Without immigration the UK would have a declining population, it’s quite obvious what’s driving unaffordable housing. You wouldn’t buy a house to rent out in a place with a year on year population drop would you.
Funnily enough loads of Tom Bloggs and Jane Does are going to be moving in and claiming a 25% reduction once this comes In to force.
Very convenient for the landlords, init?
Edit: I work directly in ctax and see this happen all the time. It’s entirely ineffective and impossible to actually enforce.
As long as they don’t do what SDLT does and make it expensive to exchange homes…
Labour are planning to build 1.5 million homes. Of these, there is only funding for 5,000 of them to be social housing. That’s 0.33%.
And then we wonder why prices are so high. Building more of any kind will decrease prices somewhat, but if it just gets bought up by cartelised giant landlords and development companies then prices will remain artificially high. If you look at Vienna, where rents are 1/3 of what they are in London, Paris, or Dublin, then you’ll see that having a large housing stock makes things infinitely more affordable. That means less money hoarded by parasitic landlords and more money spent in the economy productively. Tax big Landlords and holiday homeowners destroying local communities in Cornwall, Wales, etc, and use it to build SOCIAL HOUSING, not just “affordable” (80% of market rate, not so affordable) and private housing that’ll get snapped up straight away regardless.
We should be aiming to one day replace landlordism altogether, but for now let’s at least try not reducing our current % of housing under social ownership FFS. I’d even take 20%, just a tiny crumb, Mrs Reeves!
Yes I would like to buy that bridge you are selling, thank you.
Cut off health care at the age of retirement. We are now living too long in every sense of society. We need to stop holding on and learn to let go.
How does this apply to companies?
I mean, OK – a landlord that owns a second home personally, will pay tax on it. But what if it’s a company with multiple properties?
Or what if its one guy with multiple companies (not properties)? So instead of having 15 properties, they just register 15 companies that each owns a property. Then they’re just like “*Second home tax? Not me. I don’t have a second home. I only have companies*”.
I know landlords would pay stamp duty & CGT when transferring ownership to a company but a) many rental properties are below the stamp duty threshold b) many companies already exist that own properties c) that’s just a one-off tax, not annual.
If we don’t build enough housing the obvious answer is charge a premium based on the number of excess bedrooms a property has versus the number of people who live there. A lot like happens with the few remaining council houses. If properties were occupied more efficiently we’d have less problems. Right now we have two many 3/4/5 bedroom homes occupied by single people/couples.
If you choose not to build the only option is to use the properties you have more efficently.
A tax on a thing that funds the thing it’s taxing? Stop being sensible!
In 2023 net immigration was 650k+
Government ambitions to create 1.5 million homes in two years are insufficient.
If they just enacted top-down default planning permission approval for farmers around towns and cities that are appropriate for expansion this entire problem would take care of itself.
The tyranny of the NIMBY majority must be opposed by a responsible government.
Question:
I’ve been saving for ten years to buy my first home. Last year, in a scheme to try and avoid paying care-home fees, my family had my grandmother gift 1/3 share of her home to me. I can’t use it as she lives in it, I can’t sell it either. It’s just paperwork. Also, when she inevitably goes into a home then the government will rightly come after these shares as it’s clearly deprivation of assets. My share, if I could access it, would be worth about £60K; but I can’t access it.
When I brought my first home, my deposit was reduced by almost 1/3, an amount that was crippling, because I had to pay stamp duty and I lost first time buyer status, so the bonus from ly help to buy isa. With the interest too, over the years, this is even bigger. I’m talking £8000 on stamp duty (comes off my deposit).
The reason for this is that I own 1/3 share in a house and that share is worth for than £40,000 and therefore is classed as a second home. Even though I see no benefit from it and can’t sell it.
I had no help to save for my home. I worked in retail for years, scrapping away to get my deposit.
11 comments
Without immigration the UK would have a declining population, it’s quite obvious what’s driving unaffordable housing. You wouldn’t buy a house to rent out in a place with a year on year population drop would you.
Funnily enough loads of Tom Bloggs and Jane Does are going to be moving in and claiming a 25% reduction once this comes In to force.
Very convenient for the landlords, init?
Edit: I work directly in ctax and see this happen all the time. It’s entirely ineffective and impossible to actually enforce.
As long as they don’t do what SDLT does and make it expensive to exchange homes…
Labour are planning to build 1.5 million homes. Of these, there is only funding for 5,000 of them to be social housing. That’s 0.33%.
And then we wonder why prices are so high. Building more of any kind will decrease prices somewhat, but if it just gets bought up by cartelised giant landlords and development companies then prices will remain artificially high. If you look at Vienna, where rents are 1/3 of what they are in London, Paris, or Dublin, then you’ll see that having a large housing stock makes things infinitely more affordable. That means less money hoarded by parasitic landlords and more money spent in the economy productively. Tax big Landlords and holiday homeowners destroying local communities in Cornwall, Wales, etc, and use it to build SOCIAL HOUSING, not just “affordable” (80% of market rate, not so affordable) and private housing that’ll get snapped up straight away regardless.
We should be aiming to one day replace landlordism altogether, but for now let’s at least try not reducing our current % of housing under social ownership FFS. I’d even take 20%, just a tiny crumb, Mrs Reeves!
Yes I would like to buy that bridge you are selling, thank you.
Cut off health care at the age of retirement.
We are now living too long in every sense of society.
We need to stop holding on and learn to let go.
How does this apply to companies?
I mean, OK – a landlord that owns a second home personally, will pay tax on it. But what if it’s a company with multiple properties?
Or what if its one guy with multiple companies (not properties)? So instead of having 15 properties, they just register 15 companies that each owns a property. Then they’re just like “*Second home tax? Not me. I don’t have a second home. I only have companies*”.
I know landlords would pay stamp duty & CGT when transferring ownership to a company but a) many rental properties are below the stamp duty threshold b) many companies already exist that own properties c) that’s just a one-off tax, not annual.
If we don’t build enough housing the obvious answer is charge a premium based on the number of excess bedrooms a property has versus the number of people who live there. A lot like happens with the few remaining council houses. If properties were occupied more efficiently we’d have less problems. Right now we have two many 3/4/5 bedroom homes occupied by single people/couples.
If you choose not to build the only option is to use the properties you have more efficently.
A tax on a thing that funds the thing it’s taxing? Stop being sensible!
In 2023 net immigration was 650k+
Government ambitions to create 1.5 million homes in two years are insufficient.
If they just enacted top-down default planning permission approval for farmers around towns and cities that are appropriate for expansion this entire problem would take care of itself.
The tyranny of the NIMBY majority must be opposed by a responsible government.
Question:
I’ve been saving for ten years to buy my first home.
Last year, in a scheme to try and avoid paying care-home fees, my family had my grandmother gift 1/3 share of her home to me. I can’t use it as she lives in it, I can’t sell it either. It’s just paperwork. Also, when she inevitably goes into a home then the government will rightly come after these shares as it’s clearly deprivation of assets.
My share, if I could access it, would be worth about £60K; but I can’t access it.
When I brought my first home, my deposit was reduced by almost 1/3, an amount that was crippling, because I had to pay stamp duty and I lost first time buyer status, so the bonus from ly help to buy isa.
With the interest too, over the years, this is even bigger. I’m talking £8000 on stamp duty (comes off my deposit).
The reason for this is that I own 1/3 share in a house and that share is worth for than £40,000 and therefore is classed as a second home. Even though I see no benefit from it and can’t sell it.
I had no help to save for my home. I worked in retail for years, scrapping away to get my deposit.
Is this fair?
Comments are closed.