Tenant group claims landlords can easily afford EPC upgrades

Ok so landlords take out a 10 yr loan to pay for the £15000 upgrades. He has to increase rent by £180pm to cover it. As a 40% taxpayer he would need £300 per month if tax relief is not allowed.

Reply to the comment left by Suspicious Steve at 13/06/2025 – 11:36
Yes…the government taxes electricity more than it taxes gas and every condensing gas boiler that you install is better than the last one. And not expensive.

I think the best argument for renewables is that you are no longer reliant for power on central government. In the ’70s we were reliant on coal; when the unions decided to strike the government had to turn the power off. Vladimir Putin is presently bombing Ukraine into submission by attacking its power supply. Ukraine is responding by using technology such as photovoltaics.

https://www.solarpowerportal.co.uk/repower-ukraine-keeping-the-lights-on/

There is an argument for investing in renewables beyond ‘climate change’ and it may be attractive to some tenants. But they are going to pay for it in higher rents AND in higher taxes.

Reply to the comment left by Beaver at 13/06/2025 – 11:17

I agree with much of what you say, but I wonder if there will be scope for capital allowances anyway:
Do you remember the argument about whether replacing single-glazed windows with double-glazed windows was R&M or an improvement (hence capital)?
Ultimately HMRC ruled “When, due to changes in fashion, or technological advances, [or legislation?] it becomes cheaper or more efficient to replace something with the more modern alternative, the fact that this represents an improvement may be disregarded and the expenditure may still be classed as a repair.”
A heat-pump is thus a boiler repair.
Insulating a wall that has condensation and mould becomes a repair.
All repairs are allowable against income.

Reply to the comment left by Steve Rose at 13/06/2025 – 11:53
I remember the argument but if you’ve checked (and I have) HMRC doesn’t give clear guidelines on this. If you look at what would be required and you find that it’s actually tens of thousands of pounds worth of investment once you’ve allowed for all the tech, structural issues if you are doing something to your roof, internal insulation, making good etc. then you need to know that you CAN offset it.

Because of the amount of capital investment involved if you are incorporated it’s easier to justify. And it may make business sense if you think that you can attract high value tenants that want to pay higher rents for band A, B or C properties. But if you aren’t incorporated you have to service both the increased capital cost AND and an increased tax bill. So you have to pass your increased tax bill onto your tenants, they probably also pay more in tax via their energy bills, and their requirement for higher income to service their housing costs will push them further into the higher income brackets because they won’t have sufficient cash available to reduce their tax bill by paying into pensions.

Whether you are incorporated or not makes a big difference. If you aren’t incorporated and your tenants don’t satisfy the criteria for grants, then the only sensible thing is a modern condensing gas boiler. It isn’t your fault as a landlord that this is the only sensible thing…it is a consequence of bad government policy and in particular, bad government tax policy.

Reply to the comment left by Beaver at 13/06/2025 – 11:43
“There is an argument for investing in renewables beyond ‘climate change’ and it may be attractive to some tenants. But they are going to pay for it in higher rents AND in higher taxes.”

Exactly so, and this is their lifestyle choice, not this oft-trotted out rhetoric about tenant rights to a safe and warm home blah blah blah. I have always provided good quality homes for my tenants, and for my limited time remaining in the PRS, I will continue to do so. As a private citizen I have made the financial sacrifices to invest for my own family and for my tenants in compliance with the law, but I am now weary of the suggestion that LLs seemingly have endless obligations to tenants – within an increasingly punitive tax and legal system. For me, Govt passing the responsibility buck to LLs stops now; it is not my responsibility, it is theirs, and heaven knows I have paid in more than enough tax to help them along the way.

Reply to the comment left by Beaver at 13/06/2025 – 12:01“it’s actually tens of thousands of pounds worth of investment once you’ve allowed for all the tech, structural issues”
It really isn’t. It is currently a maximum of £3,500 per property and, while there is speculation that this figure may rise to £15,000, that too will be the maximum (and it is still just speculation.)
There are currently plenty of grade E and F properties being rented out utilising these exemptions. That is unlikely to change.

Reply to the comment left by Suspicious Steve at 13/06/2025 – 11:28
“working” is not the criteria. Child Tax Credits, Working Tax Credits and Universal Credits are all gateway benefits.
If your tenants are so wealthy that they’re not in receipt of any benefits, then I suggest they can afford a higher rent than the £600 you mentioned earlier.

Really mr Wilson, I think yourself and people like you are hugely impacting landlords mental and physical health and making Landlords run a non profitable business.
If everyone needs a good quality, affordable home. It’s the foundation of our lives, then make sure that when people buy or own their own home, that them properties have to have the same.
See how that goes down with every homeowner who then needs to spend thousands of pound to get to a minimum EPC rating!
There would be complete uproar for sure.

Reply to the comment left by Steve Rose at 13/06/2025 – 12:17So you are saying that I can definitely get a band D property to band C by spending £3,500? That I could go to an assessor say “…I want to get my band D property to C…” the assessor comes up with a list with a price tag of £20K and I say “..the maximum is £3.5K” and the assessor will then give me an EPC certificate at band C?
Or are you saying that if I spend £3.5K then I can apply for an exemption?

Reply to the comment left by Beaver at 13/06/2025 – 13:36
This whole area confuses me: The last time I looked at exemptions it appeared that I could get an exemption without spending anything. Not even £3.5K. So why do anything at all if you are not incorporated? Of course I may have misunderstood the exemption process and I’m happy to be educated about it.

I do get that some people running incorporated businesses could attract a well-healed portion of the rental market that wants to rent a band A, B or C property and can afford both the rent and the substantial amount of additional tax. It won’t do anything for climate change or achieve ‘net zero’, but in the same way that some people like to drive Ferraris then there’s a place in the market for this kind of activity. Whether you should make everybody drive a Ferrari, or another really expensive and over-priced car like a Tesla, is another matter entirely.

The Daily Express has just run a poll saying that consumers have turned away from Ed Miliband’s net zero commitments.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/2067858/net-zero-poll-prices

My tenants don’t seem to want a Tesla. They seem to like having a modern, efficient condensing gas boiler and a warm, safe band D property. And I suspect that many of them are better able to get to grips with the science that Ed Miliband clearly doesn’t understand.