Summer Budget 2015 – Landlords Reactions

For those of you who apprectaie my creativity, shares in the new Property118 portal are now available for sale – link below.
.

Reply to the comment left by “Mark Alexander” at “13/07/2015 – 20:49“:

Sounds like a plan with the big IF..if the bank would give such a high loan to the company to the size of your debt and at what interest cost.

Reply to the comment left by “James Tallis” at “13/07/2015 – 19:28“:

Gosh! I never knew that when I co-owned a garden centre that wasn’t a limited company with eighty staff and several million turnover that it wasn’t a business.

It must have been an investment, how on earth did I expect to claim financial costs on my loans.

Reply to the comment left by “Phil Landlord” at “13/07/2015 – 19:49“:

Hi Phil
If this methodology was applied – at least it would stop lower rate tax payers or no liability taxpayers from being charged tax at the higher rate on an “income” they
don’t receive. If they are higher rate taxpayers – then at least they should have the income to pay the higher rate tax and the 20/25% levy from the interest/financial costs
figure.

While we are focusing on the tax implications. We have to be careful that the like of ME & others lenders can now call their loans as they can take the view that these proposals have now changed the conditions on the basis of which they had originally offered the facility.

I do not think many banks have got the desire to lend to the property related business.

Reply to the comment left by “Luke Marchbanks” at “13/07/2015 – 21:08“:

Why is my plan any different to a bog standard BTL mortgage to a Ltd. co?

Same covenant, me!

Same security

Same LTV.

Plus, in a few years time I might find a rich Arab looking to buy the income stream of the head lease. This is barely any different to a Head Lease on a shopping mall, the income multipliers for which are circa 25 times rent. NICE!!!

Can’t believe I’ve not thought of this before now. The bigger the portfolio, the better of course.
.

I know of a portfolio Landlord in West London who owns 25 properties and he is selling them all in one hit. He has told tenants, who are in fixed tenancy that he will pay them £5000, if he was successful in selling. (Only to those who were resistant to move out).

He seems to think, that, Buy To Let has been attacked and the government is looking to bring institutional landlords as they want to improve on quality of accommodation and have a bite of 28% CGT on a lot of existing buy to let business, which is absolutely massive

Another one for discussion.

If your taxable income rises above £100K you start loosing your personnel tax allowance (on which you pay no tax) up until £121200 where you loose it completely.

So if my income (actual property profit and other sources) is 70K and my mortgage interest is £70K my taxable income becomes £140K so I loose my personal allowance because I took out a loan?!?!

Jason

No sorry, I don’t follow that logic.
,

Reply to the comment left by “Jason E” at “13/07/2015 – 22:25“:

Jason,

The fact, your income is £70k you are already a higher rate tax payer. By adding £70k to your income from interest payments is not going to make any difference.

As Income and Capital Gains are 2 different things.

CGT is chargeable 18% for basic rate payer but when gain pushes you to higher rate then you pay 28% on proportion of your gain.

Hope this helps.