My two cents:
Cutting the top rate of tax will make no difference to the millionaires who aren't going to stop tax avoiding the tax they should be paying is cut a notch. If they're getting away at the moment with only paying in total, say, 23%, then they will continue to employ their accountants to ensure such a total is kept or reduced further, rather than going 'Oh I wouldn't pay 50% but I'm happy to pay 45!"
Earners on £150k - £250k who won't have accountants will get a tax cut, and are the biggest gainers of the budget.
The stamp duty is a red herring. The very rich will just buy the houses under their wives or children's name which will avoid the tax. 'Closing loopholes' - meh, why not just do that anyway? My feelings is that either they don't want to for fear of losing some of their lobbyists or simply can't.
Overall, the rich have benefited from the budget.
Pension raiding was an interesting one. £83 a year isn't a huge amount but for some pensioners it'll be the difference between eating and heating for a couple of months. Politically Osborne has taken a massive gamble, more so than cutting the top rate of tax. The 60+ age group always have the highest turn out for elections and are always the group who vote Tory the most. Upsetting them is a bad move, which is why throughout the current parliament you've been student fee rise, EMA cut, schools forced to academies etc whilst bus passes, free tv licenses etc for the elderly have remained. It's their core support which win them elections they're keeping happy. Big gamble taking from them, especially when the total figure raised for the treasury matches what we're expected to lose from income tax after 50% rate is removed next year. Big, big gamble.
Er, what else happened? Personal tax allowance rise by £1000 was welcome. That'll give everyone a couple of extra hundred quid to play about with. Although giveth with one hand taketh with the other, it doesn't necessarily mean you're better off. Many tax credits which are being cut will put people worse off than they were before. All kind of depends on circumstance.
Cigs, petrol and now booze are all set for a tax hike. Smokers especially will be worse off. If you're a heavy smoker, say 40 a day, expect to be worse off by £250 or more.
That's my analysis of what happened. Was it a good budget? No, it was dreadful. The cutting of the top rate tax will cause such a disengagement with the government from workers who are seeing everything they've worked for eroded. It's already bad enough with academies, the NHS, forest sell offs, pay freezes, unemployment. The government are really walking a fine line now. Most people bought into their mantra of 'we need to cut' prior to the election on the back of displeasure with the Labour administration, but to me, from someone who keeps a keen eye in politics, it really feels like middle England is 180ing. People wouldn't mind the cuts, provided there is some hope of growth and the lowering of unemployment. Without those two key things, alongside what people perceive to be an unfair budget, the Govt have shot themselves in the foot. The budget really needed some emphasis on growth, not simply a tax cut and longer trading hours on a Sunday during the Olympics. Don't ask me what in particular because I'm not an economist, but the overall feel of the budget was a reshuffling of what we have, rather than a vision of change, of prospects.
Labour have a chance to regain the electorate now but Milliband is, like his predecessor, Tory-lite and is massively underestimating the anger people feel about public services sell offs which should be his bread and butter. Shame.
Just as a side point I don't think the rich simply up sticks and move countries if the tax rate is unfavourable. They're already loaded and family, friends and their business is here. You can't just suggest people will fuck off like that, it's a weak argument, weak like trickle down economics and the Laffer curve.