Capital gains on BTL to be taxed as income

Capital gains on BTL to be taxed as income

16:52 PM, 25th August 2016, About 8 years ago 124

Text Size

Capital gains on BTL to be taxed as incomeIf you thought clause 24 of the 2015 finance bill was underhanded, wait until you get a load of this! Capital gains on BTL to be taxed as income

The government have slipped some additional clauses into the finance bill 2016 “Sections 75-78: taxation of profits from trading and investing in UK Land” which make profits made on the sale of buy-to-let property become taxable income, at income tax rates.

This wasn’t announced in the budget and there has been no consultation.

The Law Society has made representations to the government, prepared by its Corporation Tax sub-committee. These representations set out how the amendments will materially change some investors tax obligations.

Law Society chief executive Catherine Dixon said “By introducing a significant change in this way, the government is denying the public the chance to consider and comment on these proposals. If the government did not intend to make a material change, they need to clarify the language in the bill before it is passed. If they are intent on these changes, they should submit them for proper public consultation and legislative scrutiny”

A Law Society Pres Release says …

“Significant amendments to the Finance Bill slipped in at committee stage set a disturbing precedent of avoiding proper consultation and scrutiny.

The changes, which alter the way buy-to-let properties will be taxed, may result in many investors paying income tax rather than a capital gains tax on their investment, creating uncertainty for taxpayers.

The way these changes were introduced, in particular without consultation on the draft legislation before it was added to the bill at such a late stage, starts to feel like legislation by stealth.

No matter what the policy proposals, proper consultation and process is vital to maintain public confidence in our democratic institutions.”

They key sections of the report are:

2.4 For example, proposed section 356OB(4) CTA 2010 would apply the new rules where “the main purpose, or one of the main purposes, of acquiring the land was to realise a profit or gain from disposing of the land” (Condition A). The consequence would be that the profit on realisation would be taxed as income rather than as capital gain. We consider that there are many situations where this formulation of the test would capture transactions that are uncontroversial investment transactions. Similar concerns arise in relation to Conditions B and D. (Proposed section 517B ITA 2007 has the same effect for income tax.)

2.5 In particular, we consider that this formulation of the test could apply to many buy-to-let investors, despite the fact that they are clearly engaged in a property investment business on general principles. Any buy-to-let investor will assess the overall yield before making an investment decision. In areas of the country with low rental yields, an essential part of the investment proposition is the prospect for capital growth, even if the investor‟s intention is to hold the property for the medium to long term. Indeed in the current market, and given the low returns on other asset classes, there are few areas where the prospect of capital growth is an immaterial consideration for investors. Financially speaking, it is hard to say that the obtaining of that capital growth would not be one of the main purposes of acquiring the land. However, the average buy-to-let investor will have assumed that it will be taxed at capital gains tax rates on ultimate disposal of the property. If the government‟s intention were to change this, then the Society‟s view is that this should have been subject to proper consultation on the principle policy and the draft legislation. If the government‟s intention is not to change this, then the Society considers that the terms of the legislation should be amended to reflect that.

Sections 75 and 76 of the finance bill deal with Corporation Tax but 77 and 78 deal with Individuals/Income Tax.

A link to the specific bit in the draft legislation is here -> http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/2016-2017/0047/cbill_2016-20170047_en_17.htm#pt3-pb5-l1g77

Are you angry about this?

Angry enough to help us to fight it by pledging £10 a month?


Share This Article


Comments

Mark Alexander - Founder of Property118

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

19:36 PM, 26th August 2016, About 8 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Jon Pipllman" at "26/08/2016 - 19:23":

Hi Jon

1) Yes

2) No, not yet

Jon Pipllman

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

20:00 PM, 26th August 2016, About 8 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Mark Alexander" at "26/08/2016 - 19:36":

Thanks Mark, appreciated.

It seems the worst case scenario is that you are taxed at the applicable marginal uk income tax rates on profits arising from sales post 5 July 2016

And the best case is that residential / btl properties aren't affected at all by this legislation

I haven't yet seen anything that would wholly convince me either way so far.

I have asked the question of a few people that know enough to sway my opinion one way or another, but the bank holiday may delay any responses.

Big Blue

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

16:39 PM, 27th August 2016, About 8 years ago

I brought this to the attention of the NLA immediately Mark alerted me/us and they were relatively unconcerned. They said the treasury had been promising this measure for a while and it is solely to bring non-resident individual developers into line on uk trading profits. They are convinced it is nothing to do with BTL investors and does not affect any BTL investor.

Two points I would add: 1. I agree the wording could be better but I'm leaning towards this being the usual incompetence in drafting rather than a secret attack on landlords. 2. If there is to be another attack on landlords I expect it to be via CGT. For this reason Mark is right to still fight this and show that we will not be treated in such a poor fashion. The more they know we are watching and ready to fight, the better!

