Spending Review 2015 – 3% increase on Stamp Duty for BTL and second homes

Spending Review 2015 – 3% increase on Stamp Duty for BTL and second homes

14:30 PM, 25th November 2015, About 9 years ago 224

Text Size

GeorgeThe Chancellor George Osborne in his spending review today announced that he will increase Stamp duty for Buy to Let properties and second homes with a surcharge of 3% from April 2016.

The Chancellor said he wanted to change from generation rent to generation buy. He was concerned that Cash Purchasers and foreign investors, who were not affected by the relief cap of 20% on  mortgage interest, along with Buy to Let investors were squeezing out home buyers. Therefore there will be an increase of 3% in stamp duty for non-main residence purchasers, which would also raise an additional £1bn in tax.

The Housing budget will now be doubled to £2bn per annum and a project to build 400,000 new affordable homes to buy will be started. Osborne said “this government chooses to build.”

These affordable homes will be offered to First Time Buyers at a discount of 20%, and 135,000 new homes will be offered under Help to Buy shared ownership.

A London Help to Buy scheme will offer interest-free loans up to a maximum of 40% of the value of a newly built home.

Restrictions on shared ownership will be removed and the planning system reformed to deliver more homes.

Councils will also receive an additional £10m to help homeless people.

It is the Chancellors clear policy to help solve the housing crises by building more homes and squeezing the competitiveness of the Private Rental Sector thus shifting the balance from renting to home ownership.

stamp

Commercial property investors, with more than 15 properties, are expected to be exempt from the new charges.


Share This Article


Comments

Vanessa Barlow

10:46 AM, 30th November 2015, About 9 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Alison King" at "27/11/2015 - 17:00":

Thanks Alison, seems you agree with my hope, and that a property dev Ltd company owning and selling 1 property at a time, should not attract SDLT

Vanessa Barlow

10:51 AM, 30th November 2015, About 9 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Tony Atkins" at "27/11/2015 - 17:19":

Hi Tony, my example was a ltd company doing property development that only owns 1 property at a time (buy and do up, then sell, and only then buy the next one), do you think it will still somehow get caught up in the tax and if so why?

Manchester Landlord

11:07 AM, 30th November 2015, About 9 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Vanessa Barlow" at "30/11/2015 - 10:51":

I imagine it will be subject to the new stamp duty rates, unless the company owns 15 or more properties (not sure if this applies to an individual owning 15 properties?). If so, this has also ruined my plans to start trading properties as the margins will be far too tight.

The government is trying and succeeding in killing off property as an investment or business for hoi polloi. Although they are more than happy for corporations to enjoy the spoils. Its all starting to become rather Orwellian!

AnthonyJames

11:48 AM, 30th November 2015, About 9 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Vanessa Barlow" at "30/11/2015 - 10:51":

Hi Vanessa, Yes, if a limited company buys just one property at a time in its own name for renovation, you should be OK on the current wording of what the Government intends to do. However if the company has two properties - say one to do up, another on which it is seeking planning - then it will be caught.

It sounds like your company will be in the fortunate position of either having the cash to buy its single property outright, or it is able to secure a mortgage or bank loan in its own name. However in my experience of property development, mortgage providers are extremely reluctant to lend to small limited companies, especially in the amounts of hundreds of thousands of pounds needed for a capital-intensive business like property. I have always been forced to buy my renovation properties and my redevelopment new-build sites using BTL mortgages in my own name, with the properties held on behalf of my limited company and recorded as such in the company minutes and trading accounts. HMRC have agreed to this arrangement and allowed the properties to be taxed as business trading assets, not private investments.

My concern now is that limited companies, whether buying more than one property in their own name or in the names of their principal director(s), will be liable for this new 3% SDLT charge, as the Government will decide it is simpler to tax everyone, individuals and companies, that own more than one property, regardless of intent as regards trading or investment. We'll only know what they are actually proposing after the consultation period and when the actual legislation is published.

