Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • Goldcrypto
    • By Goldcrypto 7th Aug 18, 11:50 PM
    • 104Posts
    • 22Thanks
    Goldcrypto
    Current property owner and first time buyer - help to buy conflict
    • #1
    • 7th Aug 18, 11:50 PM
    Current property owner and first time buyer - help to buy conflict 7th Aug 18 at 11:50 PM
    My brother bought his first property in his 20's in London and now in 30's. This was bought as an investment as a buy to let property. Now he has never had a property of his own as a residential to live as he preferred renting (the property investment helped him gain good capital growth over the last 10 years and the rental paid down mortgage and covered most of his rental costs for his own living) as he liked be flexible to be able to choose new properties and move around with his work that has quite a bit of international travel.

    Now the 20% loan assistance for first time buyers would not be available to (despite him not actually having a home to live as his main residency) as he would still be classed as someone owning real estate plus he would be hit by the new increased stamp duty costs for a second plus property etc - all seems unfair as those companies with 10+ do not get hit (ie big investors), while the small guy gets hit and plus some people do not like to invest their money in stock market etc, would be fairer if government allowed 1 residential as main residence and at least 1 investment buy-to-let (for those also to be able to claim first time buyer assistance and not have to pay increased stamp duty costs).

    My question (given the background): His girlfriend would qualify for the first time buyer and would want the 20% loan available for first time buyers. Now for land registry when she buys the name would have to be in her name etc but if my brother wanted to give her 50% of down payment and gift her for time been half of the mortgage payments so in x number of years there could be a legal contract she signs (at purchase) that states he has half ownership claim etc? Is there a way to structure this with a lawyer in some way?

    He would not be willing to sell the London property as growth has been too good and expects continued strong capital growth. Even if that was not the case, it is in a very hot rental location so provides great rental income.
    Last edited by Goldcrypto; 07-08-2018 at 11:53 PM.
Page 4
    • haras_nosirrah
    • By haras_nosirrah 9th Aug 18, 7:56 AM
    • 1,623 Posts
    • 2,893 Thanks
    haras_nosirrah
    One other slight issue with your plan. Most lenders will not accept a gift from a non bloodline relative and those that do would not allow the giftor to move into the property.

    She would have to use the money from elsewhere - your brother can't gift her the deposit
    I am a Mortgage Adviser
    You should note that this site doesn't check my status as a Mortgage Adviser, so you need to take my word for it. This signature is here as I follow MSE's Mortgage Adviser Code of Conduct. Any posts on here are for information and discussion purposes only and shouldn't be seen as financial advice.
    • bowlhead99
    • By bowlhead99 9th Aug 18, 8:17 AM
    • 8,306 Posts
    • 15,196 Thanks
    bowlhead99
    [long train commute today so here goes for a long post...]


    The point is many of these posts (only a few have provided useful factual information to the question) are just irrelevant views of people and not helpful. Simply they had a question and best way is to offer a solution. So answers are they can do option A or option B or option C but can not do option D etc Simply outlining the solutions without any background views.
    Originally posted by Goldcrypto

    But you already have the basic options, outlined in your earlier paragraph which you called "1. ..." and "2. ..."

    Option One is that they pool their resources and just buy a property together. Doing that:

    - They won't get the chance to get an equity loan and only buy 80% of the property now and the other 20% later at the future market price - but they probably won't need one, because they have adequate funds to just buy the whole lot on a joint mortgage at whatever ownership split they prefer.

    - There will be additional stamp duty to pay because of the involvement of your brother. But that stamp duty is not much in the grand scheme of things because you are talking about an asset that creates significant value for them over time - in saved rent payments for the roof over their heads, and in potential capital gains on an exit a number of years down the road. When you are buying the place, you can simply tell the vendor you don't like the colour of the bathroom, so you want to pay less. Or that you don't have as much money as you really do have, so you want to pay less. When later selling the place, you can simply reject a reasonable offer of 95% of the asking price, and demand at least 98%. Boom, 3%. Of course, you are still worse off than if you had done those skilful negotiations and not had the initial stamp duty. But it is not a big deal, paying a few percent stamp duty on a property purchase and sale which runs for a multi year period and creates value in the tens or hundreds of percent of the original purchase price depending on the time period and market conditions.


    Option Two is, girlfriend buys a property for herself NOT jointly with boyfriend.

    - Stamp duty is lower and she can use the HTB equity loan if she is feeling more financially stretched and wants a new build.

