Why mortgage-free landlords say they are leaving, and why it is not about debt
These figures come from our Q3 2026 Landlord Sentiment Survey, which ran from 1 to 8 October 2026. 1,654 landlords took part and 1,472 completed every page. For the full results, including how sentiment has moved since Q1 and Q2, see the .
This quarter we asked, for the first time, what proportion of each landlord’s portfolio is currently making a loss after all costs and tax. The main article reported that just over a quarter of landlords (26.2%, base 1,485) have at least some loss-making property. Here we look at who those landlords are, how losses relate to borrowing, and what they mean for landlords’ plans. We also look at a finding that, at first sight, points the other way: landlords with no mortgages at all are the most likely to say they will leave.
Heavy losses go hand in hand with leaving
The share of landlords planning to exit completely rises sharply with the share of their portfolio that is losing money. Among landlords with no loss-making property, 19.8% plan a full exit over the next three years (base 934). That is broadly the same for landlords with up to a quarter of their portfolio in loss (19.1%, base 188), rises to 32.9% where a quarter to a half is loss-making (base 73), and reaches 47.6% where more than half or all of it is (base 126). Of those whose entire portfolio is loss-making, 54.2% plan to exit (base 72).
Lighter losses show up in a different way. Landlords with up to a quarter of their portfolio in loss are the most likely to plan to sell some properties but not all (56.9%), which suggests they are trimming loss-making properties rather than leaving. Combining “sell some” and “exit”, 60.3% of landlords with no losses plan to reduce their portfolios, rising to 76.1%, 86.3% and 83.3% across the three loss bands.
Critical Finding: Losses are the clearest dividing line in our data between landlords who are staying and landlords who are going. When we compared landlords of similar age, portfolio size and level of borrowing, those with more than half their portfolio in loss were still about three times as likely to plan a full exit as those with no losses. Borrowing, age and portfolio size do not explain the link away.
Losses rise steeply with borrowing
Of landlords with no mortgages, 12.5% report that at least part of their portfolio is making a loss after all costs and tax (base 503). The share rises with each step up in borrowing: 23.3% of those with average gearing under 30% loan to value (base 202), around 31% between 31% and 60% (bases 234 and 197), 38.8% at 61% to 70% (base 160) and 46.9% at 71% or more (base 128). The share with more than half or all of their portfolio in loss rises from 5.6% of mortgage-free landlords to 17.2% of the most highly geared.
Landlords’ answers to a separate question back this up. Asked which other factors influence their decision to sell (respondents could choose more than one, so totals exceed 100%), 24.1% of mortgage-free landlords chose “rental income no longer covering costs” (base 503). That rises to 56.5% at 61% to 70% loan to value (base 161) and 59.2% at 71% or more (base 125). Among landlords with more than half or all of their portfolio in loss, 74.8% chose it (base 127).
The most highly geared group is not uniformly in retreat, however. Landlords borrowing 71% or more of their portfolio’s value are the most likely of any group to be loss-making, and also the most likely to plan to buy more property (19.3%, base 135, against 7.0% overall). The same was true in Q2 (21.6%, base 190). This group appears to include both stretched landlords and active investors who borrow heavily to grow.
Key Insight: For landlords with mortgages, the cost of borrowing now decides whether many properties make or lose money. Mortgage interest is only partly deductible for landlords who own in their own names because of Section 24, so higher rates hit the bottom line harder than they would for most businesses. Even so, one in eight mortgage-free landlords also report losses, a reminder that repairs, compliance, licensing and tax can push a property into the red without any debt at all.
Mortgage-free landlords are more likely to exit, but not because they are mortgage-free
At first sight, the landlords most likely to leave are those with no debt at all. 30.0% of mortgage-free landlords plan to exit the sector completely over the next three years (base 517), against 21.7% of those with mortgages (base 958). The gap was almost the same in Q2 (33.2%, base 615, against 24.4%, base 1,392), when we asked exactly the same questions.
Three things suggest this is not really about debt.
