Landlords could face possession and enforcement pressures
2 weeks ago | 1 comments
Government admits no assessment of burden facing landlords
9:45 AM, 30th July 2026, 3 days ago
35
Categories:
The government has confirmed it carried out no assessment of the combined impact of landlord tax hikes and Renters’ Rights Act reforms.
In a written parliamentary answer, Baroness Taylor of Stevenage said the government had made “no single assessment” of the cumulative costs landlords will face from the Renters’ Rights Act alongside planned tax changes.
No single assessment
In a written parliamentary question, Lord Truscott asked: “What assessment the government have made of the combined cost of new regulatory measures under the Renters’ Rights Act in addition to proposed tax increases for the average landlord”.
Baroness Taylor of Stevenage said: “My department has made no single assessment covering the combined cost of the measures in the Renters’ Rights Act and proposed tax increases.
“Last year’s Budget, the government announced a 2ppt increase to the rate of property income to be introduced from April 2027. This is to help narrow the gap between taxes paid on work and paid on income from assets. An assessment of this policy was published in a Tax Information and Impact Note.”
In the impact notice, it claims the 2ppt increase would be “negligible”.
It said: “By 2029 to 2030, 2.4 million landlords (6% of taxpayers in 2029 to 2030) will face an increase in tax as a result of this measure. Administratively, this measure will affect individuals (including partners in partnerships) with profits from property rental income. It is anticipated that both the one-off and ongoing administrative burdens for these individuals will be negligible.”
Hit renters and landlords
However, industry figures have previously warned that the combined impact of rising taxation and increased regulation could push more landlords to exit the private rented sector.
Jonathan Stinton, head of mortgage relations at Coventry Building Society, said: “Hiking property income tax won’t just hit landlords, it will hit renters in the pocket too. When the cost of being a landlord rises, those pressures almost always find their way into monthly rents, meaning those who don’t own a home pay the price.
“A similar rise to tax on dividends means the cost will also go up for landlords who hold their property in a limited company.
“The more landlords are taxed the less appealing it is to let a property, which could lead to fewer landlords and reduced choice for landlords. The simple but powerful forces of supply and demand would then push rents higher, making it much more difficult to rent a home. First-time buyers who are trying to save a deposit while renting could especially struggle and worry that their homeownership dreams are pushed even further out of sight.”
Sam Humphreys, head of M&A at Dwelly, said: “The rise in property income and dividends tax presents all types of landlords with yet another obstacle to adapt to at a time when they are already absorbing significant operational changes under the Renter’s Rights Act.”
Tags:
Baroness Taylor of Stevenage, landlord tax hikes, property income, Renters’ Rights Act, rising taxation
Comments
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
Previous Article
Final warning for landlords as possession deadline loomsRelated Articles
Government claim landlords still have a choice over who they rent to
2 weeks ago | 5 comments
One in five homes lost from PRS as small landlords struggle
2 weeks ago | 2 comments
Member Since July 2013 - Comments: 2054 - Articles: 21
12:07 PM, 30th July 2026, About 3 days ago
Reply to the comment left by NewYorkie at 11:01 EDIT Sorry meant to reply to Cider Drinker
I did not say you should try to end it orally. However, if a tenant says they are willing to go and hands back the keys but won’t sign anything, that can still be treated as a surrender.
Member Since July 2013 - Comments: 2054 - Articles: 21
12:12 PM, 30th July 2026, About 3 days ago
Reply to the comment left by Beaver at 30/07/2026 – 11:51
If a 2 pence in the pound increase is negligible for landlords, then a 2 pence increase in the basic income tax rate is negligible for everyone.
Member Since March 2024 - Comments: 304
12:28 PM, 30th July 2026, About 3 days ago
FYI Baroness Taylor, the 2p in the £ rise will be negligible for me because I added a sufficient sum on to the rent increase I was intending to implement to compensate. Not so for the tenants.
Presumably your role with its tax free £371 daily attendance allowance doesn’t qualify you to understand that many landlords have operated for years with rents well behind the market for good tenants. All you and your ilk are doing is ending that relationship by incessant tax grabs and regulatory changes as rents can and will increase by whatever amount is necessary to compensate where tenants would have to pay even more to end the tenancy and move.
Just a small sign of encouragement to new individual landlords and to retain existing ones in the face of the significantly changed landscape as far as risk is concerned following the RRA might have been applying the increase to passive investments earning interest or dividends whilst leaving active direct investment in residential property at standard tax rates.
The loss of income to the treasury would be offset by higher numbers of landlords paying tax. It might also contribute to the government’s aspiration to get more houses built as the 1.5 million target by 2029 is not likely to be met.
Member Since October 2013 - Comments: 1681 - Articles: 3
1:09 PM, 30th July 2026, About 3 days ago
Landlords are already taxed on income before the effect of s24. This is another 2% tax on top of that, and is NOT neglible.
Member Since January 2023 - Comments: 2
1:24 PM, 30th July 2026, About 3 days ago
Reply to the comment left by Beaver at 30/07/2026 – 11:19
I’ve used MCO on occasions – it’s the threat that works and the simple “Pre-Action Protocol” letter is scary to anyone wanting to preserve their credit rating. Looking at the link I see there is reference to a “Breathing Space”; would the Court would allow this and for how long? With mortgage repossessions I believe it was a matter of weeks, rarely many months, but perhaps the Court would not compare landlord creditors equally to mortgage lender creditors!
Member Since May 2018 - Comments: 2278
2:30 PM, 30th July 2026, About 3 days ago
Reply to the comment left by John Kerr at 30/07/2026 – 13:24
Thank you. For the benefit of anybody who hasn’t used it from the people who have, what are the small things that you have to be aware of when using this process in order that the process remains on your side as a landlord and you don’t compromise it by, for example, making small administrative mistakes?
Member Since August 2022 - Comments: 111
2:32 PM, 30th July 2026, About 3 days ago
I have done MCO for every tenant that has owed me money, sometimes just as a means of warning their next landlord (it works).
I have also done Attachment of Earnings and got all my money back. Make sure you have the tenant’s employer’s address for this. Don’t bother with AoE for benefits tenants, you won’t get anything back. But worth doing for employed tenants. Their employer will absolutely know that they owe money so it definitely acts as a deterrent.
Member Since May 2018 - Comments: 2278
3:00 PM, 30th July 2026, About 3 days ago
Reply to the comment left by Markella Mikkelsen at 30/07/2026 – 14:32
I’m guessing that you can offset the cost of a Money Claim Order against rents but typically what does a Money Claim Order Cost?
Member Since December 2023 - Comments: 17
3:02 PM, 30th July 2026, About 3 days ago
The un-elected baroness who almost passed the law single handed says now that they did not take into account the landlord losses as the result of the biggest change in law that in the last 10 years that has been a decade of total anti landlord rhetoric stealing from small landlords the interest charges that they were entitled to deduct from the loan towards their business like any other business and according to the place in the country could be around £10,000 and £20,000 which will be the rent so high rents reflect the abolition of this business right. Since then another 99 different economic punitive changes while demonising the small landlords so anything that you punish the landlord have nothing to do with the higher rent cost and like Raynor the (Vice president of the government stated by saying that the landlords have plenty money while she with 3 properties and stealing £40,000 from HMRC while being on one hand the architect of this awful law that not a single landlord was consulted in a sea of demonising landlords through the media which was constantly throwing dirt on the professionals that poor their money to invest in accommodation and of those 99 new laws, rules and regulations not a single one has been in favour of landlord but greatly reward that 2% of bad tenants who leave after large rent arrears and the landlord spending over £3.000 with lawyers, courts and fines. That is the reason why landlords are leaving so there will be less homeless but they cannot produce miracles of this rough sea, just to through the life saver.
Member Since April 2018 - Comments: 517
3:13 PM, 30th July 2026, About 3 days ago
The same old Baroness. Note the arrogance of her response. Do not vote Labour.