PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING
Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.Current property owner and first time buyer - help to buy conflict
Comments
-
Goldcrypto wrote: »I meant to imply a new property owner - not necessarily 'first' time but not owning any other properties at time of the purchase. She would be flexible at looking at whatever properties and threshold (up to max value - looking to get most they can spend outside of London) is applied to the HTB EL to qualify for it - if she went that route.
??? :huh:
You do that HTB EL is only for purchasing new build properties don't you?Goldcrypto wrote: »Thanks. Are you aware of any restrictions to that or requirements to time needed to be owned before she could sell 50% ownership to him?
She could in theory sell half the property to him the very next day but it's likely she would face early repayment charges by redeeming the mortgage so soon. The equity loan would need to be repaid immediately and the higher rate of SDLT would still apply so it all seems a bit pointless really.0 -
You do that HTB EL is only for purchasing new build properties don't you?
Indeed. New build as from Gov site:
'Equity loans are available to first time buyers as well as homeowners looking to move. The home you want to buy must be newly built with a price tag of up to £600,000.
You won't be able to sublet this home or enter a part exchange deal on your old home. You must not own any other property at the time you buy your new home with a Help to Buy: Equity Loan.'She could in theory sell half the property to him the very next day but it's likely she would face early repayment charges by redeeming the mortgage so soon. The equity loan would need to be repaid immediately and the higher rate of SDLT would still apply so it all seems a bit pointless really.
Ok, so no restriction early repayment on the HTB EL. If she went that route he would not be ready anyway currently to buy her out 60% or so immediately. They could look to see what mortgage options are available for early repayment or options for becoming joint mortgage (later date for remortgage) etc. It would be later on so they could still benefit from now, if they chose that option, if they see a property they want .'Wall Street is the only place that people ride to in a Rolls Royce to get advice from those who take the subway'
W Buffett0 -
My main client is worth the sort of money you only see on a Monopoly board. Do you know what he does?
He pays the additional SDLT.
The SDLT on a £5 million property bought by a company is nearly £700,000. There is no relief, but perhaps there should be some because - well, it's not fair, is it? That one person pays that much into the public purse in one go? And then has to pay Corporation Tax on the sale. Life is so unfair when you're generating significant sums of money for the economy and not stripping the public purse.
Please. Your 'brother' is no better than a benefit cheat. He's benefitted from the price rises that the measures were introduced to curb and to help genuine FTBs get a hand. That is enough.Everything that is supposed to be in heaven is already here on earth.
0 -
I hope your brother protects his share as if they split or divorce he might lose it"It is prudent when shopping for something important, not to limit yourself to Pound land/Estate Agents"
G_M/ Bowlhead99 RIP0 -
Doozergirl wrote: »My main client is worth the sort of money you only see on a Monopoly board. Do you know what he does?
He pays the additional SDLT.
The SDLT on a £5 million property bought by a company is nearly £700,000. There is no relief, but perhaps there should be some because - well, it's not fair, is it? That one person pays that much into the public purse in one go? And then has to pay Corporation Tax on the sale. Life is so unfair when you're generating significant sums of money for the economy and not stripping the public purse.
Please. Your 'brother' is no better than a benefit cheat. He's benefitted from the price rises that the measures were introduced to curb and to help genuine FTBs get a hand. That is enough.
Here we go. What has this got to do with actually answering the question? Just a waffle of your 2 cents worth on UK real estate economics and policies.
Regarding views, although this is pointless as we work with the current policies in operation, you honestly think it is fair multi millionaire Landlords who buy properties through a company that holds at least 15 homes will be able to avoid the extra stamp duty charge? While average Joe's just looking to work hard and have one property investment along with their residential are attacked. We all know how many £Billion and multi £million corporations use clever accounting to off set their corporation tax. Starbucks only paid a fraction in 5 years. So please get of your high horse. That does not wash with me.
If you equate people working hard to invest as a 'benefit cheat' then you are clearly delusional or misguided. More British people should be investing and making their money work for them instead of complaining and crying envy. You think investing in good real estate projects is a simple process with no research into the property, active management of the property, renovation etc? Oh no, lets just ignore all that hard work!
