Profile incomplete
18:34 PM, 3rd August 2015, About 9 years ago 111
Text Size
As part of our campaign to reverse the Government’s Budget proposals restricting finance cost relief for individual landlords we are aiming to lobby all MPs in the UK – and as many times as possible.
We are asking that everyone who is against this proposal firstly signs this petition: https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/104880
Secondly, and as importantly, we are asking that you write to your MP and preferably follow this up with a visit to your MP’s surgery.
It will be the case for some that you may live in one constituency and have rental houses in other constituencies. Please send emails to all the MPs that are applicable to you.
In order to keep track and make sure we leave no-one out, can you please post in the comments section below the following details:
1. Name of MP contacted via email/letter.
2. Constituency of the MP.
3. Date(s) letters/emails sent.
4. Whether you have spoken to the MP face-to-face and/or made an appointment to see him/her in their surgery.
If you get any response other than an automated reply or acknowledgement, please paste the text in the comments section below, remembering to ensure the full name of the MP and Constituency is included.
Also, later on (bearing in mind MPs’ absences during the summer recess), please also report back on their attitude towards the Budget proposal.
I will be keeping a spreadsheet, to make sure we miss no-one out.
Contacting MPs and persuading them of our case is going to be key to our success in overturning this illogical, unjust and discriminatory proposal. You may be the only person who writes to your MP, so it is very important not to assume someone else will already have done so.
We should especially be looking out for MPs who might be willing to champion our cause as well as those who will be willing to vote against the Finance Bill. If you feel your MP falls into this category, please let us know in the comments section below.
The following is a link to a website with contact details of your MP >>> https://www.writetothem.com/
Below is a sample email/letter to MP’s you may wish to adapt, if you don’t have the time to write one from scratch:
Adjust as necessary, e.g. if you are not a constituent but own property in the constituency, or if you want to add something about the MP’s party’s stance on it etc.
Dear [Name of MP]
I am writing to you as one of your constituents, my address is [ add your address and postcode here]
I am writing with regard to the latest attack on landlords in the Budget, through the proposals to restrict ‘tax relief’ for landlords. Many landlords have been confused about the terminology “tax relief”, so many still don’t realise the effects this would have on their businesses and on the wider economy.
Aafter seeking clarification from HMRC, I have realised that what is really being proposed is that the cost of interest, which is our biggest cost in running our businesses, has been re-defined as ‘income,’ which can be taxed. Obviously, this makes no sense, and this is the verdict of the chief economists who reported to the Treasury Select Committee on the Summer Budget.
If this is to be a new principle of taxation, why aren’t all businesses in the UK facing this bizarre proposal?
Buy-to-let is not a simple, ‘hands-off investment’ as it is sometimes portrayed; it is a very labour-intensive business, often very stressful and for many of us constitutes a full-time job, whereby we work and are on call 7 days a week, including evenings.
Unfortunately, the failure to understand our business (ignorance, by another word), has led to the Government announcing this illogical and unjust proposal.
I am hoping you can use your influence and your vote to help quash this measure.
You will find more details of the proposal on this link to the Property118 landlords forum – LINK >>> http://www.property118.com/?p=76936
The information there will help you to be fully informed, but if you have any questions please let me know and I will endeavour to answer them.
I will be coming to meet you soon at one of your surgeries to discuss this in person.
Yours sincerely
[add your name here]
YOUR Money, YOUR future, YOUR choice.
Previous Article
Tax Efficient InvestmentNext Article
10% wear and tear loss affect on furnished?
Big Blue
18:08 PM, 11th September 2015, About 9 years ago
Reply to the comment left by "Nitzan Marinov" at "11/09/2015 - 17:46":
I'm so glad they're 'trying to identify landlords' - it'll mean they can recognise them more easily when they've been driven out of business! Although I do wonder what sort of government wants to make our lives as difficult and frustrating as possible whilst simultaneously needing our help and recognising we're about the only people who CAN or WILL help! Go figure. I can't!
Whilst we're on the subject, where do we now stand with the rest of society? Y'know, the 90-odd percent who hate us for our evil, selfish greed but who simultaneously want us to take thousands of refugees and expect the PRS to come to the rescue? So many of these socially-committed commentators want homes for Syrians, provided immediately and at someone else's expense, (of course), but they also want the private landlords that'll be doing this eliminated from housing provision. How does THAT work...??
Nitzan
18:13 PM, 11th September 2015, About 9 years ago
Reply to the comment left by "Ros ." at "09/09/2015 - 21:18":
Well, I've used your response, Ros, to respond to the honourable MP as follows:
Dear Mr Jackson,
Thank you very much for your response.
I wish to point out that according to my understanding, it is the fact that over the years owner-occupiers have not had to pay the kind of taxes they do in other countries that has led to house price inflation, and that it is in fact owner-occupiers pricing out first time buyers.
Many owner-occupiers see their homes as investments and are also more emotional about purchases and so are more likely to be willing to pay more for them. It is wealthy people who do this, not BTL landlords who have to make their investments work.
