Spending Review 2015 – 3% increase on Stamp Duty for BTL and second homes

Spending Review 2015 – 3% increase on Stamp Duty for BTL and second homes

14:30 PM, 25th November 2015, About 9 years ago 224

Text Size

GeorgeThe Chancellor George Osborne in his spending review today announced that he will increase Stamp duty for Buy to Let properties and second homes with a surcharge of 3% from April 2016.

The Chancellor said he wanted to change from generation rent to generation buy. He was concerned that Cash Purchasers and foreign investors, who were not affected by the relief cap of 20% on  mortgage interest, along with Buy to Let investors were squeezing out home buyers. Therefore there will be an increase of 3% in stamp duty for non-main residence purchasers, which would also raise an additional £1bn in tax.

The Housing budget will now be doubled to £2bn per annum and a project to build 400,000 new affordable homes to buy will be started. Osborne said “this government chooses to build.”

These affordable homes will be offered to First Time Buyers at a discount of 20%, and 135,000 new homes will be offered under Help to Buy shared ownership.

A London Help to Buy scheme will offer interest-free loans up to a maximum of 40% of the value of a newly built home.

Restrictions on shared ownership will be removed and the planning system reformed to deliver more homes.

Councils will also receive an additional £10m to help homeless people.

It is the Chancellors clear policy to help solve the housing crises by building more homes and squeezing the competitiveness of the Private Rental Sector thus shifting the balance from renting to home ownership.

stamp

Commercial property investors, with more than 15 properties, are expected to be exempt from the new charges.


Share This Article


Comments

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

10:09 AM, 28th November 2015, About 9 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Manchester Landlord" at "28/11/2015 - 09:47":

Yes, I agree and have just posted on the reactions thread too.

Costas Tzanos

Become a Member

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

Sign Up

9:53 AM, 29th November 2015, About 9 years ago

I believe this new stamp duty rule will do much more damage to the buy to let, redevelopment business than clause 24, as many more people will be affected by this tax change. Clause 24 only had serious consequences for those who had purchased with high leverage, this affects anyone with more than 1 property.

It may still make sense for me to carry on buying via my limited company, as am using funds from my other company above bad beyond the 42k or so that gets hit by the new 33.5% dividend tax, and so its still a more efficient way to take money out of my first business...... but what a complete ball ache. Buy to let for small operators really is now dead in the water. The only other really attractive option is put my money into SIPPS. With a tracker fund ETF yielding on average 8%, I am surprised if a lot more other people who where looking towards buy to let would now not think that is a much more attractive option.

Costas Tzanos

Become a Member

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

Sign Up

9:56 AM, 29th November 2015, About 9 years ago

One option I was thinking about, if I where to buy a property under my own name (not ltd) and claim it as my main residence, then 6 months down the line convert that to a buy to let and buy a new one which I would claim is not going to be my main residence, would that not be one way of getting around the increased Stamp duty, or would my original purchase be classed as a second home, even though I have converted it to a buy to let?

Costas Tzanos

Become a Member

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

Sign Up

10:04 AM, 29th November 2015, About 9 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Costas Tzanos" at "29/11/2015 - 09:56":

Correction above....should read is NOW going to be my main residence. ...not NOT

James dengel

Become a Member

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

Sign Up

12:17 PM, 29th November 2015, About 9 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Costas Tzanos" at "29/11/2015 - 09:56":

No because it would involve a sale to the limited company buying so stamp duty would be payable.

If keeping it in your own name then the second purchase would be classed as a second property. They want to tax people who buy more than one property or companies that buy a property, regardless of use.
Holiday, second home, but to let.

S.E. Landlord

Become a Member

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

Sign Up

12:56 PM, 29th November 2015, About 9 years ago

I am inclined to think the introduction of the additional 3% stamp duty was in response to the many references in letters saying that the change in tax relief did not affect cash buyers or holiday homes.

The legislation will need to be carefully worded if it is not going to catch the primary residence of those with a second or buy to let property who actually want to move. I expect there to be a requirement to prove the purchase is a main residence and it may be that the additional stamp duty becomes due if that changes.

money manager

Become a Member

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

Sign Up

12:57 PM, 29th November 2015, About 9 years ago

We'll have to wait and see the results of consultation on corporate exemption but I am wondering if there might be an avenue for incorporation under a group umbrella with another landlord (to qualify for the 15 unit level exemption). If set at that simplistic level it might even become worthwhile to buy a couple of cheap properties if you are short.

Tracey Hoad

Become a Member

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

Sign Up

14:14 PM, 29th November 2015, About 9 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Costas Tzanos" at "29/11/2015 - 09:53":

It does sound attractive Costas simply because a SIPP doesn't need to be refurbished or have a boiler replaced if someone doesn't know how to look after a home.

chris jones

Become a Member

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

Sign Up

18:15 PM, 29th November 2015, About 9 years ago

what do we know exactly about the corporate exemption, is it just going to be no 3% or could it be more than 3% taken off (or less )

James dengel

Become a Member

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

Sign Up

9:45 AM, 30th November 2015, About 9 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "S.E. Landlord" at "29/11/2015 - 12:56":

I don't think it will be worded as such.

I think it will be as it's said, buying a second property you pay an extra 3% regardless of motive. They don't want any loopholes. They want to force you to pay extra or only have a single home.

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