View more on these topics

Editor’s note: Little-known boost for B2L but still no housing plan

Paul-Thomas-700.jpg

Those expecting a rabbit out of a hat-type announcement in last week’s Budget would have been bitterly disappointed.

All in all, the whole affair was pretty beige – despite some well-timed one-liners – and rhetoric over substance was the order of the day.

There were, however, some interesting announcements, the Lifetime Isa being one of them.

But once again George Osborne wasted the opportunity to put forward a definitive and joined-up plan to solve the housing crisis.

In fact, things like the Isa do not solve supply problems – they simply stoke demand and will probably therefore push up house prices.

Perhaps the most interesting part of the Budget was the outcome of the Treasury’s buy-to-let consultation. Osborne confirmed there would be no carveout for larger landlords buying through a limited company, meaning everyone must pay the 3 percentage point surcharge from 1 April.

However, as Mortgage Strategy revealed last week there is a little-known loophole that could save landlords thousands of pounds in stamp duty.

Landlords bulk-purchasing six properties or more are able to take advantage of multiple dwellings relief.

Experts suggested landlords could rush to use this obscure tax relief after 1 April, although admittedly this avenue is of no use to those buying single properties.

As Bill Warren Compliance founder Bill Warren says: “If the opportunity is there, I’m sure landlords and multiple buy-to-let owners will be rushing to it if they can save a few bob.”

MDR was in fact highlighted to respondents to the buy-to-let stamp duty consultation by none other than HM Treasury.

This simply reinforces the commonly held view that the Government would like to drive smaller landlords out of the market and wants big corporates to take over the management of the private rented sector.

Therefore one should not expect the Government to loosen its grip on the sector any time soon.

Recommended

Estate-Agent-To-Let-Buy-Sign-700.jpg

Landlords can save on stamp duty using tax loophole

Landlords could rush to take advantage of a little-known stamp duty loophole after the Chancellor this week denied large investors a carveout on future hikes in the tax. The Chancellor announced a 3 percentage point stamp duty surcharge on second homes and buy-to-let properties in the 2015 Autumn Statement. The Treasury then consulted on exempting […]

Paul-Thomas-700.jpg

Editor’s note: Hopes for a bland Budget

As you read this the Chancellor is likely to be applying the finishing touches to his latest Budget speech. There is one area of the market whose members will be praying that he shows them some mercy: the buy-to-let sector. The combination of increased stamp duty rates, a gradual reduction in tax relief and the […]

Foundation Home Loans: The lender at one year old

Foundation Home Loans is just one year old but its roots pre-date the credit crunch. Given the Chancellor’s recent attack on buy-to-let, what do FHL’s bosses think lies ahead for both the firm and the sector? Foundation Home Loans had hardly opened its doors last year when the Chancellor delivered his first blow to the […]

Canada Life annual IHT survey results

75% of wealthy unaware of new residence nil rate band IHT allowance Just 4% were aware the new allowance will be up to £175,000 per individual Lack of awareness of IHT rules means families risk paying a bigger bill than they need 83% think the current inheritance tax rules are far too complex A remarkable […]

Comments
  • Post a comment
  • Chris Hulme 22nd March 2016 at 9:21 am

    The evidence seems clear on the long term outcome for small private landlords and its not pretty. Surely driving the private rented sector to be owned and managed by the large corporates is the most anti competitive move that could be made giving control of such an influential market to a limited few….. isn’t this what we saw with the banks where there were too few participants owning the majority share of the market and subsequently became “too big to fail”… until they failed!

    In terms of the 6 properties or more – there cant be that many transactions that could or would gain such reliefs and that shouldn’t be the driving factor making the investment decision – the tax tail should not wag the investment dog.