Richard York

12:18 PM, 30th November 2015, About 9 years ago

Careful on the value of the properties - if they are greater than £500k on aquisition, from 1st April 2016 properties in the higher tax bands will attract the "Annual Tax on Enveloped Properties" if they're not let out (I believe at a market rate) and belong to a "non-natural person" (ie a ltd company, partnership etc)

This will be £3500 per year and ramps up over £1M.

Also note that these properties (over £500k) will also attract 15% tax if purchased by a non-natural person.

There may be some exemptions for property development companies, but I'm not really clear on what these are. Something to be aware of, anyway. I think this was intended to reduce the dodgy corporate vehicles hoovering up prime central london, but something to be aware of.

Manchester Landlord

12:20 PM, 30th November 2015, About 9 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Tony Atkins" at "30/11/2015 - 11:48":

Tony, from your previous statement:

"I have always been forced to buy my renovation properties and my redevelopment new-build sites using BTL mortgages in my own name, with the properties held on behalf of my limited company and recorded as such in the company minutes and trading accounts. HMRC have agreed to this arrangement and allowed the properties to be taxed as business trading assets, not private investments."

Are you saying that HMRC are happy for your company to be taxed as the beneficiary on your personal property portfolio? Is this a way for us to respond to clause 24?

Mark Alexander - what are your thoughts on this?

AnthonyJames

12:28 PM, 30th November 2015, About 9 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Manchester Landlord" at "30/11/2015 - 12:20":

Manchester Landlord - I don't think the Declaration of Trusts that I use are "ways round" Clause 24. I don't really have what most landlord would recognise as a personal property portfolio - yes, the properties are held in my personal name with BTL mortgages, but to have all their costs allowed, including full deduction of mortgage interest, against profits I need to show my accountants and HMRC that I am actively trading - spending money on renovations, securing planning permission, building new houses, selling them - and that I am not just sitting on the BTL mortgage properties for the long term.

Manchester Landlord

12:33 PM, 30th November 2015, About 9 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Tony Atkins" at "30/11/2015 - 12:28":

Understood - thanks Tony

Jay Jay

13:35 PM, 30th November 2015, About 9 years ago

It seems to me that whatever you do to make an honest living pay your tax keep people employed provide property for those that actually want to rent and not buy (there are still a lot out there) I have three tenants who have frankly told me they are happy to rent as they have no worries about up keep and rising maintenance costs. So yet again another conservative miss match just like tax credit, the possible outcomes could be more BTL being sold off, tenants then having to reply on local authorities for accommodation (which they in most cases do not have they sold all their housing stock as well) plus the increase in rents to recover the 3% + in SDLT. What is wrong with these so call politicians, I will tell you what’s wrong not one of them has had to work hard and make an actual living income, most at the top are privileged individuals and have no idea what is happening at the coal face, I just laugh when I see GO going around factories and construction sites in his HSE outfit learning a trade in 2 minutes. I think I will sell up move away from the UK set myself up with my monies after of course paying my CGT and anything else HMRC can sting me with. I sometimes think to my self is it all worth it, having employed staff paid shed loads of taxes and everything an honest employer has to do, then by governments changes in a particular industry I was in destroyed my business overnight so my retirement fund went out the window so starting to earn a living income from BTL was my only option, and now GO is starting on small landlords/ladies, so will I be voting big C next time round not likely but JC looks a good option I am becoming quite fond of the man. What happened to supporting enterprising entrepreneurs along with a bucket load of other manifesto promises you’ve guessed it they were all lies.

Vanessa Barlow

13:38 PM, 30th November 2015, About 9 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Tony Atkins" at "30/11/2015 - 11:48":

Thanks for the extra info Tony, and sounds like your business will unfortunately become more complex / costly for you soon. And yes my property was bought outright with cash, I am only a very small business so can only afford to do one at a time because I don't have enough spare cash for more, and as you say mortgages are not possible in my case either.

1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

Leave Comments

In order to post comments you will need to Sign In or Sign Up for a FREE Membership

or

Don't have an account? Sign Up

Landlord Tax Planning Book Now