Accidental landlord and new tax rules

Guest101

LisaV wrote: »

Wow.

I came on here looking for some impartial advice; not looking for sympathy, and not looking for judgment of my circumstances either.

I come back from work to find that.... there is only one comment, I think, with useful, impartial, detailed advice (thank you *booksurr* much appreciated.) Most of the rest of you seem vary between trying to out-!!!!!! one another, and generally hurling pedantry, abuse and judgement in my direction.

Clearly no thanks to you lot!! suggest you could do something more constructive with your time? You're being no help on here that I can see.

Perhaps paid for advice is what you're after?

LisaV

No, that's not necessary. I just need pointing in the right direction for the right information. Which is clearly, away from this discussion board! I am surprised, I thought the MSE Forum was better than this....

westernpromise

Booksurr's first reply contains the answer; basically the tax relief above 20% is progressively withdrawn from this April.

Rosemary7391

LisaV wrote: »

No, that's not necessary. I just need pointing in the right direction for the right information. Which is clearly, away from this discussion board! I am surprised, I thought the MSE Forum was better than this....

Mostly you'll get much better than this - stick around and you'll see. It's not always sugar coated but usually very helpful. It's just that the phrase "Accidental Landlord" is akin to waving a red rag in front of a bull around here, hence my suggestion for a warning!

chucknorris

westernpromise wrote: »

Selling and buying (eg) a £1.5 million house would blow £100k just on stamp duty, in return for which you get

ABSOLUTELY NOTHING

so a total, total squandering of money. You'd have to be going it a bit to lose £100k letting it out, renting, then moving back in.

A very common situation in London and the south-east.

My guess was about £1,300,000 based upon:

73,750 stamp duty
19,500 estate agent (assuming a 1.25% deal can be achieved)
2,400 solicitor
4,350 miscellaneous fees

100,000 total

EDIT: But obviously the estate agent’s fee can vary, but my wife is currently trying to sell a house for £1,100,000 and her agent fee is 1.25%, but if you used 2% for the agent's fee it is only about £1.2m. No idea how someone come up with £1.5m lol.

Bob_Bank_Spanker_2

chucknorris wrote: »

My guess was about £1,050,000 based upon:

80,250 stamp duty (assuming you would be liable for the additional 3%)
15,750 estate agent (assuming a 1.25% deal can be achieved)
1,200 solicitor
2,800 miscellaneous fees

100,000 total

EDIT: But obviously the estate agent’s fee can vary, but my wife is currently trying to sell a house for £1,100,000 and her agent fee is 1.25%. No idea how someone come up with £1.5m lol.

Why lol? Post 41 clearly states "selling my property and buying another" - additional 3% would not be due and makes your assumption incorrect. Indeed, my fag packet figure of £1.5m was confirmed by westernpromise in post 50.

chucknorris

Bob_Bank_Spanker wrote: »

Why lol? Post 41 clearly states "selling my property and buying another" - additional 3% would not be due and makes your assumption incorrect. Indeed, my fag packet figure of £1.5m was confirmed by westernpromise in post 50.

He didn't confirm it, he said the '£100k would go just on stamp duty'! So he was actually refuting, not confirming.

Your figures are still well out:

93,750 stamp duty (as he said the £100k is almost gone on just stamp duty)
22,500 estate agent's fees
2,400 solicitors
4,350 miscellaneous fees

123,000 total fees/stamp duty

EDIT: I revised my calcs in the earlier email to take account of no additional 3% and it comes out at about £1.3m, but if you used 2% for the agent's fee it is only about £1.2m. So nowhere near £1.5m

booksurr

Rosemary7391 wrote: »

Mostly you'll get much better than this - stick around and you'll see. It's not always sugar coated but usually very helpful. It's just that the phrase "Accidental Landlord" is akin to waving a red rag in front of a bull around here, hence my suggestion for a warning!

indeed, let us hope the next post is a Right to Buy wanting to become an accidental LL because they would avoid 100k of fees that way.

That would be serendipity for flag wavers and require many antacid pills (with or without coatings)

booksurr

westernpromise wrote: »

Wrong.

LOL - RIGHT

everything you have written simply attests to what I said, people become accidental LL because it is about their perceptions of how to make money through remaining invested in property. Bear in mind "make money" means the same as not losing money, although you may struggle with that?

Rosemary7391

booksurr wrote: »

indeed, let us hope the next post is a Right to Buy wanting to become an accidental LL because they would avoid 100k of fees that way.

That would be serendipity for flag wavers and require many antacid pills (with or without coatings)

Yes, well, I didn't say it wasn't that way for a reason!