Summer Budget 2015 – Landlords Reactions

Reply to the comment left by "Barry Fitzpatrick" at "16/12/2015 - 14:29":

Professor Philip Booth, who is Professor of Finance, Public Policy and Ethics at St. Mary's University, Twickenham, and gave evidence to the Treasury Select Committee, pointing out C24 didn't make any sense, has now made a further statement, and given me permission to circulate this far and wide. It is as follows:

'Osborne is either being deliberately dishonest or simply does not understand the issue when he uses the tax relief for owner occupiers example. Tax on owner occupied imputed rent was abolished in 1963 (in my view it should be brought back, but that is a separate point) and tax relief on mortgage interest was intended as an offset against that (because interest is taxed in the hands of the financier of the mortgage, if appropriate).

When the tax on imputed rent was abolished the tax relief that remained was an anomaly (or, arguably, designed to shove society in the direction of owning rather than renting). There was nothing any longer to relieve (so, of course, it just relieved general income tax paid on income).

The case of renting is totally different. Here, tax is paid on the rent and the interest is a business cost (as with any other business). One should pay tax on the profit and the financier of the mortgage pays tax on the interest.

Any other position is essentially arguing that providing shelter for people who cannot afford to buy is less economically worthy than any other economic activity that would be taxed as a business and it should therefore be discriminated against.

To put it quite bluntly, this is an elementary undergraduate public finance error that should not be made in the Treasury. '

We all need to get together somehow and fight this as I really believe there could be a genuine error we all thought this was sabotage it could have been a task for junior HMRC graduates that have not understood the implications for the portfolio landlords and how many they are

Reply to the comment left by "NW Landlord" at "16/12/2015 - 14:52":

NW Landlord

You have to be right I am not very educated and I can see the harm this is going to cause to the landlord, tenants, Trades and housing and banking markets.
GO can not blame the rest of the UK for what is happening in London Housing Market.
If I can not afford to live in a certain area I have to move so if that happened.
who would do all the jobs the Rich wont do.

Reply to the comment left by "NW Landlord" at "16/12/2015 - 14:52":

Over the years I have had legalities to sort out and have thought that because people were solicitors/ judges , magistrates and people in high positions that they know what they are talking about. When I have come to use these people I have been amazed to find thats not the case.
I am going through an eviction at the moment and wrong paperwork has been issued and not spotted by the judge even though I have called the court 4 times.
Just trying to say that there is always the possibility that lack of understanding is a possibility .
What a diabolical mess this will create for many people.

Reply to the comment left by "Stewart Jackson" at "16/12/2015 - 14:01":

Stewart, I'm in Gateshead. Perhaps Mark can put us in touch.

Good plan. I've emailed him a few times. I'll ask him to pass my email address to you.

Reply to the comment left by "Ros ." at "16/12/2015 - 14:42":

‘Osborne is either being deliberately dishonest or simply does not understand the issue'

Ros I think the answer is probably both.

Osborne (& political elite) ARE being 'deliberately dishonest' and he & perhaps the cannier members of HMT may realise that the average MP (including DG, his spokesperson) and the majority of the electorate 'simply does not understand the issue'.

Re other posts on this thread, even if the lawyers advise that there is only a small chance of success legally, I would be more than happy to contribute to a legal challenge (or a general C24 awareness fund) if only to highlight the facts of the issue to everyone including the extremely egotistical voyeurs from HPC website who to date have lapped up GOs rhetoric, without questioning whether his intentions could possibly be devious or misguided... purely... because they only want an.. ahem... HPC.

Btw to those voyeurs, I have no probs with an hpc and would welcome it.. I know you guys are frequently recipients of the such things as you are bound to be right sooner or later as even a stopped clock is right twice a day. It's about time...

Reply to the comment left by "Mark Shine" at "17/12/2015 - 01:08":

Hey I would chip in, as mentioned if only 40000 members dropped £100 that would create a huge fighting fund. Even if the government won a challenge, there would be enough publicity around it to make GO uncomfortable and scupper any chances he has of being Prime Minister.
I would feel quite happy with that right about now.

I do wonder how many home owners would be happy to go into negative equity? Doesn't worry me so much, I planned to be in it for the long haul so prices would likely recover before I needed my money back.

ARLA & NAEA predictions on rent increasing are in part driven by the effects of the new taxes on Landlords.

https://www.landlordtoday.co.uk/breaking-news/2015/12/arla-and-naea-house-prices-will-be-up-50-and-rents-25-by-2015

Reply to the comment left by "Ros ." at "16/12/2015 - 14:42":

Hadn't considered the double taxation resulting from this change - us and the mortgage providers - or are we the scapegoat as big business is good at avoiding large tax bills