Summer Budget 2015 – Landlords Reactions

I am quick to point out the toothlessness and lackadaisical approach of the NLA generally. I think they seem to spend more tome telling or rather spinning us landlords about what they may have been responsible for through their clandestine "yes minister" approach to lobbying, than they actually do fighting for the issues that really matter to landlords and their tenants. In a class where the NLA are the geeks and Shelter are the ADHD student, there are no points for guessing who is getting all of the attention all of the time.

After all the, NLA have allowed the loss of wear and tare allowance, Tenant Tax, Right to Rent, 3% stamp duty surcharge, 28% capital gains tax for landlords. Generally, I have been vocal saying that with influence and affect that the NLA have, I think we'd be okay without them.

Thinking that if the NLA ever did anything strong I would blog in my under crackers.., here I am.... and very pleased to applaud Chris Norris for his proper put down of the National Housing Federation in a piece on the BBC news website today. The language of hate and stupid resentment to landlords is amazing and at last, Chris has stood up and stood his ground and actually thrown a punch. Well done Chris and Thank you!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-37132249

Reply to the comment left by "Barry Fitzpatrick" at "20/08/2016 - 09:08":

Excellent idea!

I have been very very clear with all of my tenants and in deed everyone I meet about Tenant Tax so there is no ambiguity here specifically.

However i think that is a great idea and we should explore and work up a standard pie chart illustration like they do when they send you your Council Tax bill - how your tax is spent.

Reply to the comment left by "Markb " at "20/08/2016 - 09:30":

We could also do a piece that shows how much of your rent will be used to support a right to by tenant or a help to buy first time buyer.

Indeed Barry. Earlier in this extremely long chain there is a post from Neil Patterson (12/08/16 09:39 hrs) with a link to posts about a letter to Tenants ( https://www.property118.com/clause-24-rent-increase-letter-tenants-template/83369/).
I am going to issue a letter to tenants explainging the situation and to send them a template of their letter to our MP..
If all tenants start to write to their MPs we may achieve something? Slim chance but better than nothing?
What do the others think?

More anti landlord bashing on news do they want is to offer accommodation that they can't supply for free does my head in

http://news.sky.com/story/x-10544172

Reply to the comment left by "Markb " at "20/08/2016 - 09:21":

And Richard Lambert was also on, saying that they weren't comparing like with like as landlords also need to make a profit, which social housing bodies don't need to. I would have liked it if he had also said that the figures were wrong because landlords pay tax and social housing bodies don't, so the differential between private and social rents that they quote is inaccurate. They should add the tax into the equation. It was also mentioned that the differential is greatest in London. Well, they might have therefore said that private rentals in other parts of the country are often very close to social rents and when tax is also taken into account, can in fact be cheaper for the tax payer, and that therefore landlords provide an essential and cost-effective service to the nation! (dream on, Rosalind...)

Also, on the one hand we have councils begging landlords to take on tenants on benefits and on the other landlords being slagged off left, right and centre for doing it. They need to make up their minds. The Times today published an article on the NHF report and began by using inflammatory language about landlords 'raking in' tax-payers money. Sky News said taxpayers money was 'lining the pockets' of private landlords. It's so biased it's ridiculous. They're going to implode with hatred pretty soon or at least burn themselves out with their discriminatory and mendacious rhetoric.

Andy Haldane, BoE Chief Economist, claims property better than pension

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/property-is-a-better-bet-than-pensions-says-gold-plated-bank-guru-lfgqx9rwc

With £84K pension and salary £180K he can claim anything...

Once this 2015 budget change begins to apply what happens to years of previously accumulated losses...built up prior to 2017. I ask this because these have previously been taken straight off any current year tax liability fig. ..so often no tax payable.Also for sole traders under circa 88k per annum total rental income..self assessment boxes only show accrued losses..its not broken down into finance and "other" costs.
In the same vein IF the lesser "of three figs" calculation is used to calculate new 20% tax allowances many of us could never use previous years losses if these are large ie not the smallest of the three figs used to calculate a new years 20% allowance,
This would mean that losses accrued over many, many years ( prior to 2017) in some cases and amounting to some very large sums are effectively simply lost?...Anyone know the answer to this there must be many of us in that situation who have built portfolios over many years using a lot of finance and taking a very long term view on gains, whilst incurring regular annual cash flow losses. Has anyone had a clear answer to this from the tax office or a sensible accountant?

Reply to the comment left by "michael fickling" at "31/08/2016 - 08:51":

I can't help Michael, but I hope someone can - you have made some very important contributions to this campaign - through your intelligent thought processes, so you deserve a bit of free advice from someone who understands this aspect. All the best.