Summer Budget 2015 – Landlords Reactions

Reply to the comment left by "Lun Bun" at "26/12/2015 - 20:19":

Hi Lun Bun - yes, we have. This is an excerpt relevant to your question:
"Judges sitting on judicial review cases in England will be concerned only with the legal issues and will consider the issues dispassionately. Emotional elements within the public or specific groups are unlikely to affect the judicial process."

I pledged earlier today. Only £25 at this stage I'm afraid, but will be more than willing to contribute to the next stages if there are any. And I hope there will be...

For me, the following point @ http://www.crowdjustice.co.uk/case/clause24/
is crucial:

"Institutions and corporations will still be able to offset 100% of their finance costs to arrive at 'profit.' No explanation has been given for this favourable treatment, even though they can provide exactly the same service and are therefore being given an unfair competitive advantage."

At present we're at £22'231...

In one day, the target we needed to hit by the end of January has been met and we're nearly halfway towards the phase 2 enlarged target.

Reply to the comment left by "Mark Shine" at "26/12/2015 - 23:51":

Hi Mark.
Yes, no explanation has been given for this discriminatory and anti-competition distinction. This point has been made to the lawyers.

For me the main point would be "I purchased my properties based on business model that, I will be able to offset all my mortgage interest as an expense. Therefore applying this tax retrospectively will be grossly unfair.

Followed by the fact, there is no single G7 country who will disallow this as an expense, in fact I do not know any country, certainly in Europe who will tax your mortgage interest.

At least, people who are buying properties now, knowingly going into transaction where they know exactly what the consequences will be but those who bought previously did not- So if we can not stop this legislation we must fight it not being retrospective.

Reply to the comment left by "Lun Bun" at "27/12/2015 - 09:31":

I woudn't entertain the "no retrospection" approach as to do so tacity conceeds the appropriatnesss of C24 in essence.

http://www.landlordsguild.com/hmrc-outlines-plans-for-pay-as-you-go-tax-bills/

Reply to the comment left by "money manager" at "27/12/2015 - 10:24":

Impeccable logic.

On fighting this we "must" ensure our legal council play this very, very cleverly because if they only focus on Clause 24 versus higher property taxes in whatever form they take, we could end up in a far worse position. We must be prepared for consequences as there are "always" consequences & build these in to our defense/attack at outset based on evidence of how any extra property tax on Landlords will have the same if not worse effect than Clause 24. Scroll down for just one example.
As posted on a different discussion thread, I said it wouldn’t surprise me if Clause 24 ends up being a red herring & the Government will make an about turn on it. The old adage of “if something you really want to bring in could be a major political hot potato, bring in something else first that appears unfair & not thought through & then later on withdraw it (as if one has listened) & then launch what you really wanted in the first place”. Corporations as well as the government have been doing this for years. It’s called management strategy.
The revenue from Clause 24 is predicted to only bring in £225m (million not billion) in extra tax in 2018/19, £415m in 2019/20 & £665m thereafter from 2020/21. In its place we could see far worse ie an annual1% pa Property Value tax payable by the property "owner" that is estimated could bring in £41.6bn per annum (billion not million).
Example:- for ease of the maths let's assume a 40% taxpayer & a UK average property value of £200,000 & borrowing geared at 75% loan to value = £150,000 at an interest rate of 4% = £6,000 pa interest payments = £1200 pa extra tax as a result of Clause 24 vs 1% property tax on a £200,000 value = £2,000 tax = £800 greater tax than under Clause 24 (an extra £2,000 in tax if currently unencumbered).
Plus a consumption or residence tax payable by tenants & OO’s, the latter of which would have brought in £9.9bn in 2012/13 which is more than twice the amount collected through CGT & combined with a Property Value Tax is substantially more than what Council Tax brings in of only £25.9bn in 2012/13.
Plus a Land Value Tax which may or may not include a tax on the land beneath a residential investment/commercial property (not the land beneath an OO's property)
And/or a tax on “Net” Wealth payable annually of anywhere between 0.3-1% on one’s assets less liabilities.
The percentages sound small but the yearly revenue collected is enormous beyond belief compared to what Clause 24 could bring in (and these amounts of revenue these taxes could bring in are only based on properties owned by individuals with the intention to apply these taxes to companies & trusts too).

Does anyone, use property management software? If so, what are your expereinces with it and what software do you recommend?

Apologies for going off track.