Bill O'Dell

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

16:48 PM, 27th August 2016, About 8 years ago

I have written to the 3 MP's where I have properties as follows:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As you are MP for Woking and I am a landlord in Woking, serving the large professional let market that contribute such a lot to our town, I feel bound to write to you about a recent development leaked about the Finance Bill 2016.

The Private Rented Sector (PRS) has been fair game for the Chancellor in recent years and many tax allowances have been reduced, reversed or annihilated for the benefit of the Treasury. We should all take our share of paying for the national debt - even if the Banks were the primary cause, I get that - but what I don't understand is why the Government is so keen on giving 50 lashes to the sector that is propping up one of the major problems the country faces - housing.
Without the PRS, there would be a massive housing crisis. Many can't afford to buy and have to rent, many choose to rent because of the flexibility it provides. Then there are migrants, job seekers from different areas of the country, essential workers on low wages, the young starting out on independent living, the disabled and those with mental health problems now pushed into the 'community' and all of these people are in need of somewhere to live. Is the Government going to provide them with housing? And where will they get the funding to build or buy the property from?

A recent leak has identified that the sale of a second home will now be treated as 'income' for tax purposes and not as capital gain. This pushes the tax rate from 18% to 40% and is the most recent in a series of significant tax takes from the PRS that frankly is short sighted and damaging to many small rental businesses and to many accidental landlords, already facing a loss as a result to the changes in interest treatment, this will be the final blow that may well mean serious financial difficulties or even bankruptcy.

I hope you will strenuously resist these changes in the Finance Bill 2016 and actively lobby to have these reversed.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not expecting much to happen but still think this is worthwhile.

Simon Hall

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

18:49 PM, 27th August 2016, About 8 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Mark Alexander" at "26/08/2016 - 09:32":

Mark, thanks for your input. whilst I can appreciate your cynical approach however I am a great believer in "Let the sleeping Dog lie".

As I fear, whilst government officials are limited in their knowledge, whilst we are challenging something which they have not clearly introduced may end up backfiring on us such as giving them brand new ideas which they did not even think of!

Just a thought.

TheMaluka

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

19:48 PM, 27th August 2016, About 8 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Simon Hall" at "27/08/2016 - 18:49":

It is a difficult call for the sleeping dog might turn out to be right bitch.

Mani Teferi

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

1:02 AM, 28th August 2016, About 8 years ago

HELP MUCH APPRECIATED!

I am remortgaging my only residence on a LET-To-BUY to buy another bigger property.

The property I am interested in buying needs complete renovation and I am considering flipping the new property to buy even bigger if values allow in 6-9months time.

Will I have to pay CGT despite this new property technically being my residential address (even if for a few months after the works are completed)?

Thanks!!

Jon Pipllman

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

11:05 AM, 28th August 2016, About 8 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Marcus " at "28/08/2016 - 01:02":

There should be no CGT payable when you sell the new house, even if you only lived in it for a short time.

Be sure to nominate the new house as your primary / main residence. Make sure all owners of the property sign the letter.

Should questions arise, the more evidence you have to show that you physically moved from the old house to the new one, the better

See page 3 of this document

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/323679/hs283.pdf

and this page

https://www.gov.uk/tax-sell-home/nominating-a-home

Dr Rosalind Beck

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

12:00 PM, 30th August 2016, About 8 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Dr Rosalind Beck ." at "26/08/2016 - 12:48":

I just received this from the RLA:

Dear Dr Beck

Alan has asked me to respond to your concerns about the latest Government amendments to the Finance Bill 2016, regarding the possibility of profits from rental properties incurring income tax on sale, rather than capital gains.

It is our understanding that these are 'tidying' amendments seeking to bring those who trade in UK property, are resident overseas and subject to 'double' taxation agreements, into the scope of the UK tax regime.

However, we have written to the Chancellor to seek clarification and reassurance that the distinction between those who trade in property by developing or buying for resale and those who invest in property to let remains:

http://news.rla.org.uk/call-clarification-cgt-amendments/

We remain concerned that the Government continues to seek changes in legislation affecting the sector without consultation, and hope the new Chancellor may bring a more inclusive approach.

Best wishes

John Stewart

Policy and Communications Manager

Residential Landlords Association

Anne Noon

Become a Member

If you login or become a member you can view this members profile, comments, posts and send them messages!

Sign Up

12:22 PM, 30th August 2016, About 8 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "James Fraser" at "25/08/2016 - 21:43":

I wholeheartedly agree with you, i have been planning to support myself during my retirement, without having redress to HB and all other benefits. I sent a letter to Conservative Party about this and they didn't even reply. Currently my portfolio gives me a good income, but if I sell up, I will have live off my capital until it runs out!! And where else would I put my money to get a good return?

Leave Comments

In order to post comments you will need to Sign In or Sign Up for a FREE Membership

or

Don't have an account? Sign Up

Landlord Automated Assistant Read More