Not a time to be a buy-to-let landlord

cells

mwpt wrote: »

That is why I said approaching but not completely the German model.

I think the rental market in the UK is quite good, there are some small tweaks that could improve the experience but also in any change there is a risk to make things worse.

PS I think I will retract my view that the UK should have some big reits landlords. IF we did I think a lot of housing wealth of the country would have leaked out to foreign investors and its probably better that it stayed mostly with the mini landlord with 1 property.


The UK housing market is more or less fine. The problem is London and to a much lessor degree the SE.

There is no easy solution to fixing the London 'problem' of 10 million more people wanting to live in London over the next 20 years but only space for 2 million of them.

cells

mwpt wrote: »

Measures to encourage stable returns in investing in new builds needed.

That does not make any sense. What does it mean?

The government steps in and puts a price floor and price ceiling on house builders?

Germany has a much more stable housing market because Germany has a much more stable population (or did until the mass migration of Syrians and the like last year). Germany has a much more stable housing market because Germany overbuilt homes during the 70s and 80s and inflation masked a real term fall from the mid 90s onward. The UK cant replicate that

Actually that is wrong, much of the country has followed a very stable nominal path. The north and midlands prices are flat for the last 10-12 years in nominal terms and in real terms for the last 12-15 years. Again back to London and to a lessor extent the SE distorting national figures and opinions

cells

lisyloo wrote: »

i am pro rationing of housing.
I haven't thought through a system and no doubt it's not easy, but I'd like to see holiday homes taxed in a highly punitive way. I realise that there would be difficulties around defining what is a holiday home and how you prove occupancy.
Maybe also those with excess housing taxed as well (yes a bedroom tax). Ideally I'd like to see that fairly imposed so those with spare rooms In use (like disabled people) are not penalised. In my view a spare room for a university student is fair game for taxation. It shouldn't be an automatic right to take up 2 homes whilst living in 1.

None of this is in my personal interest and I don't hate landlords, in fact I quite like them.

the rental sector is the most efficient sector to ration houses. Generally people are far more willing to move and far more willing to rent the right sized home for their needs due to a constant price signal.

the social and the owner sector are not like that, there is no price signal so there are old people living 3-4-5 bed homes when a 1 bed would suffice.

the bedroom tax tries to address this a little but its mostly ineffective.

maybe the councils and governments should 'forcefully' reallocate council housing. never going to happen but maybe moving out granny from her inner london 3 bed flat into a serviced council retirement block in outer london would be a good idea.

In fact it might be a very good idea for councils to build purposed built HMOs for the working age and also HMOs for the older folk (with a warden to help them with various small tasks)

antrobus

cells wrote: »

...the bedroom tax tries to address this a little but its mostly ineffective.......

Do you know that for a fact, or are you just guessing again?

cells wrote: »

....maybe the councils and governments should 'forcefully' reallocate council housing. never going to happen but maybe moving out granny from her inner london 3 bed flat into a serviced council retirement block in outer london would be a good idea....

A number of councils have been known to have bribed council tenants to relocate; councils have the power to issue fixed term tenancies, rather than lifetime tenancies, and might well be obliged to do so eventually, which would make it a lot easier to shift people.

cells wrote: »

...In fact it might be a very good idea for councils to build purposed built HMOs for the working age and also HMOs for the older folk (with a warden to help them with various small tasks)

HMOs for the older folk? Don't people normally call them Care Homes?

antrobus

cells wrote: »

That does not make any sense. What does it mean?...

Long term leases? Like Germany?

westernpromise

mwpt wrote: »

What I am against in the housing market is huge transfers of wealth, boom and bust

So you're "against" the last 70-odd years of housing economics then. How is that different from being "against" gravity, or death?

My belief for the rental sector is that it should be more in line (but maybe not completely) with the German model.

I'd vote for that. If we had German tax treatment of rental property we'd be allowed to charge depreciation off against the rent. So you buy a place for £500k, depreciate it over 50 years meaning you deduct £10k from the net rent before calculating the tax. The result would in most cases be no tax charged to landlords at all. That would flow to some extent into cheaper rents. Everyone wins!

Investment in housing should not be seen as a risky speculation with huge returns.

Who sees it like that then? The returns on housing are marginal. I own a place worth about £950k that lets for £30k a year. If 3% gross is huge return I'd hate to see what you'd consider a paltry return.

Higher BTL mortgage rates than OO.

You really haven't looked into this at all, have you?

lisyloo

antrobus wrote: »

HMOs for the older folk? Don't people normally call them Care Homes?

I don't think that was it.
There's a huge difference cost wise and otherwise between people living independently with assistance (wardens, visiting care, meals on wheels) and nursing or care homes which cost a great deal more.

The former is cheaper and more popular with people who like to keep their independence as long as possible.

I have no issue with older people being "helped" into appropriate accomodation.
If they over consume a valuable resource then under my proposals they would be taxed. Their age had nothing to do with it (unless they genuinely need a spare bedroom for mobility equipment).

lisyloo

So you're "against" the last 70-odd years of housing economics then. How is that different from being "against" gravity, or death?

Surely we can change housing economics in the future if there was the will to make it fairer?

westernpromise

If they over consume a valuable resource then under my proposals they would be taxed.

Astonishing. Just astonishing.

lisyloo

Please explain why.
It's with fairness in mind.
Didn't we ration food in the war? Was that wrong? Should it have gone to the highest bidder instead?

Really I do need you to explain what is astonishing.

BTW - just for clarity, this is tax not eviction. There is a choice, just as there is with cigarettes, alcohol etc.