    - And then if boyfriend wants to buy in at a later point he can buy a piece off her at market value (at the same time as the equity loan is cleared at that market value), paying his stamp and additional stamp (because of becoming a second property owner), together with the legal fees for the equity transfer and getting the mortgage company to agree to have him on the mortgage etc.


    So you have your two main options. And it's been explained that it's impractical to lend her his money as part of her deposit and then live in the property while her mortgage company turns a blind eye. They won't like loaned deposits, and they won't like economic interests for an adult individual who's living there and isn't on the mortgage or the deeds. So the only way to 'help her out' is to gift her some money and have no claim to it.

    The overall outcome of just gifting her some money and having her owe him some favour in return - while he has no actual claim to the house, because he will have documented for the mortgage lender that he has no financial interest because it was a gift - is that stamp duty is saved, HTB equity loan is accessible, and she doesn't have to commit as much of her own resources and can keep hold of her savings and investments etc rather than cashing them in. While that would be a very nice gesture by your brother, you have said yourself that 'Lets not forget this couple are not married and who knows if will marry or what future relationship holds'. So, a huge cash gift to help her buy the property with fewer resources of her own is something that could backfire spectacularly and probably shouldn't be considered.

    If you try to document the brother's cash as being something properly recoverable, your options are very limited because of the mortgage lender not liking it. Theoretically he could inject the money as a loan shortly after she purchases it, taking a second charge on the house which ranks after the mortgage loan and allows her to pay down the mortgage to a level which is more acceptable to her. But charging the house (when it is not all her house anyway, because of the HTB equity loan shared ownership scheme) can be problematic and even if he had a charge which says he definitely gets paid on proceeds of sale, what happens when they split up in six months and she doesn't sell her property for thirty years and in the meantime he needs the money to buy a marital home with someone else?

    And of course, a loan interest in a house is not what he really wants - the real value of the house over time is in equity ownership ,and ownership comes with stamp duty implications and HTB equity loan implications.


    So what it comes down to is she can go it alone and get the tax regime and incentives applicable to someone making their first step onto a property ladder, and she can do that more affordably if he gifts her a load of money that he doesn't want to; OR they can buy like any 'normal' couple and pool their resources and get a joint mortgage for the property they'll jointly own and live in. If they do the joint purchaser thing, there won't be any incentives applicable to buying a first time property as one of the parties is well minted in property having already bought one and seen it go up in value to a multiple of what he paid.

    There isn't a simple solution that allows him to be a joint purchaser of equity in the property while getting the various benefits of being a first time buyer who doesn't own any residential property, when he is in fact a person who does own residential property and is not a first time buyer. OR if there is a good solution, it will not be shared for free on a site with ten million viewers, because promoting loopholes is the way loopholes get closed.

    If the couple who are looking to do the buying are interested in a better solution, they can do some research and pay for professional advice. If they ask the boyfriend's 'brother' to go online and ask around on forums rather than doing the legwork themselves or buying professional adice, what comes back to them will be cheaper than professional advice but they may get a suboptimal result.

    - -

    The problem you have with this thread is that effectively you have come to the forum, explained the situation, and said you are looking to find a way that the couple can structure a transaction to try to get the various benefits and incentives (or lack of disincentives) of:
    - being a first-time-buying couple (stamp duty discount) and

    - being a non-property owning couple (access to HTB equity loan and avoidance of second-property stamp duty surcharge)

    while actually they are quite well off and one of them is not a first time buyer and is currently an owner of property.

    We *do* get that you want the technical answer to this and don't want to moralise about politics etc. However, I expect you understand as such incentives are funded by *the taxpayers*, which includes nearly all of the forum members here - none of us have a vested interest in helping you structure a transaction to get around the pesky restrictions that the government have decided to impose on the various incentives (or lack of disincentives a the case may be).

    So, some people will not want to help and will stay away from the thread, while other people will want to actively participate in the thread to voice their indignation at being asked for suggestions on how to improve the couple's financial result (grabbing incentives for which, on the face of it, the couple do not qualify) at a greater cost to the taxpayer

    You can spin it however you want, but you seem to have already concluded that you don't like the standard approach of girlfriend buying a property and getting incentives, because she has to commit more of her resources to it and the boyfriend doesn't get a look in ; and you don't like the other standard approach of them buying as a couple because there are no incentives and there is a positive disincentive (3% additional stamp duty). So it seems like what you want to get as your outcome, is incentives that as standard, you can't have.

