PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING

Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.

Advice please! Already own one property as buy to let but trying to buy second

cwt
cwt Posts: 2 Newbie
in House buying, renting & selling
Hey everyone

I would be grateful for any advice on stamp duty that I could get. I currently am an accidental landlord, I bought an apartment in 2006 (shared ownership 50/50 with a sibling) and the market crashed. I relocated to another part of the country to retain in a different profession and the original property has been on a buy to let since 2008. I wanted to sell originally but the property was in negative equity.

I'm now trying to buy a second property as my main residence as I still live in my parents house currently. I still have a buy to let mortgage on the first property. My question is would I be charged the extra stamp duty for the second property?
«1

Comments

  • G_M
    G_M Posts: 51,977 Forumite
    Name Dropper First Anniversary First Post Combo Breaker
    Of course.

    Additional SDLT is charged on puchase of a 2nd (or additional)property unless

    a) it is your main residence and
    b) you are selling your current main residence

    You are doing neither of the above.
  • cwt
    cwt Posts: 2 Newbie
    Thanks for the advice. it all seems a little unfair given I'm effectively stuck with the original property. If I sold it within the completion date then I wouldn't be charged I presume.
  • G_M
    G_M Posts: 51,977 Forumite
    Name Dropper First Anniversary First Post Combo Breaker
    If it's your only property, and you sell it first, then you'll not be buying an additional property as you'll end up owning just one property.

    Therefore the additional SDLT will not apply.

    The tax is to dissuade peopke from owning 2 or more properties. This is because, as you may have heard, there is a shortage of housing in the country.

    (OK - it's to raise money for the government too, from people who are either rich enough to afford 2 homes, or who are earning rent from a BTL business).
  • AFF8879
    AFF8879 Posts: 651 Forumite
    First Anniversary First Post Name Dropper
    Is the property still in negative equity? Doesn't affect your SDLT liability but sounds odd that it hasn't recovered in 9 years including the booms of 2015 etc.
  • dinkylink
    dinkylink Posts: 228 Forumite
    First Anniversary First Post
    Brace yourself; they don't like the term accidental landlord round here! :rotfl:
  • Marvel1
    Marvel1 Posts: 7,171 Forumite
    Name Dropper First Post First Anniversary
    AFF8879 wrote: »
    Is the property still in negative equity? Doesn't affect your SDLT liability but sounds odd that it hasn't recovered in 9 years including the booms of 2015 etc.

    Depends on areas, i'm probably the same since 2007.
  • hazyjo
    hazyjo Posts: 15,470 Forumite
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post Photogenic
    cwt wrote: »
    Thanks for the advice. it all seems a little unfair given I'm effectively stuck with the original property. If I sold it within the completion date then I wouldn't be charged I presume.

    Why is it unfair? Who told you that property prices only go one way? I don't get why people are so shocked when prices fall. In all that time surely you're not still in negative equity - you must have paid a chunk off by now, and, as above, prices have risen or reached what they were in 2009 in most areas. It's not in the least bit unfair - just sell the old property and buy another one.

    It was perhaps unfortunate for you that you (presumably) had to leave your current job and move so far away to get another job. Obviously in a falling market, it's advisable to stay put - or, if not actually owing more than you can sell for - ie negative equity - then you move to something bigger/pricier which you might not otherwise have afforded.

    If you sold it before the completion date, you would not be charged. If you sell within 3 years - you can claim it back.

    Jx
    2023 wins: *must start comping again!*
  • AnotherJoe
    AnotherJoe Posts: 19,622 Forumite
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post Photogenic
    hazyjo wrote: »
    Why is it unfair? Who told you that property prices only go one way? I don't get why people are so shocked when prices fall. In all that time surely you're not still in negative equity - you must have paid a chunk off by now, and, as above, prices have risen or reached what they were in 2009 in most areas. It's not in the least bit unfair - just sell the old property and buy another one.

    It was perhaps unfortunate for you that you (presumably) had to leave your current job and move so far away to get another job. Obviously in a falling market, it's advisable to stay put - or, if not actually owing more than you can sell for - ie negative equity - then you move to something bigger/pricier which you might not otherwise have afforded.

    If you sold it before the completion date, you would not be charged. If you sell within 3 years - you can claim it back.

    Jx

    I believe that's incorrect, although a common misunderstanding.

    From what I've read here, the 3 year concession only applies if it's your main residence you sell later. E.g. you live in A, buy B, then sell A it applies . AIUI that doesn't apply if you live in C , then buy B and then sell A)
  • sparky130a
    sparky130a Posts: 660 Forumite
    dinkylink wrote: »
    Brace yourself; they don't like the term accidental landlord round here! :rotfl:

    Probably because in most cases it's a disingenuous claim and not at all accurate...
  • sheramber
    sheramber Posts: 19,058 Forumite
    First Anniversary I've been Money Tipped! First Post Name Dropper
    AnotherJoe wrote: »
    I believe that's incorrect, although a common misunderstanding.

    From what I've read here, the 3 year concession only applies if it's your main residence you sell later. E.g. you live in A, buy B, then sell A it applies . AIUI that doesn't apply if you live in C , then buy B and then sell A)

    yES, IT IS only of you sell your main residence that you can claim it back.

    As your main residence is now your parents' home that doe not apply to you.
This discussion has been closed.
★ ★ ★ Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 343.1K Banking & Borrowing
  • 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 449.7K Spending & Discounts
  • 235.2K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 607.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 173K Life & Family
  • 247.8K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards