Summer Budget 2015 – Landlords Reactions

Reply to the comment left by "Ros ." at "07/10/2015 - 13:54":

Thanks ML & Ros. I'll write too.

In the Independant today Shelter complain that Camerons new affordable housing would only be affordable for those earning £50,000 and would reduce homes built for affordable rent.

"Last year Mr Cameron pledged to build 100,000 a year and doubled it to 200,000 a year by 2020 in the Tory election manifesto.

Today he will set out in more detail how the Government will pursue a “national crusade to get homes built” by introducing incentives for developers to build more affordable homes by relaxing planning restrictions.

However Campbell Robb, chief executive of Shelter, said the new scheme would only benefit those already able to buy a home.

"You don't solve an affordability crisis by getting rid of the few affordable homes we're building, yet that's exactly what this policy will do.

“Today's announcement confirms our fears that Starter Homes costing up to £450k will be built at the expense of the genuinely affordable homes this country desperately needs. Our research has shown that these Starter Homes will too often only be 'affordable' for higher earners, not the millions of people working hard for an average wage who will be left stuck in expensive private renting.

“There's nothing wrong with helping people on to the property ladder, but the government has to invest in genuinely affordable homes to buy and rent for all of those on ordinary incomes who are bearing the brunt of this crisis."

Last year, 141,000 homes were built across the UK – just over half the number that experts say is needed to prevent house prices continuing to spiral."

Just to make life easier, I am pasting the beginning of my letter to Michael Gove in case anyone wants to copy or base their email on it and then put some of their own stuff. I'm not pasting everything I've written as I don't want to make it public yet.

Dear Mr Gove.
It has been brought to my attention that you have spoken today and said that buy to let landlords need to be able to make sufficient profit in order to encourage investment in the sector. It looks like you have not been made aware of the detail in the Finance Bill with relation to this - although, for my part I did write to you about this a couple of months ago just after the Summer Budget.

Clause 24 of the Finance Bill abolishes landlords' right to offset the main cost of our business when calculating profit (and in effect means we will be taxed on art of our turnover). There is no way now that landlords who rely on finance will 'invest.' Who would take out a large loan to invest in a business, when they could no longer offset the interest costs of that loan against profit and in addition, have that large interest amount re-defined as part of their profit, upon which they are taxed?

Many landlords do not yet understand the significance of this (and perhaps you also don't) as George Osborne presented it in an incredibly misleading way in his Summer Budget speech. In addition to landlords, it is going to have a terrible impact on private tenants who will see rents rise and will be displaced and some will be made homeless as landlords are forced to sell up businesses suddenly rendered unviable, directly as a consequence of this Government policy.

Just emailed Mr Gove. Lets hope it gets through his goalkeepers in the office!

Reply to the comment left by "Darlington Landlord" at "07/10/2015 - 14:19":

What Monsieur Robb doesn't realise is that the Government has a completely different interpretation of the 'housing crisis' to his understanding of it. The Government's number one priority is increasing the numbers in owner-occupation. The plight of the poor in areas where most people rent is very, very low on their list of priorities. And brains of Britain Robb has been one of the main architects of what will be the real 'housing crisis' as rents go up and the evictions start and homelessness soars. Well done Campbell. You'll be okay though with your fat salary.

Reply to the comment left by "Ros ." at "07/10/2015 - 14:30":

I agree, but the article does support the view that this Government doesn't look like they have a coherant or practical housing policy and are heading for a new Omnishambles in renting and homelessness - possibly another angle for the telegraph?

Reply to the comment left by "Laura Delow" at "07/10/2015 - 13:20":

Hi Laura

It might create jobs in construction but what often happens is the locals dont get the work. So all the little trades will be trampled on. The big building firms tender out to cheapest price. I know the government have always hated the small builders as they see it as a black market and believe they lose lots in undeclared taxes.

If GO really wanted to stamp out just the small landlords he could have said that full time landlords are not included in clause 24 or ones with gross turnover of xx amount.
Or all landlords need to incorporate and will be allowed rollover relief providing their properties are a certain standard.
Better still depending on certain criteria he will recognise that many landlords are very much businesses .

I dont see OO balancing the mortgage amount of BTL business lost.
There is also all the firms accountants , mortgage advisors cleaners letting agents
If rates increased many of these new OO could be repossessed.
Without a decent paid job many will never own a property.
Then the people on the benefits who many cant get work ,what hole is he going to push them in. We already have seen how IDS deems these people.

I dont agree with clause 24 in any form.

If it gets passed then I think we all should be given a CGT holiday or the government buys at market value our portfolios.

Maybe they will do a deal with Shelter to start supplying houses for all benefit and low paid people when there are no PRS landlords left to take them..

The freedom on information requests dont confirm that they have looked at the whole picture.

Look at the awful mess IDS has made with Ucredit might have sounded good and looked good on paper . But implementation and it actually working , its a total mess. Did they do any What if's?
Look at the results of the bedroom tax.

The answer is more houses and they have all the powers to alter the planning system to enable this instead they tinker.
Then they take so much from the developers for affordable housing that they add it to the end value of the house. Hence price increases.

They are just scared of upsetting to many NIMBYs as they will lose votes. But they think its ok to destroy a sector in a stroke of a pen

But you sound like a fighter and its good to share views and come together to fight it.

http://news.rla.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/160629-Impact-of-Loss-of-Mortgage-Interest-Tax-Relief-note-for-Treasury1.pdf

Disappointment for landlords as Treasury responds to RLA

And here is David gaukes response. It is truly shocking. I'm more angry now than when this was first announced!

http://news.rla.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/150928_Treasury_David-Guake_Reply.pdf

They talk out of there xxxxx no idea make ur own plans that suit ur circumstances as I'm sad to say this looks like it's coming need to be one step ahead what a joke