Summer Budget 2015 – Landlords Reactions

Reply to the comment left by "ray selley" at "14/08/2015 - 20:12":

I like that idea. It would give me something I could offset against tax as an allowable expense!

Reply to the comment left by "ray selley" at "14/08/2015 - 20:12":

It will never happen Ray, just look at how many people were affected by the BOI tracker rate hike scam vs the number that reached for their wallets. Then consider the number who just rolled over and accepted their mortgages would cost an extra 2%.

Seriously, forget raising funds and consider publicity stunts. Demonstrations will not work because landlords are less popular than bankers right now. What's needed is to get people to look at the saynotogeorge website.

Shock tactics is exactly what we need, but advertising is expensive and is never going to get us on BBC news.
.

Reply to the comment left by "Ros ." at "14/08/2015 - 08:07":

Ros I agree with your earlier comment about the value of face to face meetings with MPs. Last month I received a response to my two letters to my MP (David Gauke, Hertfordshire South West and Financial Secretary to the Treasury) saying that he would discuss my concerns with the Treasury and revert back to me. I have now followed up and requested a face to face meeting and will report back with a summary after it happens, assuming it does.

In my surrounding area which includes London (high demand from professionals and those on benefits, low yield – high capital values yet comparatively low rents)…. it won’t take that much for this budget proposal to push even the shrewdest and most caring, honest and professional of sole trading landlord businesses with <50% LTV towards bankruptcy and cause total havoc in the PRS. BTW as I know some of this forums external voyeurs have highlighted NI contributions – as a sole trading landlord BUSINESS I have been making regular NI payments since the beginning (15 years ago on the advice of my accountant).

Reply to the comment left by "Ros ." at "14/08/2015 - 17:04":

I am meeting my accountant to look at all my figures and work out the CGT for each property to see which ones I should start with if I decide to sell any. I will be at 28% tax .on just one.
Just wondering if one I have spent cap on might be at a loss and can combine them in tax year.

I am also looking at getting valuation figures for each property so if I do become a non resident I have the evidence of true values.

I personally do no think, it would be retrospective.

Kathy, you can offset capital losses & and the residue can be carried forward..

Council ‘clients’ housing:

I am still continually hounded by London councils to provide accommodation for their ‘clients’ via text and email and phone calls. A few years ago I foolishly gave them a shot with 3 renovated properties, only to find on a few occasions that the money the govt or rather tax payers were giving their clients was actually pocketed by those savvy clients rather than used for accommodation.

Finally I was left with no alternative but to evict one tax payer thief (who I knew was working although claiming he wasn’t to get free hosuing), which took about a year.. Don’t believe the nonsense you might read on other anti-LL websites about how non-incorporated landlord businesses are bad, tenants are all great and how LLs are quick to evict and how long it REALLY takes.

That said, I suspect there had been very little consultation between the council housing depts and the Treasury about the chaos it will cause before this budget proposal was announced?

Institutions may want a slice of what they think is the pie, which maybe behind this Treasury move, who knows, but if so they are in for one hell of a reality shock!

There was a question yesterday about contacting the DPS (I only just realised I didn't answer it).
These were two of the emails I received from the DPS:

(maybe someone could volunteer to try and push them a bit further, especially as over time I believe more people are getting the picture and especially as, if they somehow agreed to circulate the petition or give us the means to circulate it to all of their landlords (and tenants!?) we are talking one hell of a load of people. That would be a real feather in the cap for someone on this site. So I throw down the gauntlet. I didn't manage it, but it would be marvellous if someone else did):

'The Deposit Protection Service (The DPS)

Thank you for your recent email.

The Government department that appointed Computershare Investor Services (CIS) as the sole provider of the custodial deposit protection scheme (The DPS) is the Department of Communities and Local Government (DCLG). Any request to use the data held will need to be made through the DCLG.

I would like to make you aware that we issue a monthly ‘Openhouse’ newsletter where we endeavour to raise awareness of such changes, to landlords and letting agents.

Should you require any further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact this office.

Yours sincerely,

Kate Pettitt

Latest email, after I pushed it a bit more:

'The Deposit Protection Service (The DPS)

Thank you for your recent email.

Unfortunately we are unable to circulate the petition however, our Open House communications provide a general update on legislative changes.

Should you require any further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact this office.

Yours sincerely,

Kate Pettitt
Senior Administrator
The Deposit Protection Service (DPS)
T +44 (0)330 303 0030
The Pavilions, Bridgwater Road, Bristol BS99 6AA, United Kingdom
http://www.depositprotection.com'

NB. I did point out that I have never received this 'Open House' communication and I have a zillion deposits with them, so it doesn't sound much cop.

I thought it was agreed that referring to the proposals as "a tax on cost" or "a tax on mortgage interest" would detract from our argument. But I see in the PDF document the second point " In plain English, what does this mean?" that we refer to the change in this way! Can I proposed the wording below to replace the current wording?

Landlords, like every other business, are currently able to deduct all their legitimate business costs (including finance interest) against their rental income, in calculating their profits and therefore their tax bill. This is standard practice in business as the general principle of taxation is that tax is applied on profit.

The Government proposes to break this taxation principle by not allowing finance costs (i.e. mortgage interest) to be treated fully as a business expense. By the year 2021, it will still be possible to get a deduction for finance interest, but the amount will be capped at 20%. This is a big change because for many Landlords, finance costs will be their largest cost. No other business is taxed in this way. No other business is disallowed claiming interest on loans taken out to buy assets that generate taxable income.

Reply to the comment left by "Mark Shine" at "14/08/2015 - 23:38":

Hi Mark

Been there done that with my borough council too. They look upon private landlords as a never ending resource of money and accommodation to tap into. Licence fees, NICEIC regs to keep to, non paying council tenants to house at our expense, etc etc.
Have you contacted all these councils you deal with, sending them the fact sheet and petition to sign? I am certainly going to do that with mine. Might not get anywhere but you never know...