Budget 2025: The real impact of the 2% tax rise on rental income

Budget 2025: The real impact of the 2% tax rise on rental income

3:20 PM, 26th November 2025, 5 months ago 43

Don’t be fooled by the “2% tax rise”.

Once Section 24 kicks in, that tiny headline increase turns into a 14% drop in real cashflow for a typical mortgaged portfolio.

We modelled the numbers on an 8-property landlord, and the results are eye-opening.

If you want to understand what the 2027 changes truly mean for your finances, this is essential reading.

Background

The 2025 Budget confirmed that from April 2027, property income will be taxed at higher rates: 22% for basic-rate taxpayers, 42% for higher-rate taxpayers, and 47% for additional-rate taxpayers. The same uplift applies to dividends and savings income.

At first glance, a two percentage point rise appears modest. However, once Section 24 is applied to individual landlords, the effect on real-world cashflow becomes far more significant. Tax is calculated on a profit figure that ignores mortgage interest, and a separate 20% tax credit is given instead. This means that even a small increase in tax rates can translate into a substantial reduction in spendable income.


This article is for illustration only. All calculations use explicit assumptions so landlords can understand the mechanics before speaking with an adviser.

Modelling assumptions

The worked example below uses the following consistent landlord profile:

Portfolio

  • 8 properties
  • £200,000 average value per property
  • £1,600,000 total portfolio value
  • 60% loan-to-value (LTV)
  • £120,000 borrowing per property
  • £960,000 total borrowing

Income and costs

  • £1,200 rent per month per property
  • £14,400 annual rent per property
  • £115,200 total rent across 8 properties
  • 20% operating costs (maintenance, voids, insurance)
  • £23,040 total operating costs

Finance

  • 5.5% interest-only mortgage
  • £6,600 interest per property per year
  • £52,800 total interest across the portfolio

Tax profile

  • Higher-rate taxpayer
  • Tax rate rises from 40% to 42% in April 2027
  • Section 24 applies (interest not deducted before tax)
  • 20% credit applied to mortgage interest

How Section 24 changes the numbers (one property)

Step 1: Cash position before tax

Item Amount (£)
Annual rent 14,400
Less operating costs (20%) 2,880
Cash profit before interest 11,520
Less mortgage interest 6,600
Cash profit after interest 4,920

Step 2: Taxable profit under Section 24

Under Section 24, interest is not deducted when calculating taxable profit. Instead, a 20% credit is provided.

Item Amount (£)
Taxable profit 11,520
Mortgage interest eligible for 20% credit 6,600

Step 3: Tax before and after the increase

Stage Before April 2027 (40%) From April 2027 (42%)
Tax on taxable profit 4,608 4,838.40
Less 20% credit on interest 1,320 1,320
Tax payable 3,288 3,518.40

Tax increases by £230.40 per property per year. The rise appears small on paper but is amplified significantly because Section 24 inflates taxable profit.

Scaling the example to eight properties

Portfolio cashflow before tax

Item Amount (£)
Total annual rent 115,200
Less operating costs (20%) 23,040
Cash profit before interest 92,160
Less mortgage interest 52,800
Cash profit after interest 39,360

Portfolio tax before and after the rate rise

Stage 40% rate 42% rate
Tax on taxable profit 36,864 38,707.20
Less 20% credit on interest 10,560 10,560
Tax payable 26,304 28,147.20

Net position

Metric Before April 2027 From April 2027
Cash profit after interest 39,360 39,360
Tax payable 26,304 28,147.20
Net cashflow after tax 13,056 11,212.80

Net annual income falls by £1,843.20, a reduction of around 14% despite the headline tax increase being only two percentage points.

What this means for landlords

Under these assumptions, the landlord collects more than £115,000 per year in rent and services almost £1 million of debt, yet ends up with just over £11,000 of post-tax income from eight properties once the 2027 rates apply.

The example shows how demanding the tax environment has become for leveraged individual landlords, particularly when higher interest rates, licensing, maintenance, and capital expenditure are considered. Some properties will remain strong performers, others will become marginal, and portfolio-wide planning becomes increasingly important.

  • Some units will still make sense to hold.
  • Others may need refinancing or restructuring.
  • Some may be better suited to company ownership.
  • A few may be candidates for disposal.

From illustration to personalised planning

The example in this article is generic. Every landlord has different interest rates, rents, borrowing levels, maintenance pressures, and family objectives. A structured consultation can apply this framework to your own portfolio
so that decisions are based on numbers rather than guesswork.

A Property118 consultation can:

  • Model Section 24, the 2027 tax rise, and different mortgage-rate scenarios using your actual properties.
  • Compare “hold, refinance, restructure or sell” options with clear cash-after-tax figures.
  • Evaluate whether company structures or Family Investment Companies may help with IHT and long-term planning.
  • Produce an action plan for your accountant and solicitor to validate and implement.

If you would like a personalised report, you can request a consultation. The output is a structured document designed to help your advisers focus on confirmation and implementation rather than discovery.

Our consultancy not only covers retirement, business continuity and legacy planning. It can also unlock the lifestyle you once dreamed about but forgot to implement.

⚖️ Important notice – scope of planning support

Where our recommendations touch on areas requiring regulated input, we refer clients to appropriately authorised professionals for advice and execution.


This article and any associated consultation are for information and planning support only. Final tax positions and legal or regulated advice must always be confirmed with appropriately qualified professionals.

Now something only for ‘tax geeks’ like me to ponder

Confession; When I first published this article I was not aware of this. I can’t say for sure when it was published. Nevertheless, tit is now know that the tax credit on Finance Cost Relief will also be increased to 22% in 2027, so I remodelled the numbers. I then went on to consider the same scenario in Limited Companies. Tax professionals will appreciate why. That outcome is very different. Landlords should also be reminded that they probably didn’t invest for rental profit alone, so when comparing returns against other forms of investment, they should also factor in the potential of capital appreciation. See my article entitled; Are You Sure This Is The Right Time To Sell Your Property?

Updated Calculations Based on the New Finance Cost Relief Clarifications

Portfolio profile

  • 8 properties
  • £200,000 each (total value £1,600,000)
  • 60% loan to value
  • Total borrowing £960,000
  • Interest rate 5.5% (interest £52,800 per year)
  • Total rent £115,200 per year
  • Operating costs £23,040 per year
  • Real cash profit after interest £39,360

1. Personal landlord at 40% tax (current rules)

Taxable profit under Section 24 £92,160
Tax at 40% £36,864
Finance credit (20% of £52,800) £11,616
Tax payable £25,248
Net income after tax £14,112

2. Personal landlord at 42% tax (from April 2027)

Tax at 42% £38,707.20
Finance credit (22% of £52,800) £11,616
Tax payable £27,091.20
Net income after tax £12,268.80

3. Limited Company at 19% Corporation Tax (small profits rate)

Taxable profit £39,360
Corporation Tax at 19% £7,480
Net cashflow after tax £31,880

4. Limited Company at 25% Corporation Tax (upper rate)

Corporation Tax at 25% £9,840
Net cashflow after tax £29,520

Summary comparison

Scenario Net cashflow after tax
Personal landlord at 40% £14,112
Personal landlord at 42% £12,268.80
Limited Company at 19% CT £31,880
Limited Company at 25% CT £29,520

The 2% headline increase is not the main issue.

Section 24 continues to inflate taxable profit for landlords who hold properties personally.

A company pays tax on real profit and remains far less affected. This distinction continues to drive the gap in outcomes between the two routes.

This illustration does not include the tax position when money is drawn from the company.

Extraction planning depends on each landlord’s wider income, pensions, dividend allowances and long term family objectives.

That step should always be tailored with professional advice.


Share This Article

Comments

  • Member Since June 2013 - Comments: 3251 - Articles: 81

    8:16 AM, 29th November 2025, About 5 months ago

    Reply to the comment left by AP at 29/11/2025 – 08:07
    Someone told me yesterday that if using S162 to defer Capital Gains, you then have no Directors Loan.

  • Member Since March 2016 - Comments: 85

    8:16 AM, 29th November 2025, About 5 months ago

    Actually I did some more research and if the value of the properties is placed on the DLA, then capital gains tax is payable on the transfer. I wonder if paying 28% gain now to save 42% tax over the years is better? Especially if at some point in the future capital gains tax may be equalised with income tax?

