The launch of a government consultation rarely sets pulses racing.

However, there was an exception to that rule this week as it published a questionnaire asking for people’s views on Rachel Reeves’ controversial mansion tax.

The Government doesn’t call it that, of course. It is officially known as the High Value Council Tax Surcharge or HVCTS.

This is the policy, announced in last year’s Budget, that will likely see owners of £2million-plus homes pay an extra £2,500 to £7,500 in council tax each year.

Wealth taxes - especially taxes on property wealth - are always going to rankle with Britons, and even some of those who will never come near having to pay this tax have voiced fierce objection to it.

Many regard working hard and making sacrifices to buy the best home they can afford as a point of personal pride.

The counter-argument is that a few thousand pounds per year will be a drop in the ocean for someone who can afford a £2million home.

It is true that many of those asked to pay this tax will be able to do so comfortably.

But I think the mansion tax should concern us all - even those who don’t own a home anywhere near £2million.

First, it runs counter to the British sense of fairness. As well as hugely wealthy people, there will also be normal homeowners in London and the Home Counties who are punished for gargantuan property price inflation in recent decades over which they have had little control - and which the Government has stoked by failing to build enough homes.

Those who will lose out most from the policy are pensioners who bought a family home decades ago in the South East which has ballooned in value, while their income has risen much less rapidly.

They may very well now be mortgage free, but living frugally on a modest pension, and will find paying £2,500 per year extra a genuine struggle. They’re property rich, cash poor.

Helping these people is the idea of the deferral scheme, proposed in this week’s consultation, which would see homeowners with a household income of less than £35,000, or savings of less than £16,000, able to postpone payments until they sell it or die.

Not only are those thresholds relatively low, but deferring also comes with an interest rate of up to 4.75 per cent each year.

Rolled up over many years, it could mean the estate of an elderly widow in Surrey could pay tens of thousands more overall than a business tycoon with a central London penthouse who could afford to pay upfront.

Speaking of tycoons, this week’s consultation will also consider whether non-UK-resident owners of properties worth more than £2million should pay a higher rate of the HVCTS.

This sends a confusing message, in the same week the Government was reported to be considering a new ‘invite only’ visa to attract wealthy foreigners.

According to Bloomberg, this would offer three years of residency to wealthy individuals investing at least £5million in Britain, in a bid to revive the country's status as an attractive place for them to live and do business.

So which is it? Either we want wealthy foreigners to settle and invest in Britain (and pay plenty of income tax) or we don’t.

The mansion tax reveals a government that gives to those wealthy individuals who have the power create jobs and growth with one hand, and takes with the other.

Finally, I can see a future where the mansion tax affects more homeowners.

The policy’s start date in 2028 is still some time away. Who is to say that a more radical Labour leader wouldn’t tweak it and bring down the threshold to, say, £1.5million or even £1million? That starts to take in a lot more homes.

The prospect of another Labour Government after 2029 currently looks unlikely, to put it politely, and the Conservatives and Reform have loudly opposed mansion taxes over the years.

But abolishing a property tax on a relatively small number of wealthy people wouldn’t be enough of a vote-winner for the parties to make it a key election promise, and the temptation to quietly keep it in place once elected could be hard to resist given the size of the public debt.

If they did, more people could be dragged into the tax’s net over time if property prices rise, as it’s unlikely the threshold when homeowners begin paying would be increased.

Freezing tax thresholds has been a favourite game of successive governments, as it allows their takings to quietly creep up over the years without creating a political storm.

Just look at stamp duty, where, with the exception of ‘holiday’ periods during the pandemic, the minimum threshold at which people start to pay has stayed the same at £125,000 since 2006.

That’s despite the average house price rising 75 per cent in that time, going from about £165,000 in 2006 to £290,000 today.

So even if you don’t own a mansion, this is worth keeping an eye on.