Do you know anything about real estate economics? How would him buying 1 property, that he wanted to be part of the London property investment growth over the last decade, while renting himself (paying other landlords as he needs to live somewhere) either in UK or US or HongKong (depending where he is living) significantly affect the market? Or should he have invested in SP500 index then you would be blaming him for the current high priced valuations of Apple, Amazon, Facebook etc? Those greedy investors trying to invest for their future / retirements etc and pushing prices up!
If you understood the London property market you would know the rise is mainly due to overseas property investors - Singapore, HongKong, China, Middle East, Russia, US etc. A tiny percentage of people own many thousands each. I know a colleague from Singapore (came to UK to do his MBA) now has a family here and bought up 8 properties already.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/jun/13/foreign-investors-snapping-up-london-homes-suitable-for-first-time-buyers
The real issue is the greedy government not doing enough to protect UK investors against overseas investors. They are getting paid so why should they care?
So all irrelevant points not related to the question. Does not help provide a solution to my original question.'Wall Street is the only place that people ride to in a Rolls Royce to get advice from those who take the subway'
W Buffett0 -
I hope your brother protects his share as if they split or divorce you might lose it
They are not married yet and too early to presume that.
He would not be doing anything outside of a legal framework that he actually has ownership on title deeds. Solution currently is to wait and joint purchase or buy his share at a later date from her. As such would be treated as a joint investment opportunity and irrelevant to the relationship status for the time been.'Wall Street is the only place that people ride to in a Rolls Royce to get advice from those who take the subway'
W Buffett0 -
The "I have a friend who" ruse. Your brother is YOU. :rotfl:0
-
coley54321 wrote: »The "I have a friend who" ruse. Your brother is YOU. :rotfl:
I wish he was. I only bought into London market within last 3 years. So I am in at the top of the market and face, no doubt, a nasty steady rise in interest rates to hit me.'Wall Street is the only place that people ride to in a Rolls Royce to get advice from those who take the subway'
W Buffett0 -
You asked for the experience of successful property investors. The experience is that they pay a shed load of tax in the right places, including the 3% surcharge, and don't use their girlfriends to avoid tax. Even if they are avoiding some, they're pouring huge amounts into government coffers from every other angle.
I wasn't passing comment on the economy at all, I was being facetious; I was passing comment on your attitude. These benefits and penalties are there for a reason and they are specifically to hit your 'brother'. Nobody agrees with you here, they think your attitude is either derisible or a joke.
He isn't married and he leaves himself wide open to be taken advantage of by his other half. That would be a shame.Everything that is supposed to be in heaven is already here on earth.
0 -
Doozergirl wrote: »You asked for the experience of successful property investors. The experience is that they pay a shed load of tax in the right places, including the 3% surcharge, and don't use their girlfriends to avoid tax.
I wasn't passing comment on the economy at all, I was being facetious; I was passing comment on your attitude. These benefits and penalties are there for a reason and they are specifically to hit your brother.
.
Nobody is looking at not paying any required taxes! Is irrelevant if you dislike investors. The question is simply the best options to take given the current legislation. Nothing to do with ones economic views. Going back a few years there would be NO extra SDLT. Those who want a say on changes can keep up to date with their politics and get voting.
If you read the posts you would have seen that his partner was the one interested from the start for her to be more capital liquid (only having 50% invested and 50% mortgage liability) - irrespective of whether it is the guy as the first time buyer or a girl as the first time buyer or just to co investors where one happens to be a first time buyer.He isn't married and he leaves himself wide open to be taken advantage of by his other half. That would be a shame
Very kind of you to worry about that after scorning him as an investor. It would be treated as a dual investment. Nothing would be invested without deeds.
Seems then there are not many investors here. Not really the shared response of hard working colleagues in the city.Nobody agrees with you hereEven if they are avoiding some, they're pouring huge amounts into government coffers from every other angle.
Yes, I am sure. Take with two hands and give back with one hand.'Wall Street is the only place that people ride to in a Rolls Royce to get advice from those who take the subway'
W Buffett0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.1K Life & Family
- 247.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards