jurisdiction, making it a relatively stable tax base. The challenge is just as obvious. Britain has never operated a nationwide land value tax, and introducing one would require valuing every taxable parcel of land across the country. This is a project likely to take years rather than months.

That's one reason the proposal remains theoretical. As the HomeOwners Alliance has noted, Burnham has not published detailed legislation or a formal implementation plan for a nationwide land value tax. At this stage, it is a policy direction rather than a fully developed government programme.

For landlords and property investors, however, it’s still worth understanding. Under today's tax system, the largest property taxes are generally triggered when you buy or sell. A land value tax and, separately, proposals for a proportional property tax, would instead introduce an ongoing annual cost simply for owning property.

That represents a fundamentally different way of taxing property. Instead of concentrating tax at the beginning and end of an investment, it spreads the cost across every year you continue to own the asset. Over the lifetime of a long-term Buy-to-Let portfolio, that could significantly change the overall tax burden.

Could Capital Gains Tax Rise Under Andy Burnham?

Possibly, but nothing has changed yet. As of 22 July 2026, the rates of Capital Gains Tax (CGT) on residential property remain unchanged. However, property investors ought to watch this area closely because Burnham has repeatedly argued that the UK should rely more on taxing assets than earnings.

One possible avenue Burnham could explore, according to the wealth and asset management company Schroders, is aligning CGT rates with Income Tax rates.

How CGT Works Today

When you sell a Buy-to-Let property, you don't pay CGT on the amount you sell it for. Instead, you pay tax on your taxable gain, i.e., broadly the profit you make after deducting the purchase price, eligible improvement costs, allowable selling expenses and any other reliefs you qualify for. You can also deduct your Annual Exempt Amount, which is £3,000 for the 2026/27 tax year.

The rate of CGT you pay then depends on how much of your basic rate Income Tax band is still available.

If, after taking your salary, rental profits and other taxable income into account, some of your basic rate band remains unused, that part of your capital gain is  taxed at 18%. Any part of the gain that falls above the basic rate band is taxed at 24%.

That means many landlords don't pay either 18% or 24%, they pay both.

What Aligning CGT with Income Tax Would Mean

One of the ideas discussed by commentators, including Rathbones and Schroders, is aligning Capital Gains Tax more closely with the existing Income Tax system. Instead of having separate CGT rates of 18% and 24%, gains could potentially be taxed using the same rates that apply to taxable income.

In simple terms, that could mean:

• Taxpayers who currently pay 18% CGT on part of their gain could instead pay a rate closer to the 20% basic Income Tax rate
• Taxpayers who currently pay 24% CGT on part of their gain could instead face a rate closer to the 40% higher-rate Income Tax band
• Additional-rate taxpayers could potentially face a rate closer to 45%

If You’re a Non-Resident Landlord, What Changes for You?

For now, very little. As of 22 July 2026, the existing rules for non-resident landlords remain unchanged. However, several of the property tax reforms associated with Andy Burnham would have a greater impact on overseas investors than on UK residents if they were ever introduced.

Three points are worth keeping in mind.

First, under Fairer Share's proposed proportional property tax, second homes, Buy-to-Let properties and overseas-owned residential properties would be subject to the higher 0.96% annual rate, rather than the 0.48% rate proposed for owner-occupied homes. It's important to remember that this remains Fairer Share's proposal, not government policy.

Second, today's Stamp Duty rules already place overseas investors at a disadvantage compared with many UK buyers. If you're buying an additional residential property in England or Northern Ireland, the 5% Higher Rates for Additional Dwellings (HRAD) surcharge and the 2% non-UK resident surcharge can significantly increase your SDLT bill, as the section on SDLT demonstrated earlier.

Finally, none of the proposals discussed in this article changes the rules that already apply to overseas landlords. The Non-Resident Landlord Scheme continues to operate as before, and Non-Resident Capital Gains Tax still applies when non-residents dispose of UK residential property, subject to the existing legislation.

For overseas investors, that's perhaps the most important point. While commentators continue to debate what a Burnham government might do in the future, the tax rules you need to comply with today remain exactly the same as they were before he entered Downing Street.

Will Andy Burnham Replace Inheritance Tax with a Care Levy?

Not immediately. As of 22 July 2026, Andy Burnham hasn't announced plans to abolish Inheritance Tax (IHT), and there is no bill, consultation or implementation date to replace it with a care levy. What does exist is a long-held belief that the current system isn't the best way to fund adult social care.

Burnham has been making that argument for well over a decade. During his time as Health Secretary, and again at the Labour Party Conference in 2021, he suggested that Britain should consider replacing IHT with a dedicated levy to pay for social care. As Rathbones explains, the thinking is that the cost of care shouldn't depend on general taxation alone. Instead, larger estates would make a bigger contribution towards funding a system that everyone may eventually rely on.