    No amount of grandstanding about commercial landlords with 15 properties will distract from the fact that you are talking about someone with property wealth wanting to get a government incentive designed to help people who are struggling to 'get on the property ladder'. You must realise that it is going to get people's backs up if you are saying it is not fair that the couple can't use government assistance to help them onto the property ladder, when you have confirmed that the girlfriend can afford to buy this two-person property with just her own salary, savings and investments ; and the boyfriend has owned a London property for so long that it has gone up in value massively together with the tenants paying off his mortgage so that the rental income is 4x the mortgage and it is so lucrative that he definitely won't sell it.

    He could move in to it if he needs a roof over his head, so forgive us as taxpayers for not wanting to 'help him get onto the property ladder' and for not wanting to waive the second-property stamp duty premium.

    You've tried to deflect the indignation on the thread by appealing to our xenophobia and saying that he is not some overseas investor, and you've tried to appeal to our common decency by mentioning that the couple are both hardworking - and presumably do not need to be ashamed of having savings and investments accumulated over time. But surprise surprise, most of us are not foreign investors either, nor do we have commercial property empires, and we do work damned hard for our own money, such that we don't want to give away our legal advice or tax money for free to 'help them out' in structuring a standard boyfriend-girlfriend property purchase.
    Last edited by bowlhead99; 09-08-2018 at 9:00 AM.
    • Goldcrypto
    • By Goldcrypto 9th Aug 18, 11:12 AM
    • 104 Posts
    • 22 Thanks
    Goldcrypto
    One other slight issue with your plan. Most lenders will not accept a gift from a non bloodline relative and those that do would not allow the giftor to move into the property.

    She would have to use the money from elsewhere - your brother can't gift her the deposit
    Originally posted by haras_nosirrah
    Not something they are going to consider. She has her own funds without needing and they would like a clear legal structure of ownership. Plus brother ideally needs to remortgage to release some equity.

    Plan so far is finding under market value property ideally 15% or so with contacts in that market or making competitive offers to offset any extra costs. They would just buy normally as a joint mortgage that they could get competitive rates with a decent down payment anyway.
    • studentguy
    • By studentguy 9th Aug 18, 11:47 AM
    • 185 Posts
    • 97 Thanks
    studentguy
    With me? Why would I be the problem (although I completely disagree the claim that some small number of people like my brother owning 1 property investment alone are the problem).
    Originally posted by Goldcrypto
    Of course you don't think your brother is the problem, it's always someone else. Newsflash, your brother is contributing to the problem - of course I have no problem with that, providing he pays the extra stamp duty he rightfully should pay. If he tries to play the game to avoid it, then I have a problem.

    So you feel my brother should never have got on the property ladder as an investor with one property? As he could not lay down roots with a primary residence. So not doing so, he should have waited , god knows how many years until he knew gain he was going to be based in London and not out of UK, and in that time he should have continued working hard and saved cash earning no interest in the bank while London property prices continue to skyrocket (overseas investors flooding in!) so he is priced out of the market when he comes to buy? Or you and others did not think about that? In the meantime it allowed him to get into the property market and provided a service as a landlord for other professional people to live there.
    Originally posted by Goldcrypto
    Firstly I don't think you understand how fortunate your brother is - most people can't afford to buy an investment property while they go do other things, so he's had a headstart. So he can either move in to his house, or buy another and pay the extra stamp duty.

    skyrocket (overseas investors flooding in!)
    I'd much rather an oversea investor who pays the correct stamp duty than a British person trying to fiddle it, thanks.

    provided a service as a landlord for other professional people to live there.
    You could argue that if he hadn't have bought it, another professional person could have bought it - but that's neither here or there, he's not a landlord for some social purpose, he's making good money out of them, so don't try and spin it into some kind of philanthropy.

    The property was not left empty like many overseas investors buying bulk properties in London and now other major UK cities. Many of those overseas investors have no interest to rent out as they are simply looking at storing their assets in a stable market and possibly looking for capital growth only with no interest rental yield. Those are the problems foe the UK property market. Vast empty residential buildings that could be used. It is overseas investors and those with vast property portfolios the government should be looking at controlling more. Not the hard working British person or retired couple who manages to get themselves into a position to buy just 1 other investment property for their retirement, plan to pass on in their family or rent out and provide a useful service. Some level of investment is healthy for real estate market.
    Look over there, those people are much worse!! Don't look at me and my family. Frankly I don't care what nationality you are as long as you pay the correct taxes. Secondly, your brother isn't exactly a hard working struggling to put food on the table person, he works in the city, so stop with the 'poor little him' act, it's not washing.

