Summer Budget 2015 – Landlords Reactions

Reply to the comment left by "Mark Brown" at "03/10/2015 - 23:55":

It would be so nice if we had a government who truly wanted to make the country better for the people in it. Instead its all about job prospects within and after you leave the government for the elite few and bugger everyone else.

This country as been going down the pan for the last 15plus years and I dont see it stopping.

We live in a changing world there is no doubt about that
I for one thank god I am not starting I life again
I built my Investment Business over 30 years ???
I did it because thought it was the right thing to do? I did it to make a living I did it to make a business I try to abide by the rues and I am happy to pay tax on profits which I do every six months
I just don't understand how any business can plan with a govt like ours
I will not be beaten by this robbing Govt who are underhand and very sneaky
I could understand if they had stopped Tax Relief for new entrants from the night of the Budget
I fully understand where the govt is coming from and maybe its correct that our Business was looked at again and standard's and professionalism improved
The lack of response from Landlords shows how little knowledge there is in our business
I know we will get no change in the future the events will happen and we all have to make our way out of this Issue in the best way we can
I do worry what will happen in the future I think Tax relief will go all together maybe within 10 years
Where is the UK going where will we all end up
I try to look for the silver lining
there is little doubt we all have challenges ahead
I think Mortgage Co will come up with new products to fit the new LTD Co model
I think Accountant's will come up with new arrangement's
Do I feel good about the future NO I DONT but I have no opition other than to learn every thing I can about LTD Co and move forward

Reply to the comment left by "Dislexic Landlord" at "04/10/2015 - 09:12":

Absolutely, I'm expanding my way out of this mess by buying all new properties for cash in a limited co. My main residence is going in my wife's name, and I'm contributing into a pension. Worst case scenario is they take my personal portfolio - they are not taking everything!

Reply to the comment left by "Manchester Landlord" at "04/10/2015 - 09:22":

I know where you coming from
Its Ironic I bought Property to give me a pension and now the new Ltd Co will be funding my new Directors Pension how mad is that
I will wait to see where the property Market is going in the future
I don't think now is the time for me to buy Vendors think there is a rise in prices so there are no bargains to be had at present
But I do think we could be looking for a fall in prices in the future Rate Rises ,MMR, and when Landlords sell up
what will we see in 10 years time will we look back and say in hindsight this as the best thing to happen

Reply to the comment left by "David Price" at "04/10/2015 - 07:56":

‘there probably is no motive save the stated “levelling the playing field”. We must also stop proposing alternative taxes, we are taxed enough already.’

David, like the majority of landlords, as your properties are unencumbered Clause 24 may actually make your business more profitable. You will pay no more tax as a result as a direct result and indirectly you may benefit from increased market rents & buying opportunities, at the expense of tenants. I am not saying that you would do that personally as hopefully your morals are intact, but many unencumbered and incorporated LL businesses will see Clause 24 as a helping hand from GO.

If you believe the motive for Clause 24 is solely “levelling the playing field” (between FTB/OO and residential LLs) as you say, please can you explain how a moderate levy for all residential landlords (NPR) would be less fair than Clause 24 which does not target all LLs?

Reply to the comment left by "Mark Shine" at "04/10/2015 - 09:44":

"If you believe the motive for Clause 24 is solely “levelling the playing field” (between FTB/OO and residential LLs) as you say, please can you explain how a moderate levy for all residential landlords (NPR) would be less fair than Clause 24 which does not target all LLs?"
I do not believe that clause 24 is solely to level the playing field, I believe that leveling is a good excuse for the introduction of a new stealth tax.
Your question is difficult to answer in a concise manner. If the levy was per property then the social housing would be unfairly penalised. If it was based on rent then landlords would be penalised when tenants failed to pay the rent. If it were based on actual rent collected then it would be a tax based on turnover and little better than the clause 24 tax.
As an example if I were to suffer selective licensing then my entire annual profit would be wiped out by a charge of £500 per property. A similar charge in London would be a drop in the ocean.
If it really is necessary to tax letting, why not extend VAT to cover all residential lettings? Its fair, its proportionate and it is paid directly by the tenant? It is after all the tenant who will always pay, for it is the end user who pays all taxes. I have posted elsewhere that Tesco does not pay business rates, the company merely acts as a conduit between you, the customer, who pays and the government who collects.

Whilst it is true that the end customer does indeed pay all taxes (and other costs), it isn't always the end customer that is on the hook if the bill doesn't get paid.

If Tesco couldn't afford to pay the rates on its stores local to me that I used to frequent, but would now never go near even if they were giving stuff away, the local council won't come knocking on my door for the debt.

VAT is a bit different in that is based on consumption. I think there are two reasons they didn't go down route: i) I don't think Europe would allow it (?) and ii) The VAT threshold wouldn't apply to enough landlords to raise enough money and / or 'level the playing field'

There was a news item today about a co-ordinated multi-national move against companies like google and Starbucks - whereby they will no longer be able to offset all of their interest costs to calculate their profit. Perhaps we have been targeted first as an easy target, and are part of a much bigger picture? In which case, I would say it is an even worse idea to incorporate - I have given my opinion several times that I believe incorporation of properties already owned is a massive gamble.

Reply to the comment left by "Jon Pipllman" at "04/10/2015 - 13:10":

Without actually voicing it that is what I was trying to say. Don't tax the landlord, tax the tenant, the end consumer.

Reply to the comment left by "Ros ." at "04/10/2015 - 13:22":

That is why, right from the start, I have held half my properties personally (latterly transferred to Childrens' names) and half in a limited company. Like you I do not know which will be the best from the tax perspective.