/_Kwasi%20Kwarteng_400x310.png)
The National Residential Landlords Association says controversial Chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng should use a £1.5 billion underspend to help buy to let investors and their tenants.
In a letter to Kwarteng the NRLA warns that whilst private rents are increasing by less than inflation, rising energy, food and other bills will make it more difficult for many tenants to meet their rent payments.
The NRLA also warns that landlords are struggling. The claim comes as the estate agency Hamptons has concluded that the impact of rising interest rates on mortgages raises the prospect of landlords making a loss on their properties.
Although government data confirms that landlords mostly prefer to keep rents the same to retain good tenants, the NRLA’s letter to Kwarteng notes that contrary to popular belief most landlords cannot shoulder the cost of rising prices indefinitely. It points to official data showing that 69 per cent of private landlords are basic rate income taxpayers.
The NRLA is calling on the Chancellor to adopt its plan for the sector, to be financed by a reported £1.5 billion underspend in budgets at the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities.
The plan includes:
1. Reforming the benefits system to prevent rent arrears in the first place. This should include unfreezing housing benefit rates. It makes no sense to have support for housing linked to rent levels as they were three years ago; ending the five weeks wait for the first payment of Universal Credit; giving Universal Credit claimants the ability to choose, at the start of a claim, to have the housing element paid direct to their landlord if they so wish.
2. Extending access to emergency housing support (Discretionary Housing Payments) to those not in receipt of benefits.
3. Scrapping the £400 Energy Bills Support Scheme payment, and instead repurposing the money, paying it direct to every household in one go, for them to use towards the increased cost of living.
4. Addressing the supply crisis in the private rented sector – the biggest driver of rents. According to Rightmove, in the second quarter of the year, demand for private rented housing increased by six per cent compared with the year before. Over the same period, the number of available properties was down 26 per cent. The NRLA says the Chancellor should therefore reverse the decision to restrict mortgage interest relief in the private rented sector; end the stamp duty levy on homes to rent out.
The association cites research by Capital Economics suggesting that ending the stamp duty surcharge would see almost 900,000 new private rented homes made available across the UK over the next decade. This would lead to a £10 billion boost to government revenue through increased tax receipts.
NRLA chief executive Ben Beadle says: “Both landlords and tenants are struggling with the cost-of-living crisis. We need a package that supports both to prevent rent arrears and sustain tenancies.
“Our proposals provide a pragmatic way forward that would have an immediate and positive impact on the private rented sector. We call on the Chancellor to act as a matter of urgency.”
Want to comment on this story? Our focus is on providing a platform for you to share your insights and views and we welcome contributions.
If any post is considered to victimise, harass, degrade or intimidate an individual or group of individuals, then the post may be deleted and the individual immediately banned from posting in future.
Please help us by reporting comments you consider to be unduly offensive so we can review and take action if necessary. Thank you.
.jpg)
%20(002).png)
.png)
Join the conversation
Jump to latest comment and add your reply
Come on let’s be honest. Landlords are concerned about how tenants are going have enough money to cover their mortgages (fund their lifestyles ) particularly now interest rates look set to rise.
You sound quite smug about all the hardship this will cause
No all I’m saying is the whole financial system is a mess. Banks should never have lent to people knowing this could happen (assuming it does).
I am not angry with landlords but l’m angry with Banks/ central banks.
It is a balance Gemma like any other business. This assumption that Landlord's are only interested in lining their pockets is a nonsense. 87% of tenants get on with their Landlord and enjoy where they live. As an industry that's not a bad figure.
Some of us actually care about the people we house.
How do you know anything about the lifestyles of landlords? As in any industry there might be a few who are making a lot of money (and maybe worked really hard to get there), but as most landlords only have a couple of properties that's unlikely to have a major effect on lifestyle. The job I had prior to becoming a landlord paid a lot more than I get from my rental properties, especially with the unfair taxation of landlords so I don't even get to take a holiday any more. So if you want to come on here and be rude, at least get your facts right.
Jemma, I don't know what political platform you support. But your ignorance of the strategically important private rental business is astounding. But not supprising
Sad Lordlord , What do I know about landlords? well I know myself ! and I also know my partner who is also a landlord. The differences he has a load of interest only mortgages where as I don’t and consequently sleep at night like my tenants can.
For the record I became a landlord in 1994
My tenants don’t fund my lifestyle which is a basic one. I haven’t had a holiday for years as I cannot afford one. I constantly improve and maintain my flats which are low rent. My tenants respect me and think they are in tenant- heaven. Soon tenant hell if I am forced to sell up to a normal landlord. Lots of good landlords will have to leave. Is that what you want to see?
Gemma we need more than help we need a miracle, let’s be honest you don’t need any funds to have our life style, Work, Stress, Persecution, Prosecution, Criminalised, Rent Repayment Orders after they lived in your Property for free, Fines. Penalties, Confiscation Orders, Banning Orders, Give them back 4 Deposits instead of
one, under constant attack by all of most useless people on earth, Classed as Rogue’s. I am sure you’d love it, nice lifestyle isn’t it.
Don’t forget when there trash your property & leave owing you thousands of pounds & are allowed to get away with Scot free because the law allows it as the system is totally against us, the court system is a joke
Further to Philip's comment - once had tenents completely trash a place,cost £25k to put right,turned to tenant's father,the guarantor,whose other son,just out of prison,then made it quite clear we'd be well advised to back off....so it's not all beer and skittles.
I had a similar situation and when I contacted the Police, they also advised me to let it go, but they would pursue it as threatening behaviour if I "really wanted to go down that route".
I've always thought it ludicrous, dangerous and potentially aiding perverting the course of justice that the home addresses of Landlords and jurors must be made public.
Decent citizens have all the cards stacked against them by the misguided do gooders.
Some salient points, but given the mess the government are in right now, there is no way on earth they can be seen helping landlords.
This is not the government fault (and I’m no lover of the government) . This a world wide problem caused by central banks.
This is the Government's fault when we talk about housing. Lack of investment in social housing being the biggest fault.
Then to make matters worse they turned on the private Landlord and created an unequal market. This resulted in a massive rent rise. Now due to this short sightedness and popular politics means that we are less robust to deal with the crisis that we find ourselves in.
And yes the cost of living is down to Putin and coming out of Covid.
Yes this absolutely and fully is the governments faults, successive governments over the last several decades have chosen not to invest in social housing, relying more and more on PRS. And then over the last 5 years they have brought in a raft of measures to push landlords out and further reduce the supply of housing for renters. A similar scenario exists with our energy independence (or lack of) that’s led to the huge energy price increases we are all about to face, but that’s a whole other rabbit hole I won’t go down.
We don’t need their help just call off the hounds enough is enough. Scrap THE WHITE PAPER now, Reinstate Section 21 the very foundation of all private Letting, although many in industry now do seem to know this, too green, too busy with their iPhones & laptops. I suppose they weren’t born.
Scrap Section 24, Give us back our Deposit’s, Scrap How two Rent and treating Tenants like idiots they know well how 2 Rent, that’ll do for a start.
Look at the energy crisis - when you increase the cost of supply then in the end the consumer pays more. If you increase the cost of supplying housing then in the end the tenants pay more. The government increased taxes on landlords and also the borrowing costs are going up. Rents are increasing because landlords are selling to because use they cannot make the sums work and they are sick of the increasing Red Tape and demonisation. Solution: lower taxes. Aside: taxes are at a 70 year high but everything is worse….. so where is all the tax payers money going? Yes, granted - more of it is now going to pay increasing interest payments on all the borrowing that the government has racked up….
Nigel, The benefits system is one of the biggest bills. Further the first thing that the majority of immigrants do is to have a baby, then lots of them..Further HS2, foreign aid, 4* accomodation for illegal immigrants. All the money unrecovered on bounce back loans, vaccines, unwanted masks etc.
Gemma Rose,
No doubt you are a graduate with a dead end degrees and lots of debt and looking to unload your debt on someone else. If l charged an economic amount for my wife and l, then we would be looking at a big loss. We have a Gean Royal family who are staggering hypocrites, without morals or scruples. Who accept massive cash donations and have a massive CO2 footprint, expect the taxpayer to pay for their extravagant lifestyle and loath to pay any taxes themselves!
Edwin you are talking utter nonsense concerning the Royals., though every right to express and have an opinion. But why on this forum.
Let's stick to the issue please.
This one made me laugh.
I’m a 57-year-old landlord who’s never had any debt in her life not because she’s rich because she worked hard. She made sure she didn’t get involved with loans she couldn’t afford knowing full well what could happen if interest rates ever .
That is a genuine reply I’m certainly not a young graduate !. …….I
wish I was still young again.
Never was a graduate though always out grafting and saving.
German Royal Family, spell checker altered it. think they had 2 generals in the SS !