    Some level of investment is healthy for real estate market.
    No, not at the moment when we don't have enough houses it's not - you're just making the problem worse. Again, I don't mind as long as you pay the correct tax (and stop moaning about having to do so) to offset it.

    The point is many of these posts (only a few have provided useful factual information to the question) are just irrelevant views of people and not helpful. Simply they had a question and best way is to offer a solution. So answers are they can do option A or option B or option C but can not do option D etc Simply outlining the solutions without any background views. They are two hard working British individual professionals who continue to make a lot of sacrifices for their time with their careers and savings so as 'Dave Ramsay' says they can 'live like no one else'.
    You've had the answers, and you complain as you don't like them. You're rude with people that don't give you the answers you want to hear. You expect us to find inventive ways that you can avoid paying tax, or using Govt incentive schemes that we all pay for, many people here are less well off than your brother and you expect us to pay for him to get incentives to be able to keep an investment property in London, which again most people here could only dream of being able to buy a property in London, while buying a second property for him to live in. These schemes are designed for people struggling, not for rich people to take advantage of. So yes, it's immoral. Your brother has been very lucky, he should acknowledge that and pay his fair share and not abuse the system.

    Secondly if you don't want peoples views, then don't post on a bloody forum.
    Despite my name, I'm not a student any more
    • Goldcrypto
    • By Goldcrypto 9th Aug 18, 12:14 PM
    • 104 Posts
    • 22 Thanks
    Goldcrypto
    [long train commute today so here goes for a long post...]

    But you already have the basic options, outlined in your earlier paragraph which you called "1. ..." and "2. ..."
    Originally posted by bowlhead99
    While I agree with some points you raised, also these replies are more useful in the discussion than some others, let me also address where I disagree.

    This forum is not really an investment forum and probably many people are not from that pool set so in future not a place best used to brainstorm investment ideas - other real estate investment forums / private equity / hedge funds / alternative investments etc will be best for that. What this site is good for is general money saving tips, products etc.

    That aside, yes, so far those two options for them. With option 1, probably going to be best with them. It is straightforward, clear ownership, they will get a competitive joint mortgage with a good down payment, no need to worry about extra SDLT (is actually not a great deal more for value of properties they are looking at especially if a 10-15% below market property value is found then they come in ahead) as looking for a below market property easily offsets costs as they have plenty of time to research/make new contacts in that market etc, clear exit strategies regarding what they can choose to do in the future.


    OR they can buy like any 'normal' couple and pool their resources and get a joint mortgage for the property they'll jointly own and live in. If they do the joint purchaser thing, there won't be any incentives applicable to buying a first time property
    This is probably, what they will be doing. No government incentive but they can make their own property financing and market condition ' incentive ' by have solid down payment for best joint mortgage rates and a good discount to market value when buying. They will probably be better than any government options anyway.

    If the couple who are looking to do the buying are interested in a better solution, they can do some research and pay for professional advice.
    My brother his partner are both very bright, and certainly will not be sitting back just for me to pop a few suggestions. They will be speaking to friends, colleagues, other city professionals, property consultants in the target market etc. Just like any person looking for good advice, we brainstorm some options (there will be a lot of irrelevant or nonsense advice in that process) and extract the relevant / beneficial points while disposing in the trash the other. If you want to be a successful doctor then you do not ask advice from your neighbour, family member, friend or group of people with no medical knowledge or clear understanding of the field. Same as if you want to be a successful investor you do not ask people who are not already as chances are they do not know how or they would likely be in the position themselves earning more or with better assets etc - you study those already achieving it to see what habits and methods they are applying or ask their advice.


    none of us have a vested interest in helping you structure a transaction to get around the pesky restrictions that the government have decided to impose on the various incentives (or lack of disincentives a the case may be)
    They were never looking to get around something, just consider what current options are available to them. For example each individual can only have one ISA - government incentive for people to save in a tax free savings package. However, there are other products out there that some may ask if they can also use while using the ISA. This is just another seeking advice for best way to structure the purchase for them.
    .

    You've tried to deflect the indignation on the thread by appealing to our xenophobia and saying that he is not some overseas investor, and you've tried to appeal to our common decency by mentioning that the couple are both hardworking - and presumably do not need to be ashamed of having savings and investments accumulated over time.
    It had to be highlighted that they made their positions through hard work and no doubt have another 25-30 years of hard work ahead. They are making sacrifices of time and this had to be highlighted to the nonsense of some of these replies. Regarding your claim of 'xenophobia' , that could not be further from the truth. For a start my family has both a mix of English and American. Plus his girlfriend is British American! I am not against some levels of foreign investment in the UK. It is very healthy both in commercial market and some levels in the residential market. Many London new residential complexes would probably not been built without it. However, there is a distinction when we get floods of overseas investors with portfolios of 20+ or so and leaving them empty. In comparison to a British individual investor with 1 property investment or a retired couple with 1 for their pension plan that are actively renting out and providing a useful service for would be tenants etc.
    • marliepanda
    • By marliepanda 9th Aug 18, 12:25 PM
    • 6,896 Posts
    • 15,037 Thanks
    marliepanda
    Either you are your 'brother' or this is an incestuous level of creepy involvement in someone elses life...
    • Goldcrypto
    • By Goldcrypto 9th Aug 18, 1:10 PM
    • 104 Posts
    • 22 Thanks
    Goldcrypto
    Firstly I don't think you understand how fortunate your brother is - most people can't afford to buy an investment property while they go do other things, so he's had a headstart.
    Originally posted by studentguy
    People often make their own circumstances. Most of his has come from his own hard work, many years of study, studying a useful subject that adds value to a service he can be rewarded for his skills. Hard work, sacrifices and saving to invest. Becoming a property investor became about by a lack of stability in overseas travel so could not anchor foundations as most young people aim to do with their home. By not investing in a property a decade ago could have likely priced him out of the London market today (seriously limited his options), and he would have been a fool for doing so. The only smart option was to get in the real estate market and people like you thinking he is part of the problem are deluded. News flash, if every property investor left London, all properties would not be bought up by first time buyers. Every city needs a healthy balance of residential properties for a rental market. Some people do not want to buy, not out of lack of choice but like the freedom of moving to different properties and having a service where they are not responsible for maintenance and repairs etc. While investing their money in other assets besides just choosing to invest in a home. Simple real estate economics.

    Now if you had chosen a decent subject to study, spent less time complaining on here, then you might have a better investment action plan.


    I'd much rather an oversea investor who pays the correct stamp duty than a British person trying to fiddle it, thanks.
    Nobody is trying to avoid not paying anything. Also unlike UK buyers, many overseas buyers capital sources are much harder to determine. You may want to open your mind and be a little more concerned about that, next time you hear a Russian buying up 20 million of London real estate.


    he's not a landlord for some social purpose, he's making good money out of them, so don't try and spin it into some kind of philanthropy.
    He was offering a service and the tenants received a service - a home, managed and maintained. What is your problem with that? What is the problem with making money?


    You're rude with people that don't give you the answers you want to hear.
    No, just find it pointless people adding their 2 cents that is unrelated nonsense and nothing to do with the question. You are a prime example.

    You expect us to find inventive ways that you can avoid paying tax,
    Repeat, nobody is looking at not paying what needs to be paid!

    Secondly if you don't want peoples views, then don't post on a bloody forum.
    Relevant views to a question. Yes, we have established this is not an investment forum as per se. Despite, some have gladly provided advice or tried to be constructive.
    • PersianCatLady
    • By PersianCatLady 9th Aug 18, 1:17 PM
    • 606 Posts
    • 592 Thanks
    PersianCatLady
    Glad you enjoyed, but are you a real estate lawyer or successful real estate investor that has input to the actual question?

    Regarding my views, they are irrelevant as the current legislation is in place - these do change so will see what happens in the future. Also, my view on this issue about property investment and implications for SDLT and help to buy are not solely focused on him but should apply to every UK citizen. I personally feel they should have the opportunity (if they are in the position to do so) to be able to get assistance on first residence property and not have additional SDLT on second property purchase (as an investment). Not everyone wants to invest the majority in the stock market with main investments etc. Maybe you think it would be fair if he (or similar people) had a few million and had 10+ properties then he could set up a company for the properties and not have to pay additional SDLT and have access to superior lending options? The government seems to be squeezing the small investor and giving advantage to the big players. Personally, I do not think it is fair for the average hard working British Joe just trying to progress.

