BTL is in desperate need of reform

Graham_Devon

StevieJ wrote: »

Wrong, I don't see why someone should pay tax on income when they are having to pay rent elsewhere.

They didn't have to, did they. They made a decision to do that, by holding on to the house.

Maybe those with 2 cars and one driver should get a rebate as they can't drive both on the roads at the same time. This could go on and on.

StevieJ

Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »

But why do you feel the taxpayer should make you better off than any other renter?

Why would you be better off, I thought that house prices were about to collapse?

Wee_Willy_Harris

StevieJ wrote: »

Why would you be better off, I thought that house prices were about to collapse?

Well, if that's what you believe, then you must be a mug for not selling now.

IveSeenTheLight

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Quite the opposite. If BTL's were discouraged, for example, house prices would fall, and less would rent.

Try taking this step by step and consider what the likely events would be.
If there's a reduction in rental stock, thus limitting the supply, what would be the likelyhood to rents?

IveSeenTheLight

DexterA wrote: »

No, that's what happened. I've said they should reverse it, nationalise the rental stock to avoid BTLs profiteering from non home owners situation.

Try to keep up.

Where are the funds going to come to re-nationalise social housing?

Try to think ahead

P.S. I responded to your one and only post in this thread and there was nothing about reversing the social housing sell off. Maybe your forgetting which logon you are commenting on.
Indeed, your post was

Originally Posted by DexterA
Rentals transfer money from the have nots to the wealthy, many who live in tax havens abroad. They are a drain on society. All rental stock should be nationalised and used for the good of the nation. The FSA needs to take ownership of the BTL problem and show some teeth.

IveSeenTheLight

Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »

Even in some parts of England. Whilst I appreciate your opinion on the practical impact of registration, that applies only to the system you have in Scotland. Your comments, whilst fair, don't devalue the argument for registration as such, merely the gentler regulation they have north of the border.

I didn't mean for it to come across as devaluing the argument for registration, just merely pointing out that it is not as rigourus as some would wish for.

Is the registration in some parts of England stricter? Do you have a link?

Wee_Willy_Harris

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Try taking this step by step and consider what the likely events would be.
If there's a reduction in rental stock, thus limitting the supply, what would be the likelyhood to rents?

The main reason for that reduction in rental stock would be current renters buying, so there would be a corresponding drop in tenants too. Simples.

Wee_Willy_Harris

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Where are the funds going to come to re-nationalise social housing?

Try to think ahead

How about the savings made to the LHA bill for a start?

diable

I rent a council flat that is paid for by housing benefit I am on the dole so get free cash I work on the sly down the market and I also own a flat that I rent out earning me even more money, I love this Country and long may it continue, I am also of Eastern African origin but was born in Eastern Europe.........

Wee_Willy_Harris

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

I didn't mean for it to come across as devaluing the argument for registration, just merely pointing out that it is not as rigourus as some would wish for.

Is the registration in some parts of England stricter? Do you have a link?

Gladly...

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2004/34/part/3