1 - UC is a mess. The 5 week wait, the woefully low and frozen LHA, the bizarre per person amounts, the earnings disregard taper are all problematic. It actively disincentives people from working full-time or living as a 2 parent household. It would be a huge task to make it fit for purpose.
2 - Extending DHPs to people not in receipt of benefit is an interesting point. How many people don't receive Benefit but would qualify if they applied? I certainly have a tenant who qualifies for a UC top up but refuses to claim it. It may be misguided but he feels better about himself if he supports his family without benefit handouts. He is the epitome of why tax cuts are more motivational than increasing Benefits.
3 - Spreading the £400 over 6 months targets it far more effectively than a lump sum and is considerably cheaper in interest for the government. If it was all handed over now it would be a distant memory when the weather gets really cold in January and February. At least this way people will be able to run an electric blanket and heat up food right through the winter.
4 - Improving, or at least retaining, the supply side could be done in so many ways.
Scrapping Section 24 would be the biggest, most tangible help and would certainly retain more existing rental properties. No other business is taxed in this way so it would only be a case of bringing our taxation in line with every other business in the country.
Removing the 3% SDLT surcharge would help if any properties are still viable at the new interest rates.
Making a decision on EPC requirements so we can plan accordingly. Whether we can fund the work is possibly questionable with increased finance costs.
Scrapping the Rental Reforms White paper and starting again would help retain some rental properties. They must have worked out the bits we were OK with and the bits we weren't.
Very good points Jo, we need a fundamental turnaround and a different mindset when it comes to looking at private Landlord's.
I just don't think the Government understand that they have caused the problem. Until they realise this what chance do we have!!
You are absolutely right about the £400 payment.
The problem with heaping extra rules and regulations on a system (the PRS) is that is usually has unintended consequences (LLs leaving so rents go up). The problem with then handing people ££ to help them is that rent & other costs just go up and absorb the extra. The answer must be deregulating - stop trying to fix the system with little tweaks to help certain groups instead remove all the tweaks and simplify everything. In the end it will probably cost less than robbing Peter to give to Paul!
Same needs to be done to the tax system!
I'm rubbing my hands with glee... Lol
So Jason it makes you happy that there are people and families out there that cannot get a mortgage to buy, cannot get social housing, cannot find a property to rent, and those that have found a property to rent are facing large increases in rent, all this being caused by government and the likes of Shelter, you're a sad man
Gemma's comments start off with a sarcastic landlord's are concerned about tenants! It's in our interest to make sure tenants are OK. You can call it self interest but if tenants can't offord the pay their utility bills the first thing they stop is paying their rent. Blame the banks is fine but ultimatley the BoE and the Govt. printed money for too long and had interest rates too low., but I think she is having a go at landlords the banks is just an aside.
Well I’m not having a go at landlords per se …..this would be interesting yes possible but more interesting as I’m a landlord myself !.
I am concerned that a business model allowed to be built on debt . Tenants are human beings they shouldn’t have to worry about paying extra rent because interest rates are going up.
Being a landlord is not something we have to do it’s a choice. There are no guarantees, we are speculators and have had a nice run for her money..
Apologies for all the typos I don’t know how to edit on this website.
Gemma, Tenants should have to worry about rates going up. They live in a home that is worth usually hundred of thousands of pounds that they don't own. Somebody else does and it is financed somehow. It's either mortgaged and therefore the cost of financing their home increases so the tenant must pay otherwise if it's a loss to the owner they will sell it and need to move out. Or maybe it's owned outright and therefore the owner with high rates may be better putting their money in the bank and sell the property.
Therefore the tenant needs to pay.
Yep Nick I agree tenants certainly need to pay… I wouldn’t have anybody living in my properties for nothing !.
I’m just highlighting what a sad state of affairs it is when tenants are at the mercy of the Bank of England.
Gemma - just about all property occupiers are affected by Bank of England actions regardless of tenure. How can tenants be immune from something major that affects their landlord? Homeowners don't even have the luxury of UC or Discretionary Housing payments when the going gets tough.
Nick Van Hoogstraaten
"Therefore the tenant needs to pay."
Markets set prices, not landlords looking for a way out of financial difficulty because they borrowed heavily when base rates were at a 300 year low. Everyone is taking a hit at the moment in lots of ways. A shakeout of those who borrowed too much is inevitable.
Echis, this is a first I find myself agreeing with you on 2 of your comments, nothing wrong with borrowing money to make money within reason, but it has to be sensible borrowing, with low interest rates (which had to come to an end at some point) and banks throwing money at borrowers all too many find themselves with far too much debt now and a big problem around the corner
There is nothing wrong with debt or borrowing to fund a business. It needs to be thought through and stress test. If all good then should not be a problem.
