Stock Market Vs Investment Property

jdw2000

CGT on BTLs is not an issue for most of the landlords I've spoken to. Sign it over to your auntie June and Bob's your uncle.

I bought my BTL from some bloke and when it came to all the paperwork a woman's name was all over it.

Frufru23

Also, with a b2l bought today, you'd maybe only invest 30% of the actual purchase price... the rent in theory will cover the mortgage to pay the remaining 70%, any applicable tax on "profit" and maintenance costs.

I've only had mine for 2 years...we've had some issues but financially it's been ok so far.

I do wonder whether I'd be better just investing it all in stocks and shares isas or the sipp instead but when I ran some numbers it seemed that the b2l held its own since I only ever funded the original 30% deposit.....

Ray_Singh-Blue

jimjames wrote: »

Stock market investments don't have a broken boiler 2 days before Christmas and all the associated hassle of trying to find a plumber to get it working again!

Houses are easier to insure

jdw2000

Without looking at any figures/facts, my feeling is that BTL is a better financial investment than shares/bonds.

I had a BTL from 2007-2014. I eventually sold it because I was tired of the hassle of it. Despite the fact that I always had good tenants and the flat was low maintenance.

I have now put the money into VLS70. I don't expect it to generate the amount of money a BTL would. And I also think I am far more exposed to losing value on my investment. But at the same time, I prefer it somehow. Just feels hassle-free and simple, yet at the same time potentially lucrative.

Pincher

jdw2000 wrote: »

CGT on BTLs is not an issue for most of the landlords I've spoken to. Sign it over to your auntie June and Bob's your uncle.

I bought my BTL from some bloke and when it came to all the paperwork a woman's name was all over it.

Even as a gift, the capital gains is crystalised on title transfer.
You have to provide a market valuation, typically supplied by an estate agent.

There is no stamp duty, as it is not a purchase.

I suppose you can transfer title every year, and use up the £11,100 CGT allowance of the current owner.

The woman could a patsy/mule, and the HMRC could be chasing her for not declaring capital gains even as we speak.

jdw2000

Pincher wrote: »

Even as a gift, the capital gains is crystalised on title transfer.
You have to provide a market valuation, typically supplied by an estate agent.

There is no stamp duty, as it is not a purchase.

I suppose you can transfer title every year, and use up the £11,100 CGT allowance of the current owner.

The woman could a patsy/mule, and the HMRC could be chasing her for not declaring capital gains even as we speak.

Let's not be naive. It wasn't a gift. It was a tax dodge. There are ways to do it and some unscrupulous ppl do it all the time.

Linton

Ray_Singh-Blue wrote: »

Houses are easier to insure

A broad portfolio of shares doesnt need insuring.

Eco_Miser

jdw2000 wrote: »

Let's not be naive. It wasn't a gift. It was a tax dodge. There are ways to do it and some unscrupulous ppl do it all the time.

You're being naive - that is precisely what Pincher meant.

Caravan_of_Love

Excuse my ignorance, VLS70?

bigadaj

Caravan_of_Love wrote: »

Excuse my ignorance, VLS70?

They mean half vls80 and half vls60.