  • Member Since March 2016 - Comments: 85

    8:17 AM, 29th November 2025, About 5 months ago

    Reply to the comment left by Mick Roberts at 29/11/2025 – 08:16
    Thanks Mick, I just read that too

  • Member Since January 2011 - Comments: 12216 - Articles: 1411

    8:34 AM, 29th November 2025, About 5 months ago

    Reply to the comment left by AP at 29/11/2025 – 08:07
    Most BTL lenders treat a “Portfolio” landlord as a person(s) with 4 or more BTL mortgages, so I can see now why you just fall outside that.

    To qualify for incorporation relief you must convert your net asset value into shares. You can classify it as a DLA but you will then pay CGT on it, because HMRC regard that as consideration.

    If you would like a second opinion on your modeling, our consultants will be happy to help and to look into any gaps you may have missed. I can assure you it’s not a simple model. It isn’t something that ChatGPT will get right and most people miss vital elements when they build a spreadsheet.

  • Member Since January 2011 - Comments: 12216 - Articles: 1411

    8:36 AM, 29th November 2025, About 5 months ago

    Reply to the comment left by Mick Roberts at 29/11/2025 – 08:16
    That is correct

  • Member Since January 2011 - Comments: 12216 - Articles: 1411

    8:40 AM, 29th November 2025, About 5 months ago

    Reply to the comment left by AP at 29/11/2025 – 08:16
    You said “ I wonder if paying 28% gain now to save 42% tax over the years is better? Especially if at some point in the future capital gains tax may be equalised with income tax?”

    The maximum rate of CGT is 24%, not 28%.

    Having modeled this for several landlords it has been a viable option for some. Please see the example below.

    https://www.property118.com/case-study-how-david-retired-from-being-a-landlord-and-passed-on-his-legacy-early/

    I hope this helps.

  • Member Since March 2016 - Comments: 85

    10:01 AM, 29th November 2025, About 5 months ago

    Reply to the comment left by Mark Alexander – Founder of Property118 at 29/11/2025 – 08:40
    Thanks Mark

  • Member Since October 2024 - Comments: 203

    10:18 AM, 29th November 2025, About 5 months ago

    Reply to the comment left by Mark Alexander – Founder of Property118 at 26/11/2025 – 16:50
    They are encouraging more people into paid work.
    That’s stupid as there are no jobs. With AI, there will less jobs. So the government believe that those unemployed people will be kept with funding from the landlords prudent savings and investment. As property prices and rents have gone up, the landlord should find their projects. Reeves forgets that the landlords have a lot of responsibilities and their outgoings have increased in the last 5 years with compliances, licenses, now Renters Rights bill on the horizon. The government wish to stop the investments into properties. Some tenants would always be tenants due to their unreasonable spending. If the rents are high, that is because the government takes a massive amounts from the landlords in licences, taxes etc. However the tenants have heavy expenditures on phones, cars, holidays etc.The government likes that so they don’t have finances for investments.

  • Member Since April 2017 - Comments: 11

    5:24 PM, 29th November 2025, About 5 months ago

    After accounting for the 42% rental income tax, the return on equity — calculated as £12,268.80 net income ÷ £640,000 invested equity — comes to just 1.91%. That level of return is unacceptably low. By contrast, allocating the same capital into an S&P 500 ETF could generate an average annual return of around 10%, with far less administrative burden.

    From an investor’s perspective, the priority is ensuring capital works harder. Timing entries on the S&P 500 during pullbacks to the 50-day or 200-day moving averages offers stronger upside potential, while avoiding the hassle and paperwork inherent in property management. Moreover, structuring equity investments through a company framework can further enhance returns compared to holding rental properties directly.

  • Member Since January 2011 - Comments: 12216 - Articles: 1411

    6:39 PM, 29th November 2025, About 5 months ago

    Reply to the comment left by wyn kyaw at 29/11/2025 – 17:24
    That maybe the case, but you have not included capital growth on the leveraged property investment.

    For every 1% of capital appreciation you need to add an extra £16,000 a year based on the example used.

    During the reign of QEii the average was 7% compound. Even if the next 70 years produce only half of that level of capital appreciation the numbers are very different.

    10% average for S&P is also extremely optimistic.

Have Your Say

Every day, landlords who want to influence policy and share real-world experience add their voice here. Your perspective helps keep the debate balanced.

Not a member yet? Join In Seconds


Login with

or