Summer Budget 2015 – Landlords Reactions

Reply to the comment left by "NW Landlord" at "25/01/2017 - 10:36":

If that is ths case why didnt they just come abd say this rather alk the BS about levelling playing field, etc.

It does nothing though to force unencumbered LLs to incorporate.

Very true about unencumbered maybe I'm wrong just an opinion

Reply to the comment left by "Barry Fitzpatrick" at "25/01/2017 - 10:54":

Barry, if you pay to get incorporated and then have 'ltd' after your name, didn't you know that that automatically changes how you run things - you suddenly become 'professional' overnight? EPCs, gas safety certs, efficient procedures like protecting the deposit become second nature. It's like the old Heineken advert where the baby is 'delivered' to the fragrant woman in the hospital bed. It happens by magic. The fact that we've all been doing this stuff for years in a completely professional way without the need for incorporation and also paying more tax than landlords who did incorporate is ignored.

Being ltd means your accounts and financial position are open to public view, some landlords wight prefer to keep their financial affairs private.

Reply to the comment left by "Gary BTLowner" at "24/01/2017 - 23:36":

Didn't think of that, but she's signed a 12 month AST now so maybe next year.

Reply to the comment left by "Simon " at "25/01/2017 - 12:58":

@Simon

I run another business that is a ltd co. the information in the public accounts is very very limited, and certainly does not include P & L figures.

Just received an update from Axe the Tenants Tax (FB):
https://www.facebook.com/clause24/posts/1387717567937910?notif_t=notify_me_page&notif_id=1485861183238169

I would be interested to hear what you think about it?
It will certainly be fair for the whole sector.

Can't see it happening myself as any common sense and reason is clearly being ignored by people who have no idea or insight into the PRS I personally am planning for this to be in place for some time. Only when landlords fall on there swords and people are made homeless, and tax receipts are nothing like what they forecast will the government look at it in my opinion as this policy is unaffordable for most

It's an interesting suggestion, which would certainly have the effect of raising revenue without the distorting and disproportionate effects of S24 on encumbered portfolio landlords. However, I don’t see that the Government would go for this.

Firstly, it would damage the bottom line of institutional investors and it’s obvious that they have a lot of influence over Government. What it would do, by choosing not to consider it, is expose the fact that Government does not want to damage the bottom line of institutional investors. Remember Gideon’s comments when a Ltd Co turnover tax was suggested.

Secondly, it would not meet the Government’s obvious aim to kill off small private landlords, by doing the exact thing of levelling the playing field. Again though, by choosing not to consider it, the Government would expose the fact that they want to kill us off to allow institutional investors to enter the market with an unfair advantage.

An interesting comment made in the Lords regarding the Homelessness Reduction Bill:

'Lord Best Chair, Communications Committee:

My Lords, I have the honour of taking the Homelessness Reduction Bill—the Private Member’s Bill—through your Lordships’ House. I thank and congratulate the Government on giving this strenuous support, and the same goes for Her Majesty’s Opposition. Can the Minister, however, impress on his colleagues in the Department for Work and Pensions that their attempts to reduce housing benefit and freeze the rents paid to private landlords is undermining efforts to place people in the private rented sector? As the right reverend Bishop says, there are already enough inhibitions on private landlords taking people on housing benefit, and some are now terminating their agreements. Unless we tackle this, the Homelessness Reduction Bill will not make much odds.'

A rare voice of reason in Parliament. The Government refuses to do a u-turn on s24 which - with other things like UC - will massively exacerbate the homelessness problem and then pat themselves on the back for passing a Bill designed to reduce homelessness. They wouldn't need the damn Bill if they stopped their destructive interference in the PRS.