Any financial help if you are self employed but also have rental income

fugitive333

Niv said:

Atlas234 said:

MattMattMattUK said:

fugitive333 said:

My savings are over thje UC threshold too, but the whole point of them is as savings, not to subsidise me not being able to work due to the pandemic.

What exactly to you think savings are for, if not to tide you over in the bad times?

To be honest it does seem a little unfair that employers and the self employed get grants and furlough while those who live off rental income are expected to use their own savings (I'm not a landlord btw so no vested interest) 

The OP is a bit of a hybrid which it seems the system cant catered for. He is not living off rental income otherwise the question asked would be moot.
Still doesn't change that fact that savings are there for the bad times. I agree that its not what you want to use them for but ultimately its why I have a cash savings account.

A bit of a hybrid - sums it up perfectly My Limited Company has been forced to close due to the pandemic and I went self employed instead but that has ceased. It does irk me slightly that certain people are getting left behind whilst others are getting handouts to help them through

[Deleted User]

Supermarkets are hiring .

MattMattMattUK

fugitive333 said:
 It does irk me slightly that certain people are getting left behind whilst others are getting handouts to help them through

That is and always has been the way of the world, one just has to deal with that and move on. I say that as a company owner/director, primarily remunerated through dividend, who has been unable to furlough myself (very low PAYE so not worth it, plus small amounts of work to do), with premises that are serviced offices so unable to claim the SBRR grant and has had my income fall by around 90%. I have just got on with things, sure I am not getting any handouts, but on the plus side I do hope that with my income being mostly dividend I will hopefully not have to pay for those handouts either (it is almost certain that IC and NI will rise, but nearly all of my tax bill is dividend tax).

Grumpy_chap

Jeremy535897 said:

MattMattMattUK said:

You can claim New Style Jobseekers Allowance if you have the relevant NI contributions and seek employment, apart from that not really, you have a large asset which you could sell. If you put the property on the market then it is disregarded for a UC calculation for 26 weeks, but if you still have an income from it that would factor into any UC calculation.

https://www.entitledto.co.uk/help/Own-other-property

You don't treat net rental income as income for UC, but it does become part of capital if not spent. The value of the property is treated as capital as well, net of its mortgage, subject to the point about putting it on the market.

Why on earth would UC ignore nett rental income?  And how?
This idea of UC ignoring asset value and ignoring the income seems absurd.

macman

Atlas234 said:

MattMattMattUK said:

fugitive333 said:

My savings are over thje UC threshold too, but the whole point of them is as savings, not to subsidise me not being able to work due to the pandemic.

What exactly to you think savings are for, if not to tide you over in the bad times?

To be honest it does seem a little unfair that employers and the self employed get grants and furlough while those who live off rental income are expected to use their own savings (I'm not a landlord btw so no vested interest) 

But if you live purely off rental income then you are not affected, as you still have income coming in. OP has not said that their rental income has fallen due to COVID, just their s/e income,

Pennywise

Atlas234 said:

MattMattMattUK said:

fugitive333 said:

My savings are over thje UC threshold too, but the whole point of them is as savings, not to subsidise me not being able to work due to the pandemic.

What exactly to you think savings are for, if not to tide you over in the bad times?

To be honest it does seem a little unfair that employers and the self employed get grants and furlough while those who live off rental income are expected to use their own savings (I'm not a landlord btw so no vested interest) 

Did those living on investment income think it was unfair that they didn't pay NIC on their income, whereas workers and self employed do have to pay NIC, which is fundamentally just another tax.

MattMattMattUK

Grumpy_chap said:

Jeremy535897 said:

MattMattMattUK said:

You can claim New Style Jobseekers Allowance if you have the relevant NI contributions and seek employment, apart from that not really, you have a large asset which you could sell. If you put the property on the market then it is disregarded for a UC calculation for 26 weeks, but if you still have an income from it that would factor into any UC calculation.

https://www.entitledto.co.uk/help/Own-other-property

You don't treat net rental income as income for UC, but it does become part of capital if not spent. The value of the property is treated as capital as well, net of its mortgage, subject to the point about putting it on the market.

Why on earth would UC ignore nett rental income?  And how?
This idea of UC ignoring asset value and ignoring the income seems absurd.

I wonder if there is some confusion here, you can if they are sub-tenants or lodgers, but that does not apply if renting out separate premises.
In contrast, under Universal Credit you will be able to keep in full all the rental income from sub-tenants or lodgers without it counted as income. However, lodgers, boarders and sub-tenants will not be counted as occupying a room in the calculation of the housing costs element of Universal Credit.
https://www.entitledto.co.uk/help/Universal-Credit-Sub-Tenants

Atlas234

macman said:

Atlas234 said:

MattMattMattUK said:

fugitive333 said:

My savings are over thje UC threshold too, but the whole point of them is as savings, not to subsidise me not being able to work due to the pandemic.

What exactly to you think savings are for, if not to tide you over in the bad times?

