Summer Budget 2015 – Landlords Reactions

Summer Budget 2015 – Landlords Reactions

14:00 PM, 8th July 2015, About 9 years ago 9619

Text Size

Budget 2015 - Landlords Reactions

The concern is;

Budget proposals to “restrict finance cost relief to individual landlords”Summer Budget 2015 - Landlords Reactions

To calculate the impact of this policy on your personal finances download this software


Share This Article


Comments

Monty Bodkin

12:13 PM, 3rd August 2015, About 9 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Greg Bowman" at "03/08/2015 - 10:40":

Hi Greg,

"actually depriving the country of much needed housing stock"

You seem very financially confused.

BTL increases the housing stock.

There is an argument to be made about depriving people of home ownership -that is what you are really trying to rant about.

You need to try and look at this rationally rather than being blinded by jealous anger.

Moffard John

12:16 PM, 3rd August 2015, About 9 years ago

Greg, you are absolutely right and I totally agree with you.

B1

12:16 PM, 3rd August 2015, About 9 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Trendo " at "03/08/2015 - 12:00":

I personally view buy to let as an investment, but then I outsource all management and maintenance so for me it really is just an investment. Those who manage and maintain their own portfolios are clearly working as a business, but even then the speculation side on capital growth seems more like an Investment. The Wikipedia entry for "buy to let" describes it as an investment and doesn't mention the word business, and they should have no bias.

Anyway, either way it is just semantics and derails the purpose of the thread.

Moffard John

12:20 PM, 3rd August 2015, About 9 years ago

You need to look at this rationally rather than being blinded by jealous anger.

Trendo

12:23 PM, 3rd August 2015, About 9 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "David " at "03/08/2015 - 12:16":

It clearly isnt "just semantics" when 2 identical trading models are classed differently and taxed differently is it ?

Lisa S

12:26 PM, 3rd August 2015, About 9 years ago

Just to come back to the point.. I am emailing all the accommodation departments in the Universities. Some, obviously, only use their own halls, but many use the PRS.

I am using an altered version of the email to be sent the Chief Execs of Councils. (I have already sent one to my local council).

I have also sent emails to other landlords I know who may be unaware of this.

Anne Nixon

12:29 PM, 3rd August 2015, About 9 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "David " at "03/08/2015 - 12:16":

Any capital gain is incidental I think and is covered by CGT, but there are massive regional variations. I personally have never made one penny increase with house price inflation in the 8 years since I started as it doesn't exist where I am.

Mark Alexander - Founder of Property118

12:31 PM, 3rd August 2015, About 9 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "David " at "03/08/2015 - 12:16":

Copied from a Facebook Group, comment made by MK Landlords Association .......

" HMRC classes your BTL business as a "UK property business", or “property rental business” - their words, not mine, taken from the Income Tax (Trading and Other Income) Act 2005.

HMRC’s own guidance states “Profits from UK land or property are treated, for tax purposes, as arising from a business. The broad scheme is that rental business profits are computed using the same principles as for trades but the taxpayer is not actually treated as if they are trading.”

However, HMRC taxation rules for private individuals running their “property rental business” state that it is a 'passive investment activity', but only because it is convenient for HMRC to do so. We might be fooled into thinking that because HMRC says it, it must be true. Well, HMRC might always be right...apart from when it’s wrong!

In the case of ‘Elizabeth Moyne Ramsey v HMRC [2013] UKUT 266 TC’ the Upper Tier Tax Tribunal allowed the taxpayer's appeal and decided that residential property letting is a business for the purposes of roll over relief under s162 TCGA 1992 (incorporation relief). HMRC has long argued that there is no business in ordinary letting as it is an investment activity.

The Upper Tribunal set out some general guidelines regarding what represents a business, as follows.

"It falls to be considered whether Mrs Ramsay's activities were a serious undertaking earnestly pursued or a serious occupation; or the activity was an occupation or function actively pursued with reasonable or recognisable continuity, whether the activity had a certain amount of substance in terms of turnover, whether the activity was conducted in a regular manner and on sound and recognised business principles, and whether the activities were of a kind which, subject to differences of detail, are commonly made by those who seek to profit by them."

The Upper Tribunal decided that these tests were satisfied and that Mrs Ramsay was carrying on a business and was entitled to her relief.

This case, and perhaps others like it, should be seized upon to support our case to Government that we are definitely carrying on a business. Are there any clever legal minds out there that can formulate this into a serious proposal that can be put to Government by our landlord lobbying groups?"
.

Moffard John

12:31 PM, 3rd August 2015, About 9 years ago

Mark,

Many thanks for your precious time over the phone which has been much appreciated. Strangely enough, the problem still exists, unless you release the comments from spam it does not show up.

Stewart

12:37 PM, 3rd August 2015, About 9 years ago

Does the Ramsey vs HMRC case imply that we could roll over Capital Gains then?

Leave Comments

In order to post comments you will need to Sign In or Sign Up for a FREE Membership

or

Don't have an account? Sign Up

Landlord Tax Planning Book Now