They are not reducing their portfolios more. Combining “sell some” and “exit completely”, 63.6% of mortgage-free landlords plan to reduce their holdings, against 67.2% of those with mortgages. Mortgage-free landlords are also more likely to plan to stay the same (32.5% against 24.1%). They are split between staying put and getting out entirely; landlords with mortgages are more likely to sell some properties and keep others.
They are smaller and older. The typical (median) mortgage-free landlord owns three properties (base 510), against six for landlords with mortgages (base 948); the averages are 7.0 and 14.3, pulled up by a minority of large portfolios. Nearly two thirds of mortgage-free landlords (64.7%, base 496) are aged 65 or over, against 37.2% of those with mortgages (base 908). For a landlord with one property, “selling one” and “exiting completely” are the same thing, and 22.9% of mortgage-free landlords own one property or none, against 7.2% of those with mortgages.
The gap largely disappears among landlords of the same size. Among landlords with three or fewer properties, 40.0% of the mortgage-free plan to exit (base 265), against 35.9% with mortgages (base 262). With four to ten properties the figures are 18.5% (base 178) and 17.5% (base 388); with 11 or more, 18.2% (base 66) and 14.8% (base 297). None of these differences is large enough to be meaningful at these sample sizes, and the same pattern appeared in Q2.
Key Insight: The “mortgage-free exodus” is really a small-landlord exodus. Landlords with no debt tend to be older, with smaller portfolios, and for many of them leaving the sector means selling one or two properties as they retire. Portfolio size, not the absence of a mortgage, is what goes with planning a full exit: landlords with three or fewer properties are more than twice as likely to plan one as those with four or more, whether or not they borrow.
Two routes out: retirement for the mortgage-free, costs and tax for the borrowers
Landlords planning to exit give different reasons depending on whether they borrow. Among mortgage-free landlords planning to leave, the most cited factors were difficulty removing tenants who do not pay or cause damage (61.6%), their own age, retirement or health (59.6%), the higher income tax rates on rental income due from April 2027 (59.6%) and licensing and council enforcement (58.3%; base 151). Only 21.9% cited Section 24 and 31.8% said rental income no longer covers costs.
Among landlords with mortgages who plan to leave, the April 2027 tax change (74.6%), Section 24 (70.1%) and difficulty removing tenants (68.2%) lead, and more than half (53.2%) say rental income no longer covers costs (base 201). Fewer (40.3%) cite age, retirement or health. Respondents could choose more than one option, so totals exceed 100%.
Key Insight: There are two distinct routes out of the sector. Mortgage-free landlords are mostly stepping back at the end of their landlord careers, pushed by regulation and the hassle of managing tenants as much as by money. Landlords with mortgages are more often being squeezed out by the combination of interest costs, Section 24 and the coming increase in income tax on rental profits. Both groups share the same frustrations about possession and licensing.
Losses, not borrowing, drain confidence
Confidence in the outlook for the private rented sector over the next three years is low across the board: 73.3% of landlords are not confident (base 1,483). But it falls sharply with losses. 67.4% of landlords with no loss-making property are not confident (base 933), rising to 80.9% with up to a quarter in loss (base 188), 89.0% with a quarter to a half (base 73) and 92.9% with more than half or all (base 127). The share who are “not at all confident” doubles, from 35.8% to 72.4%. Not one of the 73 landlords with a quarter to a half of their portfolio in loss described themselves as confident.
Borrowing on its own makes little difference. Between 68.7% and 77.1% of landlords are not confident at every level of gearing, from no mortgages to 71% or more, with no consistent pattern.
Key Insight: It is not debt that saps landlords’ confidence; it is whether their properties are paying their way. A highly geared landlord whose rents cover costs is no more pessimistic than a mortgage-free one. Once properties start losing money, confidence collapses, and the plans to leave follow.
Remortgaging: driven by borrowing, not distress
A third of landlords (33.8%, base 1,614) expect to remortgage at least one property in the next 12 months, broadly unchanged on Q2 (34.2%). Among landlords who have mortgages, though, the share has edged up in each survey this year: 43.8% in Q1 (base 1,442), 48.2% in Q2 (base 1,392) and 50.9% in Q3 (base 959). Each step is small, but the direction has been consistent.
