x
By using this website, you agree to our use of cookies to enhance your experience.
award
award award
award award

OTHER GUIDES & TIPS

Tax Clampdown on Short Lets Will Not Change, claims government

The government is ruling out any U-turn on the tax changes regarding furnished holiday lettings - despite substantial complaints from Tory MPs.

At the Budget in early March, Chancellor Jeremy Hunt announced that the Furnished Holiday Lettings (FHL) tax regime would be abolished from April 2025. 

The effect of abolishing the rules will be that short-term furnished holiday lets and longer-term residential lets are treated the same for tax purposes and individuals will no longer need to report the two income streams separately.

Advertisement

Applying to properties rented for over 210 days annually, the changes will impact approximately 300,000 FHLs in the UK. The removal of access to Capital Gains Tax relief, beneficial capital allowances, and exemption from finance cost restriction rules will make holiday letting substantially less profitable for many.

The justification given by Hunt in March was that holiday lettings, especially short lets, contribute to longer term housing shortages in tourist areas of the country and that this tax change would level the playing field - and encourage more landlords into long term letting.

In a debate in the Commons this week, the Financial Secretary to the Treasury - Nigel Huddleston - told fellow MPs: “There is broad recognition that the current system is contributing to some distortions. In my former capacity as Tourism Minister, I travelled around the country …  I had colleague after colleague and industry after industry making claims for and demanding the exact policy that we are introducing.”

He continued: “The problem is that if I were an investor thinking of buying a property in a certain area, it would make pure economic sense for me to get a short-term let rather than a long-term let. Therefore, in certain communities across the country, when a new property becomes available, there is an incentive for an investor to straightforwardly go for a short-term let rather than a long-term let because there is beneficial tax treatment. 

“We are not eliminating the tax incentives but levelling the playing field so that the perverse incentive no longer exists.”

Huddleston went on to claim that not all tax benefits for landlords were disappearing.

“After the abolition of the FHL tax regime, a higher rate paying landlord with mortgage interest costs of £12,000 per year would still get up to £2,400 taken off their income tax bill through the relief. 

“If they spend a further £8,000—for example, on insurance, letting agent fees and replacing domestic items such as sofas, fridges, washing machines—they could save a further £3,200 in income tax by using the reliefs that are available for all landlords. 

“It is about levelling the playing field. There will still be tax incentives, but we do not want that distortion. When somebody buys a new property or an existing property, there is a false incentive that is causing some problems, because human behaviour that naturally seeks a better return on investment leads them towards short-term lets, rather than long-term lets. That is what we are trying to correct.”

The irony is that the legislation required to enact the abolition of the FHL tax regime is unlikely to pass before the General Election, widely expected later this year. At that point the proposed changes fall, rendering the debate largely pointless as the current benefits will therefore not change for some time at least ,even if the Conservative return to power.

Want to comment on this story? If so...if any post is considered to victimise, harass, degrade or intimidate an individual or group of individuals on any basis, then the post may be deleted and the individual immediately banned from posting in future.

Join the conversation

  • icon

    Are they seriously saying people were campaigning for short lets to be treated in the same half baked way long term lets are? Surely people were campaigning for levelling up by returning long term lets to a standard method of taxation and removing the incentive to switch to short lets that way.
    Punitive taxation is what has led to the current housing crisis. Sucking short lets into the same regime isn't going to improve availability or standards. It will just make holidays more expensive.

    icon

    100% Jo. Even campaign groups were suggesting levelling the playing field by removing section 24 on long lets to encourage landlords back. This policy will not return short let’s to long let’s because, whilst more work, at least some money can be made as apposed to struggling to make a BTL wash its face. This is simply a PR stunt with a handy tax grab attached!

     
  • icon

    What a bunch how do they get jobs in Parliament , all snouts in the trough and they wonder why landlords are getting out and have so much property vacant paying double c/tax he’s so much out of touch or deliberately misleading.
    He claims he has colleague after colleague and industry after industry demanding he introduce this exact policy that’ll be his mates the big boys squeeze the small private guys out for his Corporate friends to take over.
    It would make pure economic sense if you were an investor but you are not you are sucking the life blood of the smaller investor and the Country for the big Corporate to take over.
    I love the idea if you spend £8’000.00 extra costs with your back to the wall he calls that a saving of £3’200.00, is he off his trolley, how could that be a saving the £8’000.00 is already gone.

  • George Dawes

    Jeremy Hunt rhyming slang

    Peter Why Do I Bother

    His middle name is Whata

     
    icon

    😂 😂 😂 😂 😂 😂. 👍

     
  • icon

    Is this the same Jeremy Hunt who setup a special purpose vehicle to purchase a block of 7 flats (thus saving a considerable amount of SDLT) and therefore unaffected by S24 that us mere plebs have to suffer? That same Jeremy Hunt? Oh well, that's ok then.

  • icon

    So what happens to a holiday business in a block of 5 flats that have never been residential and not to residential building regs, is the only option to sell, and who then provides accommodation for holidaymakers that keep all the small businesses going.

  • icon

    I used to own a holiday park which had 2 bedroom bungalows. Planning permission ONLY allowed them to be used for holiday purposes, NOT residential. So whatever is done it would not change the local residential housing supply!

    icon

    Richard, we have 2 bungalows of this exact type and are struggling to break even at the moment. We don't have loans luckily so won't be caught by section 24 but had hoped eventually to get business asset disposal relief. I pointed out my mp that our properties and many like them cannot be residential whatever happens and it went straight over his head.

     
icon

Please login to comment

MovePal MovePal MovePal