CGT Changes

clutton_2

squat now says ""You are aware of what BTL/BTS has done to our economy arn't you? You do know that it's forced all the manufacturers to move abroad?"


what an astonishing assertion ........

When the right to buy was introduced, (and because councils were not allowed to use that income to replenish their housing stock), the number of council houses available at modest rents began to diminish, and the number available got smaller and smaller each year. Hardly any councils own property any more, it is has all been put into the hands of housing associations. The housing associations which i have come across provide appalling property, and dont do repairs for months and months and months.

Private BTL landlords are providing a service which councils no longer offer.


About 6-7 years ago Lenders began to realise that they could make money out of BTL landlords, so, began to offer "special " mortgage products at higher interest rates, and with sometimes obscene arrangement fees, so that they got a "piece of the profit action" themselves.

BTL landlords are not, en masse, the scum of the earth, as some here appear to think. We offer a service - as with any product/service some landlords offer a better service than others. Like any product/service you generally only hear about the tenancies that go wrong - there are millions of excellent tenancies up and down the land which run perfectly smoothly.

The "emotional" aspect of BTL =- ie - this is my HOME - you cannot be a nasty landlord and evict me, even tho i have not paid the rent, or annoyed the whole neighbourhood, or wrecked the house, = makes this a terribly emotive subject.

BTL is also a business - and some commentators seem to find this an obscenity - i am at a loss to understand why.

3-4 years ago the Average gross income for a landlord on a two-up-two-down terrace, almost countrywide, was £100 a month. This has gone down substantially as mortgage rates have increased 5 times in the last 18u months. Any business needs to increase its prices, if its costs increase - but some commentators find a rent increase obscene also - again i am at a loss to understand why.

Whether you like it or not, housing is now primarily in private hands - no amount of whining will change that - no amount of jealousy that some do not own their own homes will change that.

It IS still possible to buy cheap houses in the UK - but you might have to shift yourself and go live in a poorer area for a couple of years to gain some equity so that you can move on -

Dont expect to have a fully furnished designer all-fitted-out-brand-new-spanking-brilliant-house-with-all mod-cons-on-day-one.

The patently green envy of some posters is sad. BTLers, DO take risks with their own money - if my portfolio collapses, i am duty bound to repay my mortgage debts and i will lose my own home - so DONT tell me that BTLers dont take any risks with our own money.

Of course we are relying on our rents as income, small tho they may be, and we are regulated to the hilt - 69 different Acts of Parliament to be accountable to.

We are mainly relying on capital growth (when we sell - providing that government taxation policy has not taken away all our capital gain in the meantime) to give us some funds for a pension when governments will no longer provide pensions - we are getting off our bums and providing for our future and that of our children.

Folks who buy/trade stocks and shares also are doing the same, but with a far more liquid asset.

No doubt they are also seen as scum of the earth for making a profit.

Profit is NOT a dirty word - its how the world works - get used to it.

I am very proud of my business, half of my properties are let to single parent mums on benefits, and half to professionals. I treat them all with utter respect and politeness, and i do my best for them. They are my customers, and i see them as looking after my asset - why wouldn't i treat them with respect.

I find it terribly sad that such bitterness and envy is expressed here - please do not tar all landlords with the same tarred brush.

I dont tar all tenants with a tarred brush just because i have had 2 bad ones in 7 years.

Lets treat each situation/problem on its merits ......... and lets treat each other on here with respect and dignity, instead of inflammatory insults.

Melissa177

Response from George Osborne has just popped into my inbox..

Darling’s anti business PBR

Labour's brazen raid on Conservative Party policies may have dominated the news agenda since yesterday's Pre-Budget Report, but it is clear that it's the capital gains tax rise that will have the biggest long-term impact on business and enterprise across Britain.
By abolishing taper relief on capital gains tax, and introducing a new tax rate of 18%, Alistair Darling stealthily raised an extra £2 billion in tax. He justified this clunking tax change as a move to create a fairer framework for private equity, but failed to mention that the tax rise would actually fall hardest on hundreds of thousands of small businesses, entrepreneurs and investors in new start-up companies – many of whom are already facing higher tax bills after the small business corporation tax increase announced at the last Budget.
The Chancellor also omitted to mention that the new capital gains tax rate is higher than France’s (16%), Italy’s (12.5%) or the US’s (15%). We have become used to Britain’s tax system become steadily less competitive under Labour, but this latest tax rise, coming at a time of economic uncertainty, may well have a detrimental impact on the British economy, as reaction to the PBR from industry experts makes clear.
As the Federation of Small Businesses has said, “The PBR is bad news for small business, adding to the tax burden. The chancellor’s statement is a huge disappointment for most small businesses still reeling from the increase in corporation tax announced in the last budget.”
Paul Davies, UK Head of Tax for Ernst & Young, says, “The taper applies to many more areas than private equity and this will increase the tax paid by many employees of companies which offer other share incentives.”
But while Labour is turning its back on the small business community, the Conservative Party will continue to fight for a better deal. We are on your side. We are holding Labour to account for the ever-increasing regulatory and legal burden it has imposed on Britain’s small businesses, and we have set out bold policies to reduce this burden, for instance withdrawing from the Social Chapter and reforming the procurement system to make it easier for small businesses to access government contracts.
And of course, we will continue to fight for lower taxes for business. As I have said, we will reverse the small business tax increase introduced at the last Budget, which we will pay for by abolishing the complex new reliefs that were introduced at the same time. We will also continue to look at how we can reduce the headline rate of corporation tax by simplifying the tax system and sweeping away complex reliefs and allowances.
At the next election, whenever it is called, Britain will have a choice between a Labour government that is steadily making life harder for small business, or a Conservative Party that is committed to helping small businesses and enterprise flourish. Gordon Brown might not understand that small businesses are the lifeblood of the British economy, but the next Conservative government does.

