A return to MIRAS - what do you think?

Butterfly_Brain

No

We pay too much bloody tax in this country as it is :mad:

i dare say the politicians of all parties are thinking of more stealth taxes to squeeze us dry when the banks should be made to pay for their fraud!!!!!!! :mad: :mad: :mad:

carolt

StevieJ wrote: »

They could disallow any business expense that they choose, they choose to allow interest on BTL does not tell you something about the govts fiscal policy as it relates to housing and how they see BTL as a neccessity at the current time. Have a thought for Carol, where would she live if there was no BTL?

You're having a laugh. :rotfl:

I'd live in exactly the same house, except (a) I'd own it, and (b) the price would be significantly lower than it is currently.

carolt

olly300 wrote: »

And once you have a few properties you are going to need to hire plumbers, builders, gardeners, etc to maintain them. You are also going to have to advertise the properties when vacant providing income for the hated estate agents, online publishers or news agents.

Quite a few of my landlords due to their business of property rental gave other people jobs that wouldn't have existed if they hadn't brought houses to rent out.

Oh come off it - if they were owner occupied instead, they'd provide far more jobs - ownier-occupiers would still employ the same plumbers, builders, gardeners etc etc BUT they'd also buy more furniture, more often, redecorate more, etc - precisely how many landlords spend more money on the upkeep of their rented properties than they do on their own homes? :rotfl:

A lot of jokers on this thread...

carolt

kennyboy66 wrote: »

It is anything but a red herring. There is no supply and demand flex for property in the UK.
Supply is effectively fixed because of planning constraints. BTL has therefore played a significant part in increasing price for certain types of properties.
It thus increases the supply of rented properties but not the overall supply of properties. Then demand for rental properties increases (as buyers are priced out) so rental prices don't fall to any extent (as they might if overall supply was increased).

Great post.

wymondham

silvercar wrote: »

You used to be able to get £30k MIRAS each as a couple, but only one lot of £30k if you were married. I remember people moaning how they were losing out by getting married. I don't think the WIKI article has the dates quite right. I thought it was finally abolished before 2000, possibly as early as 1990. I remember it was restricted to basic rate and then 15%, possibly down to 10%, then abolished.

Yes it was gradually reduced. Did'nt make much impact on payments though and did'nt make much impact when it was scrapped. It's something from the past that would not really have any impact if re-introduced.

laurel7172

No

Remember that the last property boom/crash was at least partly caused by Conservative tinkering with MIRAS-they announced they were going to (effectively) halve it by withdrawing the double relief for unmarried couples and set off a property buying panic...

The market adjusts for subsidy, just like it adjusted for cheap and readily available credit. A return to MIRAS would cost billions, and house prices would rise and mop it up so nobody was better off. Lose: lose. Unless you're a housebuilder.