The situation for some Landlord's has been that Osbourne turned this on it's head when he introduced section 24. Seeing the danger I started to sell my properties, but only when a tenant gave notice. Covid has then brought it's own issues where tenants have accrued significant rent arrears which means that Landlord's have had to plug the gap.
Unfortunately I now find myself in a position that I need to evict a tenant as they have not kept to our mutually agreed repayment plan and indeed have now missed 2 further rent payments.
I am also selling 2 further properties that will be on the market next month. I do not consider myself to have built myself on debt but I can see if I do not take this action the unfair tax of my loan payments could cause me problems in the not too distant future.
Other than my properties I have no other debt.
Osbourne should have only been allowed to bring in Section 24 for new loans. This would have included re-mortgages. How can you stress test something that would be introduced halfway through your 25 year mortgage term. This is why I spout on about Government interference.
Andy,In my opinion the royal family run the conservative party who, apart from Churchill are anti British. Unfortunately plenty of MPs are landlords who are allowing the financial juggernaut to roll over them. The financial institutions have decided to take over the PRS, logic and reason will not affect the situation. Also l was in part replying to Gemma.
Hi Edwin, like I said we all have a right to our opinion and life would be boring if we all thought the same.
I used to be indifferent to the Royal's and certainly this institution has it's faults. But, there is not a better system, in my view, and i'd hate to have President and all the voting that would involve. They have headed so many institutions that have helped change so many life's for the better, on balance i believe they are an asset.
I now find myself in a position that I have no idea where I am politically due to a poor opposition and a tory party that's a mess. In the past I have voted both red and blue.
All the best to you.
Some of us are royals and some are not, personally I respected our Queen an incredible lady, as for Charlie boy zero respect
Gemma, Virtually all businesses are built on debt and the Government most certainly is !
It's the ultra rich who are calling the shots !
I hear what you’re saying about virtually all businesses being built on debt and it shouldn’t be the case . The reliance on debt has snowballed and as each person gets a loan the next person has to do so to keep up thus ever increasing the amount.
When something goes wrong in this particular game/business the consequences hit people (the tenants) very directly so we have an awful lot of responsibility. Maybe this is one area that shouldn’t be so reliant debt. Remember this is a choice no one makes us do it . We do it to improve our own finances.
If it was about helping society I would’ve become a social worker , let’s be honest here !
Too much personal debt is bad. Good business debt where money is generated is good.
I don't think banks were lending so readily after 2008 when the interest rates were at an all time low, in which case properly stressed debt could not be easily obtained.
If it was not for section 24 a base rate of 6% would not be a problem.
Gemma my friend you can’t have it both ways. I am glad you had a good run but if you got stuck with a professional bad lot, working the system like I did and loose 12 months rent. The law shouldn’t allow this to happen.
Totally agree , some tenants can be awful and the potential loss of section 21 is particularly worrying but at the end of the day that’s the way the cookie crumbles then we can get out of it ….. no one makes us do it. Dreadful for landlords that have made massive losses and been put under a lot of strain due to the law not being fair.
Gemma, dear its not the way the cookie crumble, us cookies don’t crumble. This didn’t just happen it’s a deliberate contrived attack to drive us out using several means in transition of our business to Lloyds. Barclay. John Lewis , General Accident etc. I agree we have the option of getting out but why should we, not least being forced out by unfair competition and that’s so obvious and blatant it’s despicable. I am not dependent on Tenants to keep me or pay for my property. I subside my Tenants Standard of living, it would be far less stressful for me not being a landlord but didn’t know it was going to be hijacked by outsiders nothing to do with PRS aided by Government.
Gemma
I do not believe you are a landlady. You are full of communist polemic ! Debt has been around since money was invented. Properly administered and policed it's very good and allows people to enhance their lives. Unfortunately some people will fiddle anything and that includes banks, and their employees.
Edwin I don’t know how we do this but I’m more than ready to get in touch with you and prove I’m a landlady ….. all seems a bit excessive but I’m game for it !.
As to me being a communist (my partner is laughing his head off reading this) I have no political allegiance to any political party but usually vote Tory.
Getting back to your original point I rather like the idea of me having to prove that I’m a landlord as long as you’re man enough to admit you’ve got this wrong 😁
Gemma, you are a landlady, not a landlord. Everything about you says communist,-anti banks,vanti landlords anti marriage etc. Most landladies had the soubriquet of being 'battle axes ' because they had their skills honed by their tenants. As to proving property ownership, lve had to go to the High Court to prove l owned some property, ie fraudsters claimed they owned it ,
Edwin this is all getting a bit weird ……. where did I say anything about being anti-marriage ? 😂😂
Are you actually saying that I don’t own these properties I claim to have and that I have acquired them under fraudulent means 😱😱
Look I know it’s been a stressful few days for some landlords but come on chill out, it’s the weekend . I would suggest yoga or mindfulness to help you but I leave myself open to being called some sort of lefty woke feminist so instead I suggest you get yourself get down your local and have a few beers 🍺🍺 🍺
I agree with Andrew regarding the borrowing and partly agree Andy, I don’t think
that S 24 should lever have been introduced.
The last crash 2007/8 I seen a
particular Bank re-possess many with one exception. I knew a guy had bought a lot for property and his acids wouldn’t
Come near covering the debt guess what the Bank never touched him. He owed them £7m so he is now super rich.
Gemma
I stopped drinking a long time ago. I am not saying you are a fraudster, just that lt can be impossible to hang on to ones property and sometimes quite difficult to establish ownership.. Marriage is about protecting women, and since you are a woman and have a partner then you are not pro marriage. Unfortunately small landlords have a simple situation, sell up or get beat up.
Landlords need to remember that they are investors in the property market. And sometimes your investments go down as well as up. Do you think it would be reasonable for someone with their pension invested in the stockmarket to cry to the government asking for handouts? No. So why do you think landlords are some special class of investor? The fear that if people have to sell up then there will be fewer places to rent. Nope, there will exactly the same number of homes, but someone might be able to afford to buy their home rather than enriching a landlord. The sooner BTL and Airbnb owners sell up and make the properties available for someone to own themselves the better.
That might be true, if there were more people looking / able to buy than rent. Whenever I advertise one of my properties I get about 50 applicants in a week. When I sell there are maybe 5 viewings per week. So 10 times as many people wanting to rent. It doesn't help any of them when I sell a property, it's just another one lost to rental market.
Whilst I agree that there will be the same number of properties, the people who are made homeless when the landlord sells are unlikely to be the ones that can subsequently buy that property. So whilst someone might he able to buy that home, those original tenants have still been made homeless with even fewer rental properties to try and relocate to.
You'll be surprised how many people don't want to buy and how many people couldn't afford to buy even if given the chance.
It's not just about buying the house, you also have to afford all of the extra costs that go with owning a home and you can no longer call a landlord to fix it for you. And if it goes wrong and you're no longer able to afford your mortgage, you lose your home. The banks don't care about your sob stories then, but landlords are expected to.
It can't work both ways. Landlords are expected to care about their tenants and keep them safe, but regulation is making it increasingly harder to do this. In the end, it's always the tenant that suffers because the landlord has to walk away. Your ideal world of someone being able to buy a house ultimately still disadvantages the majority of people the landlord was housing because, as you say, there's still the same number of houses, but those tenants aren't going to be the ones living in them. It will still be 'them' and 'us', just in a different way.
House prices are going to go down as affordability goes down. People will be able to afford houses if prices drop enough. High house prices only benefit investors and people looking to downsize. One person's home should not be another person's investment. I am looking forward to house prices falling by 30+% I am looking forward to struggling BTL landlords having to sell (which will probably depress prices even more) and I'm looking forward to more people owning their home rather than paying the same amount to enrich a landlord. We do need to prevent foreign investors buying property as well. And prevent properties solely used for airBnb.
Harsh Reality, you are correct house prices will drop, 30% drop is very unlikely however, and that's only on paper, the loss is only made if selling.
More owner occupiers ? well if they can find the deposit, if they can get a mortgage and if they can pay the monthly payments as interest base rate hit 6% in a few months, a lot of ifs there , then as we go into recession and a labour government all the unemployment that will follow as sure as night follows day, now that's the 'harsh reality', still looking forward to it ??
I'm already hearing that they've dropped 10% in the last few months, possibly more. Given that we also have inflation of 10+% at the moment that is an additional reduction in value. Every month 100,000 people come off fixed rates and at the moment they are going to be seeing a 4% hike in rates, which they were never stress tested for plus higher energy etc costs. Landlords will not be able to simply put rents up because the tenants won't be able to afford it. Repossessions and distressed sales are coming.