Plans to remortgage rise with borrowing, from 3.4% of mortgage-free landlords (base 504) and 28.8% of those under 30% loan to value (base 208), to 67.3% at 61% to 70% (base 168). Landlords with some loss-making property are more likely to remortgage than those with none (53.2% with up to a quarter in loss, base 188, against 30.0% with no losses, base 924), but that is mainly because they borrow more. Once borrowing is taken into account, the difference disappears. Landlords with more than half their portfolio in loss are, if anything, less likely to be planning a remortgage (36.5%, base 126).
Key Insight: Remortgaging is a routine part of running a geared portfolio rather than a sign of distress. The landlords with the heaviest losses appear more likely to be heading for the exit than refinancing to stay in.
In landlords’ own words
We also asked two open questions: the single biggest issue landlords face, and what would make them stay or expand. Landlords with heavy losses were about twice as likely as those with no losses to raise costs or losses as their biggest issue, and more likely to raise tax. Among mortgage-free landlords planning to exit, around 45% of those who answered said nothing would change their minds, or simply that they are leaving; interest rates and Section 24 barely featured in their answers.
Themes from landlords with heavy losses included:
-
Barely breaking even: landlords working full time on their portfolios and still making little or nothing after tax, with less money left to reinvest in the properties.
-
Repairs and voids: the cost of putting a property right after a tenancy ends often exceeding the deposit.
-
Equity: in some areas, many years of flat prices leaving little equity to fall back on.
-
Pensions: smaller landlords who regard their properties as their retirement income feeling penalised by the tax system.
-
Treat it as a business: calls for mortgage interest and other costs to be fully deductible, as for other businesses.
Mortgage-free landlords planning to leave more often described the regulatory direction of travel and difficulties with tenants than money. One described being unable to sell a leasehold flat because of ground rent and service charges, and so continuing to let it.
How we analysed the results
-
Questions: Q25 (share of portfolio making a loss after all costs and tax, base 1,485), Q14 (average gearing, base 1,539), Q3 (plans for the next three years, base 1,629), Q4 (remortgage in the next 12 months, base 1,614), Q17 (confidence in the sector’s outlook, base 1,534) and Q19 (other factors influencing the decision to sell, multi-select, base 1,486), compared with portfolio size (Q9) and age (Q27).
-
Bases: percentages are of landlords who answered both questions in each comparison, so bases vary. Landlords who chose “rather not say” on gearing are excluded from comparisons by gearing.
-
Groups: “mortgage-free” means average gearing of “no mortgages”; “with mortgages” means any loan-to-value band. Gearing of 71% to 75% and 76% or more are combined as “71% or more”. “More than half” and “all of it” loss-making are combined as “more than half or all”, except where stated. In the loss charts, landlords who answered “don’t know” or “not applicable” on losses are excluded; in the chart of losses by gearing they are included in the base. Portfolio size is grouped as three or fewer, four to ten and 11 or more.
-
Small numbers: no group with fewer than 50 respondents is reported. Differences are described as meaningful only where they pass a standard statistical test at 95% confidence. The links between losses and exit, mortgage status and exit, losses and confidence, and losses and remortgaging were also checked in combined models allowing for age, portfolio size and borrowing.
-
Comparisons over time: gearing and remortgage questions are unchanged since Q1, so those trends are like-for-like. Our question about plans covered the next 12 months in Q1 and the next three years from Q2, so comparisons of plans use Q2 and Q3 only. The questions on losses, confidence and reasons to sell are new this quarter.
-
Who took part: respondents are self-selecting Property118 readers, not a random sample of all UK landlords. They are mostly experienced landlords aged 55 or over, and every question in Q3 could be skipped.
What Does This Mean for Landlords?
The survey points to two different groups leaving the rented sector, for different reasons.
The first are landlords whose properties no longer pay their way. They are more likely to borrow heavily, more likely to cite Section 24 and the coming increase in income tax on rental profits, and far more likely to have lost confidence in the sector. Losses are the factor most closely linked to a plan to leave, even after allowing for age, portfolio size and borrowing.
