“Those drawing on wealth or income from additional properties are disproportionately rich and wealthy”

Hi Barry

Nobody knows what those morons are thinking but I can't see how they could apply anything like s24 to companies without thoroughly pissing off their corporate sponsors and killing build to rent in the process.

There are ways to effectively trap landlords into private ownership but I'm not going to share those on a public forum. I'm certain they will work it out for themselves at some point though. Meanwhile, for those who can find a way to 'thread the needle' in terms of incorporation the advantages are simply too great to ignore. Not just in terms of avoiding s24 but also in regards to washing out capital gains and the ability to accrue all further capital growth outside of the current owners personal estate in order to mitigate IHT.

Hi, for what it's worth my experience of younger individuals who want to purchase a property (and this is obviously not a scientific study just based on my observations of younger 'millennials' & slightly older via renting out a few properties and running a company/employing the above) is that they seem to have been slightly spoiled (not simply by their parents but also by society/media etc) to have unreal expectations that they can have everything/live like the Beckhams/reality TV stars/Facebook friends and all the latest gadgets, new and shiny car etc NOW. I purchased my home when I had turned 30 but that was after probably 4 years of saving. staying in whilst my friends went out, putting off having a car etc, etc.
It was a struggle then (early 90's) to afford the deposit and payments (btw interest rates were many times higher than now) but I managed it through delayed gratification, support from family (not financial btw) and being single-minded.
I do have some sympathy for potential purchasors these days but it is more because of the environment they have been brought up in rather than the particular financial situation which seems pretty similar to mine was back in the day.

This article is totally irrelevant. How do they think baby boomers managed to buy property? Their parents were generally extremely poor so they didn't have the bank of Mym and Dad. No they savbed and vorrowed every penny they could in order to try and save for their old age. Now the government has removed that possibility with section 24 taxation. It is not the fault of the people who have bought the properties that the asset has increased in value so much. That is due to the constant investment into social housing provided by the government and their demands that private builders supply it. Of course the builders can only supply it by increasing the price of the private sales if the government will not pay for it. Anyway what previous generations have is irrelevant. How dare they decide that people who have worked hard to provide for themselves should be penalised. Will the government pay for them? We will all leave the country for good and stop paying tax altogether like Mark.

I still pay UK tax Fen, just a lot less than I would if I had stayed.

PS - the weather is better here too, oh and by the way, I rent here LOL

It is stupid to lump landlords in with second-home owners as if they were the same. The former increased the quantity of accommodation available for full-time occupation, whereas the latter reduced it.

Landlords increased the number of dwellings in England by 2.5 million between 1996 and 2013. That was 83% of the total increase of 3 million.
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/467800/Bulletin_12Aug2015_FINAL.pdf

Landlords did this by financing new builds, by rehabilitating run-down properties or by converting large residential or commercial buildings into flats or houses in multiple occupation (HMOs).

The younger generation owes BTL a debt of gratitude because if landlords had not increased the supply, both prices and rents would have been even higher than they are now. Instead they vilify landlords because they have been indoctrinated against BTL by a number of ignorant people, of whom Laura Gardiner seems to be one. She wrote

“Given that … we have a housing crisis that manifests itself in concerns about security and quality for those renting from private landlords, this state of play seems far from optimal. And to be fair, …policy makers have woken up to in recent years, with attempts at action. Stamp duty surcharges on second homes were introduced last year, and reduced mortgage tax relief for those engaged in buy-to-let came in this April.
These steps have pros and cons, but there’s a case for thinking even more broadly – from implementing the commitment to tackle empty homes in the recent housing white paper, to greater regulation of private landlords and increased security of tenure to shore up tenants’ position.”

No, the real housing crisis is the acute and chronic under-supply of dwellings for an ever-increasing population. Landlords were responsible for most of the increase in supply in recent years, but the tax change, which she seems to approve of, stopped them doing so. It has also driven some landlords out of the market.

Greater regulation, whatever that means, and lifetime tenancies will drive more landlords out of the market. As the private rental sector shrinks, more and more people will be made homeless, to be housed by councils at greater expense.

She ended with:
”These are options and challenges our Intergenerational Commission will continue to explore, because from the perspective of many of Britain’s real (sic) ordinary folk who still desire to own their home but find doing so increasingly out of reach, one house would be enough.”

She seems to be hinting that no-one should be allowed to own more than one dwelling.

I assume she is one of Britain’s real ordinary folk who still desires to own her home.

Presumably, she thinks that landlords should be forced to sell their properties to people who cannot afford to buy, and make homeless those tenants who do not wish to buy.

Axe the Tenant Tax published today a link on FB:
https://www.lettingagenttoday.co.uk/breaking-news/2017/8/tell-the-chancellor-what-he-should-do-----but-please-be-polite
Would Property 118 make a formal representation as a Landlords Union?
Any templates what to include in an individual representation? Should we go via our MPs? Or directly?
Perhaps that should be a separate thread?
Any suggestions welcome! Thank you.

I will put this to our campaign team, i.e. Dr Rosalind Back, Appalled Landlord, James Fraser, Dr David Price etc.

Thank you Mark, to be honest I was hoping for that.
Would love to join that group, but apart from being a landlord I do work full time in a corporation, so not much time left...

Another attack on landlords.The impression given in this report is that people who can t get mortgages will suddenly find they they can because extra taxes from landlords will somehow give them that ability.If you believe that you will believe anything.