    Regardless of peoples current political views on UK real estate policies, I'm here looking for actual technical answers to address the question only. So lets not digress.
    Originally posted by Goldcrypto
    I have a English law degree but I think you are confused about English law as you are using American terms in your posts.
    • studentguy
    • By studentguy 9th Aug 18, 2:00 PM
    • 185 Posts
    • 97 Thanks
    studentguy
    People often make their own circumstances. Most of his has come from his own hard work, many years of study, studying a useful subject that adds value to a service he can be rewarded for his skills. Hard work, sacrifices and saving to invest. Becoming a property investor became about by a lack of stability in overseas travel so could not anchor foundations as most young people aim to do with their home. By not investing in a property a decade ago could have likely priced him out of the London market today (seriously limited his options), and he would have been a fool for doing so. The only smart option was to get in the real estate market and people like you thinking he is part of the problem are deluded. News flash, if every property investor left London, all properties would not be bought up by first time buyers. Every city needs a healthy balance of residential properties for a rental market. Some people do not want to buy, not out of lack of choice but like the freedom of moving to different properties and having a service where they are not responsible for maintenance and repairs etc. While investing their money in other assets besides just choosing to invest in a home. Simple real estate economics.

    Now if you had chosen a decent subject to study, spent less time complaining on here, then you might have a better investment action plan.
    Originally posted by Goldcrypto
    You have no idea about my personal circumstances thanks, I did choose a decent subject to study and I have a very good professional career earning way above the national average, not that it matters. I also am in the process of buying a decent sized house... soo I'd shut up about assuming things about other people.

    Nobody is trying to avoid not paying anything. Also unlike UK buyers, many overseas buyers capital sources are much harder to determine. You may want to open your mind and be a little more concerned about that, next time you hear a Russian buying up 20 million of London real estate.
    I don't understand why this is relevant. Stop diverting from your family's circumstances with other irrelevant examples.

    He was offering a service and the tenants received a service - a home, managed and maintained. What is your problem with that? What is the problem with making money?
    You're obviously incapable of reading. I have no problem with people making money, and fair play to him for doing so - but to imply he did it because of a social good which is what you implied originally is rubbish. I also have no problem with him having an investment portfolio if that's what he wants to do, but that comes with costs, such as the additional stamp duty. If he doesn't like it, he should just move into his house and keep one property.

    No, just find it pointless people adding their 2 cents that is unrelated nonsense and nothing to do with the question. You are a prime example.
    So you want our (taxpayers) money and incentives but you don't want our opinions... right.

    Repeat, nobody is looking at not paying what needs to be paid!
    Well in that case it's simple isn't it. Get them to buy a house together and stop worrying about Help to buy schemes and the additional stamp duty. The fact they're not doing that is why you are trying to avoid what needs to be paid.
    Despite my name, I'm not a student any more
    • Soundgirlrocks
    • By Soundgirlrocks 9th Aug 18, 2:16 PM
    • 566 Posts
    • 849 Thanks
    Soundgirlrocks
    I'm just smiling thinking of all that lovely capital gains the Brother will have to pay when he eventually sells that wonderful London investment.
    • studentguy
    • By studentguy 9th Aug 18, 2:23 PM
    • 185 Posts
    • 97 Thanks
    studentguy
    I'm just smiling thinking of all that lovely capital gains the Brother will have to pay when he eventually sells that wonderful London investment.
    Originally posted by Soundgirlrocks
    Don't worry Goldcrypto will be back asking how to avoid paying capital gains as it's unfair on people with 1 investment property which they've worked really hard to get, and everyone should be allowed to have 1 investment property don't ya know, poor little brother.
    Despite my name, I'm not a student any more
    • marliepanda
    • By marliepanda 9th Aug 18, 2:24 PM
    • 6,896 Posts
    • 15,037 Thanks
    marliepanda
    Don't worry Goldcrypto will be back asking how to avoid paying capital gains as it's unfair on people with 1 investment property which they've worked really hard to get, and everyone should be allowed to have 1 investment property don't ya know, poor little brother.
    Originally posted by studentguy
    Someone died. The brother did not work hard!
    • studentguy
    • By studentguy 9th Aug 18, 2:28 PM
    • 185 Posts
    • 97 Thanks
    studentguy
    Someone died. The brother did not work hard!
    Originally posted by marliepanda
    But but Goldcrypto keeps saying how his brother works really hard and manages to invest his money in property... he's worked really hard to pay the mortgage every month, what with the rental income only being a few times the mortgage amount every month. He's working really hard making loads of sacrifices don't ya know! We shouldn't tax him
    Despite my name, I'm not a student any more
    • TamsinC
    • By TamsinC 9th Aug 18, 2:34 PM
    • 531 Posts
    • 644 Thanks
    TamsinC
    so much 'whataboutism' . . . .
    • marliepanda
    • By marliepanda 9th Aug 18, 2:59 PM
    • 6,896 Posts
    • 15,037 Thanks
    marliepanda
    But but Goldcrypto keeps saying how "his brother" works really hard and manages to invest his money in property... he's worked really hard to pay the mortgage every month, what with the rental income only being a few times the mortgage amount every month. He's working really hard making loads of sacrifices don't ya know! We shouldn't tax him
    Originally posted by studentguy
    Fixed that :P
    • Goldcrypto
    • By Goldcrypto 9th Aug 18, 3:13 PM
    • 104 Posts
    • 22 Thanks
    Goldcrypto
    I'm just smiling thinking of all that lovely capital gains the Brother will have to pay when he eventually sells that wonderful London investment.
    Originally posted by Soundgirlrocks
    This is really why a lot of people here seem to be commenting with things they do not understand.