George Osborne MP
Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer

BobProperty

clutton wrote: »

We are mainly relying on capital growth....

I agree with everything you have said except the above. I only looked at property which gave a good return in terms of the rent, like 15%. Any capital gain was a bonus.
I also find it peculiar that people who complain about BTL never seem to be bothered about Tesco making a profit.

SquatNow

You muppet. (Clutton)

People are only forced to rent privately because BTL/BTS has bought up all the cheap housing.

Yes there will always be a market for private rentals, but generally people would rather have their own place.

As BTL/BTS pushes up prices, people were forced to pay more which means they need to earn more. Once they demand wages above a certain level, it becomes cheaper to manufacture stuff in another country. It's not rocket science, it's basic mathes.

I know as a BTL landlord you like to THINK your providing a service because it means you can sleep better at night, but most landlords arn't.

Consider this: If no-one had to pay rent or mortgage, how much cheaper would they be to employ? About 90%, since most of the money you earn you pay as mortgage/rent, or for goods/services which are overpriced due to the manufacturer etc having to pay it's staff more due to mortgage or rent.

See?

clutton_2

bob - i have never solely relied on capital growth - i see that as a bonus - i bought when it was possible to get very good returns. i find it astonishing that more and more young investors are willing to buy zero-cash-flow liabilities.

squatnow - if you cannot do me the courtesy of debating in an adult manner ...... dont expect a response.

SquatNow

{bowl of milk, table 5}

OK I'm sorry, maybe I shouldn't have called you a muppet.

But answer one simple question: What VALUE do you add when you rent out a property... that is why is it better that your tenant rent from you instead of owning a property themselves? Detail roughly how many hours each day you spend improving each property.

BobProperty

SquatNow wrote: »

People are only forced to rent privately because BTL/BTS has bought up all the cheap housing.

Yeah, all the Housing Associations round here were bought out by BTL people.

SquatNow wrote: »

As BTL/BTS pushes up prices, people were forced to pay more which means they need to earn more.

Being offered 6 x income on a mortgage has nothing to do with price rises then? People were paying more but they were being lent more, much more, like twice what they would have been lent 20 years ago.

SquatNow wrote: »

It's not rocket science, it's basic mathes.

Thank f*** it's not basic English.

SquatNow wrote: »

Consider this: If no-one had to pay for food, how much cheaper would they be to employ? About 90%, since most of the money you earn you pay for food, or for goods/services which are overpriced due to the manufacturer etc having to pay it's staff more due to food. See?

Is that logical, Captain?

clutton_2

apology accepted (bowl of mile table five ????)

why do you think i ought to add value to a property ? i dont, yet, follow your argument.

Some of my tenants add value to my property by decorating and installing excellent fixtures - in return i dont increase their rent very often, but, i think i am probably a rarity in this aspect - like gorgeous george.

i add value to my tenants lives by providing them with good homes.

this may annoy you - but some weeks i do no work at all - other weeks i am on the phone at midnight trying to sort out problems. there is no way to regularise the work load.

budget_counsellor_shaz

Excellent points Clutton and Bob...........you should both change careers and become politicans:rotfl:

SquatNow

clutton wrote: »

why do you think i ought to add value to a property ? i dont, yet, follow your argument.

If you don't add value, why should you morally, be entitled to payment?

clutton wrote: »

Some of my tenants add value to my property by decorating and installing excellent fixtures - in return i dont increase their rent very often, but, i think i am probably a rarity in this aspect - like gorgeous george.

That's not adding value

clutton wrote: »

i add value to my tenants lives by providing them with good homes.

Unless you BUILT those homes yourself with your hands they you arn't PROVIDING them with anything. The homes were already there, you simply turn up once a month and demand people pay you hundreds of pounds if they don't want to be thrown out into the gutter.

clutton wrote: »

this may annoy you - but some weeks i do no work at all - other weeks i am on the phone at midnight trying to sort out problems. there is no way to regularise the work load.

So why do you get paid if you're not doing any work? I understand that sometimes you have to sort problems out, but surely if you are called upon to arrange for a boiler to be fixed etc you should be paid per hour (say, £10?) for carrying out that service, rather than £500+ per month whether you work or not?