I probably have less equity in my portfolio of properties in the north and Peterborough than many people who own one home outright in London. Nothing I have done has led to those prices increasing. Also, BTL landlords are more likely to negotiate a price down.
The evidence does not support the idea that landlords affect house prices in this way. Moreover, In the Government response to the petition they changed their terminology and say:
"By unifying the treatment of finance costs for all individual landlords, the Government is reducing the distortion between property investment and investment in other assets, and reducing the advantage landlords may [my emphasis] have in the property market over ordinary homebuyers."
So the result is that the government massively attacks one sector of housing providers in the country on the basis that they ‘may’ have this effect or advantage.
In addition, if you imply that landlords are not needed any more, because the government has supported the big building projects planned, I will point out that only today it was reported by the BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34224028) that:
"Many local authorities are not keen to use their own council housing stock so people are trying to identify landlords who might be able to put up Syrian refugees, paid for by the state."
If the government is taxing landlords out of the market, how will they house the "20,000 Syrians are expected to be resettled in the UK over the next five years." [Same BBC article]
Does the government expect them to be able to buy their own homes in the UK? Or will it actively encourage it? I find that hard to believe.
Furthermore, I referred to the inherent inequality of the tax treatment to landlords and home owners to show that the play field isn't level to start with and, therefore, there's no need to level it.
Landlords run businesses, we work hard to keep our properties fit for tenants and we are regularly required by the government to comply with more costly regulations. Our businesses need to be compared to any other business in the UK and all costs should be allowed. Comparing us to home owners is not only illogical but also threatens to kill off the supply of good homes for people who can't afford or don't want to buy their own home.
Kind regards
Big Blue
19:42 PM, 11th September 2015, About 9 years ago
Reply to the comment left by "Nitzan Marinov" at "11/09/2015 - 18:13":
That's a corker, Nitzan. All MPs should be receiving that!
Dr Rosalind Beck
21:54 PM, 11th September 2015, About 9 years ago
Reply to the comment left by "Nitzan Marinov" at "11/09/2015 - 18:13":
Great Nitzan. Let's see what gobbledegook he comes up with now. And if/when he does, shame on him! And we'll help you sort another response... at least it's a dialogue (of sorts) - he is at least organising replies which is more than many. As an optimist, I think you could even win him over. Keep it coming at him and wear him down!
Nitzan
22:21 PM, 11th September 2015, About 9 years ago
Reply to the comment left by "Ros ." at "11/09/2015 - 21:54":
Thanks Ros, Considering I wrote to 5 different MPS and he was the only one who responded. I think we're doing allright 🙂
Richard Lee
8:59 AM, 21st September 2015, About 9 years ago
I wrote to Andrea Leadsom MP and initially had a very bland response. I followed it up with some more information and a worked example of how the new rules would increase my income tax by 200% and I received a letter advising me that she had written to David Gauke MP (Financial Secretary at HM Treasury) to ask for his comments on my situation and the points I had raised, particularly in relation to a number of potential unintended consequences. We'll see what response I get! Richard Lee
Dr Rosalind Beck
10:20 AM, 21st September 2015, About 9 years ago
Reply to the comment left by "Richard Lee" at "21/09/2015 - 08:59":
Good work Richard. I had a similar experience last week with my MP - they really need you to sit down with them and show them your own circumstances or give them an example of a portfolio landlord who will be made bankrupt. 'Unintended consequences' - I like that expression.
Big Blue
15:08 PM, 21st September 2015, About 9 years ago
Reply to the comment left by "Ros ." at "21/09/2015 - 10:20":
I got Stephen McPartland and the NLA together last week. SMcP fully understands our situation and says he will vote against the govt on it wherever possible. I believe him as he has a habit of doing this on other issues so we'll see. He intends to raise the issue at PMQs too.
Dr Rosalind Beck
15:10 PM, 21st September 2015, About 9 years ago
Reply to the comment left by "James Fraser" at "21/09/2015 - 15:08":
Hi James.
If necessary do you think he would propose or support an amendment on it - i.e. put his name to it and argue for the amendment?
Richard of York
17:58 PM, 21st September 2015, About 9 years ago
1. Ed Vaizey ( Con )
2. Wantage ( Oxfordshire )
3. 27th August - emailed outlining my business & the overall madness of the proposals. Received a response to say was forwarding to Chief Secretary to the Treasury & would get beck to me ( he is usually very good ).
15th September - emailed requesting a meeting to go through my concerns and provide illustrative figures using the 'calculator'
17th September - reply to say no surgery dates set yet & would I send more info and the 'calculator' examples for them to look at.
21st September - sent details and now wait response. Also invited MP to spend half a day with me visiting some properties and tenants, many of whom have no concept/hope of ever owning their own home and who believe my houses ARE their home - many in place for 6,8 & even 10 years.
If the NLA has 58,000 members and the RLA 20,000 why do we only have 29,000 signatures on the petition..........?!