First time landlords: VAT? Tax?

Miss_Samantha

Crashy_Time wrote: »

I know, I was trying to underline the point that many landlords seem to think they are entitled to pay as little tax as possible.

They are, as we all are.

Crashy_Time

Miss_Samantha wrote: »

They are, as we all are.

Fair enough, I should have said - Keep unfair tax advantage.

Miss_Samantha

Crashy_Time wrote: »

Fair enough, I should have said - Keep unfair tax advantage.

They don't have any unfair tax advantage either.

Crashy_Time

https://www.lettingagenttoday.co.uk/news_features/Buy-to-let-landlords-have-unfair-tax-advantages-claim

sparky130a

Crashy_Time wrote: »

https://www.lettingagenttoday.co.uk/news_features/Buy-to-let-landlords-have-unfair-tax-advantages-claim

A lot has changed in nigh on 4 years....

Crashy_Time

sparky130a wrote: »

A lot has changed in nigh on 4 years....

Yes, the government has changed the tax rules for BTL.

AnotherJoe

Crashy_Time wrote: »

https://www.lettingagenttoday.co.uk/news_features/Buy-to-let-landlords-have-unfair-tax-advantages-claim

That reads (on a skim) as biaised and incompetent since they mention things that give tax relief that are irrelevant or inconsequential (such as living in the house for a short while) and omit the main unfair advantage which IMO is tax relief on the mortgage.

I dont see why a private individual who happens to be a landlord should be able to claim tax relief on their mortgage whilst a private individual who happens not to be a landlord, cannot.

I understand this is going away for HRT payers but it still leaves many couples able to claim, where one is HRT and the other isnt, just put it all in the non HRT payers name.

If that relief was removed, that would go a long way to making a level playing field.

Crashy_Time

AnotherJoe wrote: »

That reads (on a skim) as biaised and incompetent since they mention things that give tax relief that are irrelevant or inconsequential (such as living in the house for a short while) and omit the main unfair advantage which IMO is tax relief on the mortgage.

I dont see why a private individual who happens to be a landlord should be able to claim tax relief on their mortgage whilst a private individual who happens not to be a landlord, cannot.

I understand this is going away for HRT payers but it still leaves many couples able to claim, where one is HRT and the other isnt, just put it all in the non HRT payers name.

If that relief was removed, that would go a long way to making a level playing field.

The article seems to acknowledge that in the first line - "Buy-to-let investors are unfairly competing against first-time buyers in the housing market thanks to generous tax treatment, according to a new report."?

Miss_Samantha

AnotherJoe wrote: »

I dont see why a private individual who happens to be a landlord should be able to claim tax relief on their mortgage whilst a private individual who happens not to be a landlord, cannot.

Because they are a business and in general taxed on profit.

Companies and sole traders can claim tax relief on loans, can't they?

AnotherJoe

Crashy_Time wrote: »

The article seems to acknowledge that in the first line - "Buy-to-let investors are unfairly competing against first-time buyers in the housing market thanks to generous tax treatment, according to a new report."?

Yes but the blurb doesnt cover mortgage interest relief (AFAICS, I may have missed it) , which IMO the major unfair treatment and much more of a factor than evading CGT by living in a house for 5 minutes, which it gives the misleading impression you can do. Why bring that up but not interest relief?