    There are such things as 'private residency relief' for your main residence property before selling. By having lived there for x period of time before a sale.

    https://www.gov.uk/tax-sell-home

    As for those with general capital gains that is a good thing. People who have invested and turned fruitful returns having to pay the current rates are justified. Is a win win situation for the economy and property owner.
    • Pixie5740
    • By Pixie5740 9th Aug 18, 3:25 PM
    • 13,346 Posts
    • 19,224 Thanks
    Pixie5740
    This is really why a lot of people here seem to be commenting with things they do not understand.

    There are such things as 'private residency relief' for your main residence property before selling. By having lived there for x period of time before a sale.

    https://www.gov.uk/tax-sell-home
    Originally posted by Goldcrypto
    Not quite. Living in the property for x time doesn't remove all CGT liability. It might help reduce it but the liability will still be there.

    As for those with general capital gains that is a good thing. People who have invested and turned fruitful returns having to pay the current rates are justified. Is a win win situation for the economy and property owner.
    Originally posted by Goldcrypto
    Indeed. People only pay CGT when they've made a tidy Capital Gain. To try and avoid it by not making a capital gain is like not wanting to go out to work because your income will be taxed.
    • Goldcrypto
    • By Goldcrypto 9th Aug 18, 3:26 PM
    • 104 Posts
    • 22 Thanks
    Goldcrypto
    Someone died. The brother did not work hard!
    Originally posted by marliepanda
    So clueless. You do realise not all properties are equal value? Some properties in the UK are fraction of the value to London. Or do you know the financial breakdown of how many people may have been on a deed to another property? No money used to invest in property by my brother was given to him. Only his savings were used.

    But but Goldcrypto keeps saying how his brother works really hard and manages to invest his money in property... he's worked really hard to pay the mortgage every month, what with the rental income only being a few times the mortgage amount every month. He's working really hard
    Originally posted by studentguy
    Another clueless post here. You do not think there can be large property projects at times like if someone chose to renovate to increase the value of the property? You think people only choose to pay of the minimum mortgage and not try and overpay to reduce the time frame of a mortgage? Oh wait, oh silly of me, despite you not even been a property investor you're not even a homeowner. Explains it. Pointless.....
    Last edited by Goldcrypto; 09-08-2018 at 3:32 PM.
    • marliepanda
    • By marliepanda 9th Aug 18, 3:36 PM
    • 6,896 Posts
    • 15,037 Thanks
    marliepanda
    So clueless. You do realise not all properties are equal value? Some properties in the UK are fraction of the value to London. Or do you know the financial breakdown of how many people may have been on a deed to another property? No money used to invest in property by my brother was given to him. Only his savings were used.
    Originally posted by Goldcrypto
    Do you know your brothers last bowel movement as well? What he had for breakfast this morning?
    • Goldcrypto
    • By Goldcrypto 9th Aug 18, 3:49 PM
    • 104 Posts
    • 22 Thanks
    Goldcrypto
    Do you know your brothers last bowel movement as well? What he had for breakfast this morning?
    Originally posted by marliepanda
    Which one? I have 2 brothers and 1 sister. Would that form part of some property investment advice if I did?
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

449Posts Today

3,164Users online

Martin's Twitter