The second are smaller, older landlords, often with no debt, who are stepping back as they retire. For them, debt is not the problem; the burden of regulation and managing tenants weighs as heavily as tax. Their departure would not be fixed by lower interest rates.
That distinction matters for anyone trying to keep rental homes in the sector. Measures that improve the economics of letting, whether on interest costs, tax treatment or compliance costs, would speak most directly to the first group. Simpler and more predictable regulation, particularly on possession and licensing, would matter more to the second. Many smaller landlords are likely to leave regardless as they reach retirement.
For individual landlords, the message from the data is that the percentage of a portfolio that is losing money matters more than the level of borrowing in itself. Many highly geared landlords are profitable and still investing. Landlords whose properties are in loss may want to review which properties are dragging the portfolio down before deciding whether to sell some, refinance or leave altogether.
These are the views of engaged Property118 readers rather than every landlord in the UK, and they describe intentions rather than actions. The Q4 survey will show whether the link between losses and exit plans holds as interest rates and tax changes take effect.
Have Your Say
Is your portfolio still paying its way, and has that changed your plans? Please tell us in the comments below; your experiences help explain what the numbers show.
Look out for the Q4 2026 survey at the end of December. The more landlords who take part, the stronger the evidence we can put in front of journalists and policymakers. Read the
9 comments on this article
Learn from your peers’ experience
A different perspective could help you spot an issue, avoid a mistake or find a better way forward. Read the comments and add your own views if you wish.
Previous Article
Will tenants miss the small landlord?
Member Since June 2013 - Comments: 3410 - Articles: 83
10:25 AM, 16th October 2026, About 3 weeks ago
You telling me.
On many houses, I’m losing 7k pa EACH house.
I’ve got lots 240k, tenant paying £1000ishpm, 12k pa, I get after tax 7k.
In normal safe investment tracker, on average I’d get 14k pa with ZERO tax till I sold the investment. And then be just one off CGT tax 24%.
And yes the regulation, we’ve done nothing wrong, me nor tenant signed up for these rules & now threats of £7000 fines from all over, every bit of admin now is £7000 fine for error. Can have no MOT & serious car accidents & get £300 fine.
Govt just doesn’t get it, many of u don’t want the houses.
Govt: Well why have u got the house Mick?
Mick: We only keeping em for the tenant, where they gonna go?
Govt: So you not doing it to make loads of money & rip tenants off?
Mick: No, I’m actually losing lots, 7k per house per tenant per year & you driving me to now ask tenant to go cause I’m losing anyway & now you want to fine me £7000 for forgetting to upload a gas certificate to database even though I’ve ACTUALLY got the certificate. New trumped up database that’s gonna’ take me another 40 hours to do all houses in small time frame you’ve gave us.
Govt: Oh, we thought u were all greedy, so we like to fine u to get some’at back.
Member Since May 2018 - Comments: 2652
10:32 AM, 16th October 2026, About 3 weeks ago
On this key insight:
“There are two distinct routes out of the sector. Mortgage-free landlords are mostly stepping back at the end of their landlord careers, pushed by regulation and the hassle of managing tenants as much as by money…..”
I suspect that there may be another factor at play here. If you are mortgage free and concerned that capital gains tax may rise then you might wish to exit now rather than hold on. At the moment you can do better with your money by putting it in the bank than investing in property, without any hassle from tenants. If you are older and not paying a high salary then it may be possible to arrange for your CGT bill to be lower. And if you hang on longer then there is a greater chance that your family might have a large IHT bill…where as if you crystallise the gain you can start gifting.
But if you are older and already having hassle with tenants then you probably will not have greeted the arrival of labour’s Renters Rights Act (and the loss of section 21 which provided a fallback) with eagerness. If you have fewer good years left, or possibly fewer years in good health, why would you want to spend a couple of those years trying to get tenants out when your investment will do better in the bank? And with Rachel Reeves’ inheritance tax changes you may need to spend the money anyway rather than have it taken off you or your family, probably to be given to someone who did not work as hard as you did or work as long as you did.