Repossessions and forced sales are coming but in the main that'll be owner occupiers hitting the skids not landlords who are a little wiser than Joe Public
I am at a loss to know what’s happening. Property prices dropping won’t necessarily make them any more affordable when jobs and incomes have also been hit, don’t forget the huge rise in costs of living, energy, travelling not least more expensive Mortgage’s.
I have come across some LL’s recently who have interest only Mortgage’s can’t believe they got such good deals some have renewed and fixed again, for them no heart attack or stress, different mind set, they don’t care if it’s never paid off, simply arithmetic monthly rent so much minus repayments = profit take easy lifestyle nothing to loose really we must be mugs.
I agree. Prices will have to drop until they do become affordable. When yields on rental properties are similar to interest rates there is no profit. And when the asset is depreciating (as they are is already) - that's a loss.
Politics of envy.
What they forget is people work exceptionally long hours for a second property investment.
People work for years and save and scrimp for small best egg .
Generation rent, a lot of people will get their parents inheritance.
People want it all now and not have to work for it.
They forget us oldies had to live with our parents to until our thirties. In the 60's the council properties were given to immigrants not our own people.Politics of years gone by.
I agree to a point. However the BTL market distorts the housing market to the detriment of a group of people. Everyone needs a home to live in, one person's home should not be another person's pension plan. Secondly, this article is looking for landlord protection. That's a no. These properties are investments. like people who've worked hard and invested in the stock market, and investments can go down as well as up
Harsh Reality, you still haven't factored in what happens to the landlord's tenants if the landlord has to sell up and displace them? Where do they go in your perfect world? Or don't you care, because you may finally be able to buy the house they're being kicked out of? Is it a case that you're better off so that's alright then Jack?
As it's been said time and time again, even if house prices go down, people don't just suddenly have the money to buy them. Salaries don't just magically go up, energy bills, food shops etc don't magically go down. All you end up with, particularly in the short term, is even more people with nowhere to live. Will you be offering them your settee or spare room to stay in, seeing as you're delighted at the thought of impending doom? Might want to charge them a rent for it though, seeing as you probably can't afford to house them for free indefinitely.
Harsh Reality, if I buy a second home it a big expense, a lot of hard work and a huge financial commitment for decades, its not a bag of sweets. So you think I have a duty to hand it over to someone who didn’t
earn it, or just because they were born, give me a break the Country is falling to bits with free loaders. Harsh Reality indeed.
Ideologically I disagree with private landlords but it's permitted so that's something I have to live with. What I object to is those private landlords asking for handouts so that their investment doesn't produce a loss.
Harsh Reality, I also disagree with handouts to who ever, landlords, workshy scroungers, anyone come to that, further back you said one person's home should not be another person's pension, well that's your opinion which like all of us you are entitled to, my opinion differs
Harsh Reality. My friend what on earth are you on about with your ideology. As a Landlord what hand outs did I ever get or what are you eluding to, never one penny always and ever tens of thousands of £’s every year to revenue, one way traffic to Government &
Councils pockets, the Banks / lenders, Insurance & institution’s. You Say we exist so you’ll have to put up with us. not the case you buy one put your money where your mouth
is and give it to them.
Not too long ago there was no landlords letting property or fair to say before the 1988 housing Act, short memories if those guys that wants to call all the shots were even born. So right there was no B2L landlords can you tell me how perfect everything was then when we didn’t exist. There was no letting available at all and if let someone into your property they immediately became a sitting Tenant, so no one fool enough for that system. The whole housing was in crisis and stagnated people couldn’t buy, sell or rent there’s your answer. Modern people’s idea of harsh reality is like being savaged by a sheep.
Michael, you me and other landlords on here remember those times, most in society do not remember those times so cannot be expected to understand, but in the next few years they will be in for a dose of it, time will tell
The title of this article is "Landlords demand relief package from Kwarteng".
I'd call tax relief on mortgage payments a handout? The taxpayers were subsidising investments. It's not that long since that has (thankfully) been removed.
Harsh Reality, sorry I disagree, it isn't a hand out, mortgage interest is a cost to the business and as such should be tax deductible as similar costs are tax deductible by all other businesses, thankfully though I'm not affected by it, no mortgages and a basic rate tax payer.
Dreaming keep dreaming, Mortgage’s interest is a legitimate expense against the business, you have given it to the lender it’s gone not in your pocket and remember you’ll have your monthly re payment on the principal, try it some time and see.
It is, if you're running a business.. and that means with the assets owned by the business and corporation tax being paid on profits.
Please login to comment