For landlords and property investors, that matters because property is often the biggest asset they own. Whether it's your family home, a Buy-to-Let portfolio or both, real estate typically makes up a large share of the wealth eventually passed on to the next generation.

But, it's important to separate principle from policy.

You'll sometimes see commentators discussing a care levy of around 10%, compared with the current 40% IHT rate. Those figures are used to illustrate how a different system might work, not because the government has proposed them. No rate, threshold or draft legislation has been published, and Burnham hasn't set out a detailed blueprint explaining exactly how a care levy would operate.

Ironically, the biggest IHT changes facing many property owners have nothing to do with the care levy.

From 6 April 2026, the rules for Agricultural Property Relief (APR) and Business Property Relief (BPR) became less generous. According to the CIOT, 100% relief now applies only to the first £2.5 million of qualifying agricultural and business assets per individual (£5 million for a qualifying couple). Qualifying assets above those limits generally receive 50% relief instead.

Another significant change is also on the horizon. From 6 April 2027, unused pension funds and certain pension death benefits are due to become part of a person's estate for IHT purposes. For families who planned to pass pension wealth to the next generation tax-efficiently, that could increase the value of an estate exposed to IHT.

So, while replacing Inheritance Tax with a care levy remains an idea that Burnham has supported for many years, it's still only an idea. The reforms to APR, BPR and pension-related rules, on the other hand, are already on the statute book. If you're reviewing your estate planning today, those inherited changes deserve far more attention than a care levy that has yet to move beyond political discussion.

Income Tax Reforms, Personal Allowance Freeze & the Labour Manifesto Pledges

Burnham has boxed himself in on Income Tax, and he’s done it on purpose. He’s promised to stick to his Labour Party’s manifesto pledge not to raise the main rates of Income Tax, VAT or National Insurance on working people. And it’s that very promise that shoves all the pressure onto property, capital and wealth instead.

But keeping the rate the same isn’t the same as keeping the tax the same, and that gap is where the money quietly hides. The personal allowance has been stuck at £12,570 since April 2021, and the last Chancellor stretched that freeze all the way out to 2031. As wages creep up while the threshold stays put, more of your income gets taxed and more people get dragged into higher bands. This is what experts call “fiscal drag.” As per the OECD’s July 2026 Economic Survey of the United Kingdom, this freeze is an Income Tax rise in all but name, and it’s told the government to review this.

Burnham has acknowledged that the frozen personal allowance was one of the issues voters raised with him most often during his by-election campaign and he’s said he wants to look at it. Whether that leads to an increase in the allowance, however, is something we'll have to wait until the Autumn Budget 2026 to find out.

Beyond that, Burnham has also floated wider Income Tax reforms over the years. According to the CIOT, he has previously supported introducing a 10p starting rate of Income Tax for lower earners, meaning the first slice of taxable income above the personal allowance would be taxed at 10% instead of the current 20%. At the other end of the scale, he argued in 2025 that there was a case for restoring a 50p additional rate of Income Tax, meaning the highest earners would pay 50% instead of today's 45% on income above the additional rate threshold.

Why is Property Tax on the Agenda At All? The Fiscal Backdrop

Because the government needs to raise money, but its biggest tax levers are politically difficult to pull. The pressure on public finances has intensified in recent months. According to the think-tank Resolution Foundation, the Chancellor's fiscal headroom has fallen from around £24 billion to roughly £10 billion, leaving far less room to absorb unexpected costs or announce new spending. At the same time, Schroders notes that the government's new defence commitments are expected to require an additional £5 billion in the forthcoming Budget.

That creates a difficult balancing act. The government wants to fund higher spending while keeping its promise not to raise the headline taxes that affect most voters. Property, wealth and capital gains therefore become obvious areas for it to examine.

The wider economic picture adds another layer of complexity. According to the OECD, the UK's overall tax burden is already among the highest in the developed world. The OECD has also cautioned that relying more heavily on taxes on capital gains and property could be particularly harmful to long-term economic growth, while noting that the UK already raises comparatively large amounts of revenue from property taxation.

That's why so much attention is focused on Andy Burnham's property tax proposals. It's not simply because of his long-standing views on taxing wealth. It's because those views coincide with a government facing tighter public finances, rising spending pressures and fewer politically acceptable ways to raise additional revenue.

Whether any of the proposals discussed in this article eventually become law will depend on future Budgets and Parliamentary approval. But understanding the economic backdrop helps explain why property taxes have moved to the centre of the conversation in the first place.

Conclusion: What Should Landlords & Property Investors Do Now?

Focus on what's already law and treat everything else as a planning exercise, not a reason to panic. That's the biggest takeaway from everything we've covered.

Some of the changes discussed in this guide are already on the statute book. Others are long-standing political ideas. A few are simply informed speculation. Knowing which is which is the difference between making a sensible decision and reacting to a headline.

Here's where we’d start: