25% Rent increase

[JohnL]

cerv Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> You absolutely can invest to an equal level. Set

> yourself up as a company and you will be exempt.

> That is how they operate.

>

> Your comments on FTBs and JAMs are pure trolling.

> You have no idea.

Wasn't this mentioned in the Autumn Statement too - not heard much about

it but thought he was talking about IT contractors etc.

Also right to buy .. from housing associations mentioned IIRC.

[pop9770]

cerv Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> You absolutely can invest to an equal level. Set

> yourself up as a company and you will be exempt.

> That is how they operate.

>

> Your comments on FTBs and JAMs are pure trolling.

> You have no idea.

No You're wrong.

I've asked my mortgage broker and I can't setup a limited company and get a mortgage I don't have the trading track record.

Also if it was that easy then this tax wouldn't have been introduced.

HAHA FTBs and JAMs will absolutely not benefit from this tax only large corporate landlords and wealthy land owner benefit. It's taking us back to serfs and landowners. We're all working for the lords and landowners and we'll have less and less possibility to get the assets away from these land owners this is an upside down tax it should tax the mega rich and large corporate landlords but it taxes the average person it closes doors and closes opportunity.

You have no idea zero.!

Margret Thatcher was for free markets and that has been the cornerstone of our progress and growth.

This tax is the opposite and it will create problems in the housing market .

[cerv]

If a bank doesn't view you as someone worthy enough to lend to that is no-one's issue other than yours.

The government does not owe you your dream investment opportunity. It sounds to me like you're the one with no idea and they're doing you a favour by encouraging you to invest in something other than an over-heated housing market. Relax, they've saved you packet in the long run :-)

[pop9770]

cerv Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> If a bank doesn't view you as someone worthy

> enough to lend to that is no-one's issue other

> than yours.

No it's if I setup a limited co with no track record in property.

Before this new tax I could and still can go with a regular BTL but what's the point if in 3 years I end up paying ?2,000 -?6,000 in tax and make a ?2,000 -?6,000 loss in the process.

Basically the government will be taking all my profit in tax

And if rates go up it's even worst.

What do you suggest I invest my money in.

And why do you think it's acceptable that a limited company lord muck and big property landlords are given preference over you and me ??

[Lordship 516]

There is a principle of taxation involved here - horizontal equity.

Horizontal equity means that taxpayers [whether a company or a real person] with equal amounts of income (or property) should pay the same amount of tax.

There may be a case for an action to be taken under competition rules viz-a-viz the Treaty of Rome & UK laws. However these actions cost a lot of money & the Whitehall mandarins in association with their political masters have more firepower that individual BTL owners.

It is basically a stand-and-deliver highway robbery by Osborne to favour large companies & Housing Associations in a crude attempt to push smaller BTL landlords out of the market & force them to buy other pension products.

[pop9770]

Horizontal equity I like it.

I think redistribution of opportunity to the rich is what this tax is about.

it's also about raising rents.

Every new tax unbalances the financial system in favor of the rich who are able to avoid these taxes.

This tax is an example of a corporate capitalist system which is currently designed to benefit the wealthy, large businesses over individuals it's a system designed to give tax advantage to the rich and it will continue the slavery of the people to the system / banks we will continue to serve the establishment the political corporate wealthy elite!!

It removes opportunity and keeps us regular people in our place .

It makes a mockery of free markets and freedom.

It creates another barrier to entry into a business area which will now become exclusively biased towards those who have large amounts of capital to invest the same entities that avoid paying their share of the taxes making it almost impossible for individuals to invest on an equal level to atempt achieve financial critical mass and live without the need for a life time of debt.

It is designed to keep us as slaves to a corporate political capitalist system.

The death of equal opportunity for all.

Margaret Thatcher is turning in her grave.

Whilst this new Socialist Tory party designs a system of elitism to dominate the masses.

Unbelievable

[Otta]

Out of interest, what exactly are your neighbours renting for ?1000 a month? And is it in ED?

I'm actually amazed you can rent anything in Dulwich for 1000 a month to be honest.

Not saying that's good or right by the way, but thought rents in that area were stupidly high.

[Jules-and-Boo]

and with lettings agencies fees being scrapped - they're likely to go up again as agents try and make their money by passing the costs on to the landlords... I mean, they have to make an honest living....

[binkylilyput]

pop9770 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Horizontal equity I like it.

>

>

> I think redistribution of opportunity to the rich

> is what this tax is about.

> it's also about raising rents.

>

> Every new tax unbalances the financial system in

> favor of the rich who are able to avoid these

> taxes.

>

>

>

> This tax is an example of a corporate capitalist

> system which is currently designed to benefit the

> wealthy, large businesses over individuals it's a

> system designed to give tax advantage to the rich

> and it will continue the slavery of the people to

> the system / banks we will continue to serve the

> establishment the political corporate wealthy

> elite!!

> It removes opportunity and keeps us regular

> people in our place .

> It makes a mockery of free markets and freedom.

> It creates another barrier to entry into a

> business area which will now become exclusively

> biased towards those who have large amounts of

> capital to invest the same entities that avoid

> paying their share of the taxes making it almost

> impossible for individuals to invest on an equal

> level to atempt achieve financial critical mass

> and live without the need for a life time of

> debt.

>

> It is designed to keep us as slaves to a corporate

> political capitalist system.

>

> The death of equal opportunity for all.

>

> Margaret Thatcher is turning in her grave.

>

> Whilst this new Socialist Tory party designs a

> system of elitism to dominate the masses.

>

> Unbelievable

Are you actually citing Thatcher as a hero of the working classes?

Interesting

I wouldn't go up north (or anywhere other than the wealthier southern counties for that matter) and spout these views if I were you

[pop9770]

Otta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Out of interest, what exactly are your neighbours

> renting for ?1000 a month? And is it in ED?

>

> I'm actually amazed you can rent anything in

> Dulwich for 1000 a month to be honest.

>

>

> Not saying that's good or right by the way, but

> thought rents in that area were stupidly high.

It's a 1 bed flat SE22 near Lordship Lane

They said they haven't had a rent increase in the 3 years which I think is amazing.

binkylilyput Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Are you actually citing Thatcher as a hero of the

> working classes?

> Interesting

> I wouldn't go up north (or anywhere other than the

> wealthier southern counties for that matter) and

> spout these views if I were you

That IS

Hilarious

If it wasn't for Thatcher many of these people up north and elsewhere wouldn't own their own homes or have work they'd be at home on the dole.

I imagine that's what will happen if Corbyn gets in it'll be Cuba / Venezuela style progress for th UK LOL.

Thatcher gave the hard working British people opportunity then Tory and Labour morons introduced a micro tax system to kill small businesses and give Starbucks McDonalds Big Business etc & Lord Muck more tax breaks and more opportunity to fleece the people.

Hilarious how the media lead by the BBC have educated the masses otherwise ,,, haha

[Borky]

Can you stop this please? Some of us come along to this forum to read and comment on community related issues. the half baked rantings of the unhinged failed capitalist may be amusing at first, but soon become tiresome.

Thank You.

[pop9770]

The Lounge is where we can discuss anything ? Almost errrrr lol

[Burbage]

pop9770 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The Lounge is where we can discuss anything ?

I think that's the point, yes.

So, if I may, I'd like to gently point out that the whole thing about tax-breaks for landlords (or their removal), is somewhat overdone.

The point of BTL is, as I gather, to get tenants to buy a property for the landlord over a given number of years. This is much the same as any other sort of leasing business, except that, as far as anyone can tell, the property will be worth much more at the end than at the beginning, which is never the same with businesses that hire out tools, plant, aircraft, cars etc.

The other potential point of difference is that people or businesses that lease things usually don't want to own those things outright - because they don't need them for very long or very often, or they'd wear out and need replacing - whereas many people who rent homes would happily buy them, especially as it would cost them less than renting.

You pointed out in a previous post that the removal of a tax-break amounts to an assault on modest landlords, and a blow for inequality, because they would no longer be able to compete with bigger landlords who have, you implied, better and cheaper access to credit,

But it's exactly because you have (or had) better and cheaper access to credit and/or property than your prospective tenants that you were able to become a landlord at all. And this is why your complaints aren't getting much shrift. You are, on the one hand, saying that inequality is a bad thing and, on the other, saying equality shouldn't apply to you if it threatens the short-term interests of your business (ignoring, apparently, the rise in value of the property/ies).

This does nicely illustrate the paradox of the rented sector, in which people who need homes can't buy them for themselves, but can buy them for businesses that don't have the cash for them either. There's something deeply wrong in that, but I guess it'll be a while before anyone works out how to fix it.

In the meantime, welcome back to the 99%.

[pop9770]

There is a fix ..

I think I've just invented it .

I'll call it

Vertical Debt

It means if you're a billionaire lord muck you're not allowed to borrow.

If you're a billion pound Company no debt allowed.

Access to Debt is access to opportunity if you are already a billionaire why would the system need to make you even more wealthy ???

Only that way will individuals' ever be able to gain critical financial mass and have access to equal opportunity.

I'm clear that giving individuals opportunity at every level in society is a benefit to humanity.

Running this political corporate elitists system is inhumane and destined to create misery and boom and bust ...

[pop9770]

On the financial systems madness

this video is good

https://youtu.be/NeJpQQt_b8c

They don't even understand Banking how on earth can they understand free economics Tax and the property markets

Hilarious

[bobbsy]

I'll wade in. I think the loss of tax relief is ludicrous - all businesses receive tax relief for legitimate expenses, which interest is. A bakery, with a mortgage, would receive tax relief on the interest paid on the mortgage. Or, the rental cost if it is rented etc etc.

This cut to tax relief is a veiled attack on pensions, IMO. The recent governments seem obsessed with the idea that no-one (other than government employees) should be able to accumulate a "large" pension pot. As lifetime and annual allowances have been targeted for pension pots/contributions, the easiest alternative for a small investor was to transfer funds into the BTL market which functioned essentially as a self managed super fund. So they attacked this as well. Funds will now transfer to an alternative (I don't know what that will be), and sooner or later that will be targeted for additional tax revenue as well.

[LondonMix]

Exactly what Loz said.

House prices will go down moderately and rental costs will go up. Buyers and long term renters for the most part are dramatically different populations so in reality, this policy will make it somewhat cheaper for someone who probably was always going to be able to buy a flat but not cheap enough to shift long term renters into ownership. The result is cheaper first time flats but higher rents as rental units will be removed from the market without a significant change in rental demand.

The government wants to get rid of small scale landlords and professionalize the sector though so they are strongly encouraging the development of large scale Private Rental Sector developments managed and owned by institutional landlords backed by investors like pension funds etc. This is how rental works in much of Europe and the US where its a professional business and an institutional asset class. The prior and current government are providing billions worth of state backed financing to encourage the development of the sector which ideally will fill the gap left by all the small scale unprofessional BTL investors.

I think it was Malumbu who said it, but he was perfectly right about public policy. It may not always benefit everyone and doesn't always work but its hardly as idiotically haphazard as the public think (notable exceptions include education policy IMO)

Overall, a professional rental sector is better for tenants that this haphazard system in the UK. It also allows for greater / faster housing delivery, another key issue facing the country. On balance, I'm supportive.

If you look on Rightmove, you can see the impact its having already. Lots of one bed flats are for sale 'chain free' and prices are falling.

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Katy Tonbridge Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Loz Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> >

> > > The landlord is testing the market to see if

> it

> > > will take the necessary rise to make BTL

> still

> > > work. If not, they will sell the property.

> >

> > ...they will sell the property...which means

> that

> > somebody down the chain who would otherwise

> rent

> > will now buy. So the rental population

> reduces.

> > So why should this force rents up?!

>

> There are a few factors, but the main one is that

> demand is greater than supply for both rental and

> sales. Another is that people often buy a spare

> room, but rarely rent a spare room.

>

> Basically, if there was enough housing to go

> around, then there would be little to no effect.

> But there is not.

[LondonMix]

Being able to deduct an actual expense you incurred from your profit isn't a tax break. Its like saying a shop should pay tax on its gross revenue without being able to deduct costs for its rent and employees etc. Allowing for costs to be deducted is just how you calculate profit.

This proposal basically increases the marginal rate of tax on rental profit for small landlords to above 65%. That's what the government wants to do and its the easiest way they could change the marginal rate specifically for BTL. That's fine. They did it for a specific reason as I outlined before.

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The policy to end tax breaks on second (third,

> forth...) properties is right imo.

[titch juicy]

pop9770 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Otta Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Out of interest, what exactly are your

> neighbours

> > renting for ?1000 a month? And is it in ED?

> >

> > I'm actually amazed you can rent anything in

> > Dulwich for 1000 a month to be honest.

> >

> >

> > Not saying that's good or right by the way, but

> > thought rents in that area were stupidly high.

>

> It's a 1 bed flat SE22 near Lordship Lane

> They said they haven't had a rent increase in the

> 3 years which I think is amazing.

>

>

> binkylilyput Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

>

> > Are you actually citing Thatcher as a hero of

> the

> > working classes?

> > Interesting

> > I wouldn't go up north (or anywhere other than

> the

> > wealthier southern counties for that matter)

> and

> > spout these views if I were you

>

> That IS

> Hilarious

> If it wasn't for Thatcher many of these people up

> north and elsewhere wouldn't own their own homes

> or have work they'd be at home on the dole.

>

> I imagine that's what will happen if Corbyn gets

> in it'll be Cuba / Venezuela style progress for th

> UK LOL.

>

> Thatcher gave the hard working British people

> opportunity then Tory and Labour morons introduced

> a micro tax system to kill small businesses and

> give Starbucks McDonalds Big Business etc & Lord

> Muck more tax breaks and more opportunity to

> fleece the people.

>

> Hilarious how the media lead by the BBC have

> educated the masses otherwise ,,, haha

And the millions of people up north that don't own small businesses?

It seems to me that all of your rantings are selfish ones, as someone that wanted a buy-to-let but find that now it's a less financially viable way of making more money.

What's your solution for folk like me that would like to buy their own first home?

If you're so desperate to invest in property why not buy shares in a commercial property fund?

[titch juicy]

What is a JAM?

[Borky]

Just About Managing- part of the finger pointing construct that also includes the HWF- Hard Working Families.

[titch juicy]

Thanks

[Jeremy]

LondonMix Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Being able to deduct an actual expense you

> incurred from your profit isn't a tax break. Its

> like saying a shop should pay tax on its gross

> revenue without being able to deduct costs for its

> rent and employees etc.

Yeah, I'm not really viewing as a tax break either, as you'd think your expenses would already be deducted before calculating tax.

But it can be (and is being) spun as a tax break.. one argument I've seen put forward is that if a private individual wants to borrow money to buy stocks, you'd still expect them to pay tax on the full amount of the dividends, regardless of their interest payments. I'm not convinced it's such a great analogy, but hey...

[Henry_17]

All,

Great news today for those concerned about the possibility of house price declines; famous 73% government owned Royal Bank of Scotland sat the Bank of England's (essentially RBS's boss, much to the chagrin of some) 2016 "Stress Test" paper. The test examined, inter alia, the examinee bank's resiliance under a housing market crash. The result? A resounding failure, so no danger of any sustained house market weakness, at least until they get their balance sheet in order, which has thus far proven a lengthy process.

[LondonMix]

Hmm, I can see that actually. I suppose its the difference between a personal investment and a business. To that end, if you hold your BLT investment in a limited liability company, these new rules don't apply and there are a lot of other business related advantages like being able to reinvest proceeds to expand your portfolio etc. However, you can't easily transfer your existing BLT into one as you'd trigger CGT amongst other things. However, going forward I think these will dominate the BTL market even though the cost of financing when using this type of vehicle is far more expensive. It will knock out the small scale unprofessional landlords and only serious small scale investors and large institutional investors will remain.

Interesting times!

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> LondonMix Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Being able to deduct an actual expense you

> > incurred from your profit isn't a tax break.

> Its

> > like saying a shop should pay tax on its gross

> > revenue without being able to deduct costs for

> its

> > rent and employees etc.

>

> Yeah, I'm not really viewing as a tax break

> either, as you'd think your expenses would already

> be deducted before calculating tax.

>

> But it can be (and is being) spun as a tax break..

> one argument I've seen put forward is that if a

> private individual wants to borrow money to buy

> stocks, you'd still expect them to pay tax on the

> full amount of the dividends, regardless of their

> interest payments. I'm not convinced it's such a

> great analogy, but hey...