Why Renting Your Own Properties to Your Own Company Doesn’t Work

Some landlords believe that renting their own properties to their own Limited Company creates a more tax-efficient structure. In reality, it can lead to penalties for under-declaring tax.

The reasoning behind the concept sounds simple enough. Individual income tax rates can reach 45 per cent, and for those earning over £100,000, the withdrawal of personal allowances can push the effective rate close to 60 per cent. Corporation tax, by contrast, is capped at 25 per cent. This can appear to offer a logical route to reduce tax exposure: set up a Limited Company, “rent” your personally owned properties to it, and provide the company an opportunity to hive off some extra profit in a lower-tax environment.

Unfortunately, the legislation that governs these arrangements was designed precisely to stop them.

How These Arrangements Are Intended To Work

The model typically involves the individual landlord granting a tenancy or management agreement to their own Limited Company. The company then sublets the properties to tenants, collects the rent, pays the landlord a nominal “head rent”, and retains the difference as profit. On paper, this seems to convert personal rental income into corporate profits taxed at a lower rate.

In substance, however, nothing has changed. For this reason, HMRC views such arrangements as artificial, and the law supports that view.

The Finance Act 2009: Transfer of Income Streams

Schedule 15 of the Finance Act 2009, known as the “Transfer of Income Streams” legislation, was introduced to prevent individuals and businesses from redirecting income while retaining ownership of the underlying asset that generates it. The legislation explains that if a person transfers the right to income but doesn’t also transfer at least the beneficial ownership of the underlying asset, the income remains taxable on that person. There is a potential problem with transferring the beneficial ownership of the underlying asset, which I suspect is where the leasing idea comes from, and that is that taxation follows beneficial ownership. In other words, SDLT and CGT consequences could also flow from such transactions, and while reliefs may be available to reduce or mitigate the effects, equally, they might not!

In other words, you cannot create a company, pay yourself rent from your own properties, and expect the income to become the company’s for tax purposes without also transferring the beneficial ownership of the properties to the company. The economic reality is that you are still the one receiving and controlling the income, and the tax follows that reality.

What Landlords Should Take from This

The instinct to manage tax more effectively is sound. The problem lies not in the goal, but in the method. Artificial income transfers do not work. Any structure that attempts to shift profits without transferring real risk, control, and ownership is likely to fail under scrutiny.

Before entering into any form of arrangement connected to personally owned properties, it is vital to obtain professional advice based on your specific portfolio, liabilities, and long-term objectives. What looks like a clever accounting solution may instead invite years of stress, backdated assessments, and unnecessary legal costs.

How we help

Our consultancy covers retirement, business continuity and legacy planning. The process is written and client-led. Recommendations are prepared using a conditional-logic Fact Find and email follow-ups, with a tailored 30+page report containing worked examples and numbered actions.

The scope includes continuity and liquidity buffers, succession planning, business structuring, refinancing pathways, AVM valuation methodology, and governance items such as shareholders’ and members’ agreements, Wills, and LPAs.

⚖️ Important Notice – Scope of Planning Support

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