To be honest it does seem a little unfair that employers and the self employed get grants and furlough while those who live off rental income are expected to use their own savings (I'm not a landlord btw so no vested interest) 

But if you live purely off rental income then you are not affected, as you still have income coming in. OP has not said that their rental income has fallen due to COVID, just their s/e income,

Op stated as his s/e income is a low% of his total income so he's not eligible for the self employment grant.
While it may be totally correct under current taxation rules to treat his income in such a way. I was simply stating that it seems a little unfair to me to protect some people's income and not others dependant on how that income is treated for tax purposes.
 Same actually for the earlier poster who's income is mainly in dividends, it may be the lawful way to treat that person's income, but still feels a little unfair to me when we all still have the same bills to pay regardless of how that income is derived

Pennywise

Atlas234 said:

macman said:

Atlas234 said:

MattMattMattUK said:

fugitive333 said:

My savings are over thje UC threshold too, but the whole point of them is as savings, not to subsidise me not being able to work due to the pandemic.

What exactly to you think savings are for, if not to tide you over in the bad times?

To be honest it does seem a little unfair that employers and the self employed get grants and furlough while those who live off rental income are expected to use their own savings (I'm not a landlord btw so no vested interest) 

But if you live purely off rental income then you are not affected, as you still have income coming in. OP has not said that their rental income has fallen due to COVID, just their s/e income,

Op stated as his s/e income is a low% of his total income so he's not eligible for the self employment grant.
While it may be totally correct under current taxation rules to treat his income in such a way. I was simply stating that it seems a little unfair to me to protect some people's income and not others dependant on how that income is treated for tax purposes.
 Same actually for the earlier poster who's income is mainly in dividends, it may be the lawful way to treat that person's income, but still feels a little unfair to me when we all still have the same bills to pay regardless of how that income is derived

Rishi's support scheme is full of holes and anomalies, which he confirmed in Parliament yesterday were actually policy decisions!!
Like the way virtually no self employed person who started their business/self employment in late 2018 or later will be eligible for the SEISS scheme because they'll breach one or other of the qualifying criteria, i.e. self employment must have started BEFORE 5/4/19 (yes 19) and the s/e profits for the 18/19 tax year must have been more than half the total income for 18/19 tax year, so if someone had taken, say, a pension lump sum, or had a redundancy payment from their old job during 18/19, or just given up a job to start a business late in 2018, if their total income (from all sources inc pensions etc) was more than the business profits, they're not eligible.
It's good that the media and other politicians are starting to take up the cause of the 2.9 million (as per National Audit Office) deliberately excluded by Rishi from the SEISS or furlough schemes.
None of this if fair.  At first Rishi on record as saying "no one would be left behind" giving hope to the excluded that the rules would be changed over time, but more recently Rishi says "we can't help everyone".

Jeremy535897

Grumpy_chap said:

Jeremy535897 said:

MattMattMattUK said:

You can claim New Style Jobseekers Allowance if you have the relevant NI contributions and seek employment, apart from that not really, you have a large asset which you could sell. If you put the property on the market then it is disregarded for a UC calculation for 26 weeks, but if you still have an income from it that would factor into any UC calculation.

https://www.entitledto.co.uk/help/Own-other-property

You don't treat net rental income as income for UC, but it does become part of capital if not spent. The value of the property is treated as capital as well, net of its mortgage, subject to the point about putting it on the market.

Why on earth would UC ignore nett rental income?  And how?
This idea of UC ignoring asset value and ignoring the income seems absurd.

It doesn't. You have to understand the logic. Two things are measured for UC: income and capital. If you have a wage, that is income, but there is no capital unless you don't spend it. Then it becomes capital. If you have a rental property, its value (net of mortgage) is capital already. To count actual income arising from it as income for UC would be double counting, although if the net rent is not spent, it will itself become capital. See ADM H5:
"H5093 Where a claimant is treated as being in receipt of income yielded from capital then any actual income derived from that capital has to be treated as capital from the date it is due to be paid to the claimant . It cannot be treated as income. 1 UC Regs, reg 72(3)
H5094 The types of income which might be derived from capital include
1. interest
2. dividends and
3. rental income.
 Example 1 Pierre-Michel has savings of £8,000 held in a bank account. This means, that for the purposes of Pierre- Michel’s award of UC, the £8,000 is deemed to yield a monthly income of £34.80. At the end of the financial year, the bank credits Pierre-Michel with £170 interest on the savings. The DM treats this £170 as a payment of capital. Pierre-Michel now has £8,170 in capital yielding a monthly income of £39.15.
 Example 2 Scoot owns a second property which he does not live in as his home. Scoot rents the property and receives rental income as a result. For UC, the capital (the second property in this example) is treated as yielding an income and the actual income derived from that capital (the rental income) is treated as part of Scoot’s capital from the date it is due to be paid."

If the rental property is deemed to have no value, then there is no deemed income, but actual income is still ignored, except that it adds to capital.