Summer Budget 2015 – Landlords Reactions

Reply to the comment left by "KATHY MILLER" at "11/10/2015 - 15:29":

Damn. One option I was thinking of was just putting some of the properties into a company, if necessary - it looks like I would have to pay the CGT at that point. I've never been that interested in tax, until now!
Question for the tax experts: If I have a house bought for £100,000 and now worth £200,000 and ignoring allowances etc., paid £28,000 CGT on the gain. If I then died the next day and my children inherited it, what IHT would they pay (if this house was already above the allowance threshold)? Would I have screwed up by paying the CGT - or if I had just died and not sold/incorporated the house would they have to pay CGT and IHT?

Reply to the comment left by "Kathy Evans" at "11/10/2015 - 15:38":

'it will revolutionise the sector, providing greater choice of tenure length, rent certainty and high levels of customer service.”

How will an institution running these houses be any different to a letting agent, from the perspective of the tenant? And in my experience my tenants far prefer dealing directly with us - e.g. when they lock themselves out of the house at 11 o'clock at night and I go and let them in, free of charge and I'm also always nice to them.
And if there is rent certainty, it will be the certainty of a higher rent.
High levels of customer service? Uh, I don't think it will be as good as what they get now.
And rent tenure: if the Government was concerned about that they could have just legislated on it. It's all a smokescreen for the big guys to move into the territory vacated by the landlords who have had their properties expropriated.

Reply to the comment left by "Ros ." at "11/10/2015 - 15:42":

Ros like you I am no tax expert but I think you know the answer!

I heard of a case where two individuals died within a short time of each other. One inherited from the other and then left his/her estate to his/her family. HMRC demanded two sets of 40% (40% of 100% then 40 of the remaining 60%) leaving only 36% of the original sum. In each case the tax free allowance was transferred without problem but I understood that it was small compared with the whole estate.

Legalised theft.

Reply to the comment left by "Kathy Evans" at "11/10/2015 - 15:38":

Yes possible, I dont think it will be that good, faceless

Did you read the other post. wall street 14.41

Reply to the comment left by "Barry Fitzpatrick" at "11/10/2015 - 11:06":

Barry, wise word.

Reply to the comment left by "Ros ." at "11/10/2015 - 15:42":

Not specific tax advice as that isn't possible

But generally IHT and CGT are separate taxes.

If the CGT liability had been created by you selling the house to a company (whilst you were alive) but the CGT bill had not been paid (because you died before paying it), then I am quite sure the CGT bill still needs to be paid from your estate. IHT would still also be due from the kids in the usual way.

In the scenario you outline, the house in question would be owned by the company and (presumably) your kids would be inheriting the shares in the company that you bequeathed to them

Depending on the nature of the company and other complicating factors such as how many shareholders there are, the IHT position could be quite different.

If you are considering the use of a company and intend to pass the company or its assets to your kids, you really do need specific professional advice.

Reply to the comment left by "Ros ." at "11/10/2015 - 15:49":

Ros, I think we are in agreement. And it'll probably be worse than a local letting agent - at least the tenant can go and have a rant in a local office, and the letting agent can ring the landlord (and vice versa) easily. A big multinational with a call centre won't allow that.

Here are some complaints in the public arena about the US example I cited earlier

http://www.complaintsboard.com/complaints/waypoint-homes-security-deposit-c723304.html

Reply to the comment left by "steve p" at "09/10/2015 - 16:07":

Hello Steve P, you have gone inside the mind of the devil to think like Osborne and his gangsters. I like your conspiracy theory and it makes a lot of sense to me. This government is introducing austerity measures that could have been started several years ago (And I'm not saying that I agree with those measures).

They are now just robbing money where they can and have no regard for values. I think this new tax has been brought in purely because of the low interest rates that many landlords have on their mortgage deals, they hate the fact that many landlords are enjoying an Indian summer of low interest rates from pre credit crunch 2007 period and they want to just steal some of that profit. Recent new finance is just an unfortunate casualty!

Have you noticed how much extra regulation has hit the landlord just recently, it's regulation that is designed to protect the tenant from eviction. They want to make it as difficult as possible to evict the tenant and protect their credit rating. If we evict them they have no where to go, if we destroy their credit rating they can't get another tenancy as easily and so are still homeless. The idea is to leave you carrying the dud tenant and his debt so at least the homeless figures do not rise. That's why the courts are always against the landlord.
I have just read on this forum that the government has increased the bankruptcy limit from £750 to £5,000 As far as I'm concerned this means that tenants can screw the landlord for up to £5,000 and walk away virtually Scot free as CCJ's don't always show up on credit reports.
Why doesn't this government allow a national register of CCJ's so that having a CCJ against you would actually mean something. Expect a wealth tax next which will include property. Sorry to be so pessimistic.

Reply to the comment left by "Jim S" at "11/10/2015 - 23:46":

Hey Jim. Even paranoids have enemies. We all have slightly different ways at looking at the world, though. I like reading the conspiracy theories and I know that politicians are sly b*rstards, but I always credit them with less intelligence than others tend do. I don't think much of this has been thought through at all and I think it will be catastrophic for the economy and have to be reversed sooner rather than later. It happened like that in Ireland and I believe it will be the same here.
There is increasing demand for rental properties and this will now not be met - in fact the PRS will shrink and the Government will be in the shit.