Member Since October 2023 - Comments: 270
10:42 AM, 16th October 2026, About 3 weeks ago
Savings interest rates are high now, so at some point it becomes more beneficial to sell the property, and put the capital in the bank.
5% in the bank, or 5.5% dealing with tenants, which do you prefer?
My bank manager doesn’t call me in the middle of the night to say the boiler stopped working!
Two sold, two to go.
Member Since January 2024 - Comments: 453
11:09 AM, 16th October 2026, About 3 weeks ago
Many landlords with higher income can be paying tax on property income even though they make a loss because they pay tax at 40% on the rental income BEFORE interest and only get 20% tax relief for the interest. The rental income BEFORE interest is also used to calculate Student Loan repayments, so you end up making bigger Student Loan repayments, Child Credits, so you can lose Child credits, loss of free childcare after £100k and reduction/loss of personal allowance after £100k
Member Since May 2018 - Comments: 2652
11:55 AM, 16th October 2026, About 3 weeks ago
Reply to the comment left by Ryan Stevens at 16/10/2026 – 11:09
This is true….you look at the equity you’ve got invested in housing, you look at all the punishment you receive for doing something socially-useful….all the cost, all the risks that the state piles on to you via the Renters Rights Act and seems intent on piling on to you via the labour landlord database and think “…is this really going to make my life better?… If I’m actually getting 5%, I’m going to be crucified by CGT and my family will get a savaging via IHT, does this really make sense?”
Also, as you get older you can retire elsewhere, but if you hold investments in the UK in land and buildings then that investment is liable to inheritance tax even if you are retired abroad. But if you invest in equities or other financial instruments then you can avoid that. If you reach the point at which you need to start gifting then it is easier to do that if all your equity is not tied up in one house (because stamp duty land tax would get you if you tried to transfer to the kids that way).
Also, in comparison to maybe a 5% return invested in residential property, as of August–September 2026, UK annuity rates for a healthy 65‑year‑old are around 7.75%–8.36% for single‑life level annuities, meaning £100,000 typically buys £7,750–£8,360 a year for life. So if you sold the buy to let, used whatever part of the equity you needed to get the income you needed in retirement and gifted the rest to your family then you wouldn’t need to pay Rachel Reeves’ death taxes. And why would you want to be punished for your life of hard work?
But none of this encourages investment in housing or growth in the economy. It is just what normal people who have worked and paid taxes all their lives and also what their families have to do in order to avoid being pillaged by the state. Parties like labour and the greens don’t tax the rich….it is normal working families and small businesses that get robbed.
So nobody should be really surprised if Mark’s data suggest that the older, mortgage-free landlords do something different. And if people have been thinking “….is what the government telling me true?” and “…how do I avoid my family being robbed by Rachel?…” then in 2026 AI will tell you how to do that.
Member Since February 2023 - Comments: 95
11:55 AM, 16th October 2026, About 3 weeks ago
Can’t wait to sell to have piece of mind
Member Since February 2023 - Comments: 8
9:07 AM, 17th October 2026, About 3 weeks ago
just got my accounts T/O £95k pre tax Profit £54k Income tax £11k balance £43K less than half left
Member Since August 2014 - Comments: 184
2:22 AM, 18th October 2026, About 3 weeks ago
My story in case anyone interested. Had 7 properties: 6 Victorian terraced HMOs in trendy part of S.Bristol and lovely 2 bed flat in W. London, Very low mortgages on fabulous full term trackers (Base +0.7%), was making money but ROI not great plus after a lot of capital improvements and expensive maintenance costs and 40% income tax plus RRA, combined with already being UK non resident for many years ago, decided to exit PRS completely, currently living in Cyprus with 4 sold, 2 under offer and the flat no offers yet. The properties sold all went for above £500k and sold to either first time buyers or buyers upsizing from a flat. No tenant expressed an interest to buy. The current trajectory of PRS is obvious, the government knows exactly what they are doing to PRS and it is planned, it is a War on Landlords, and the goal; as many independent landlords driven out as possible and replaced by corporate landlords, BlackRock etc. My advice, sell up and get out before it gets any worse.
Member Since May 2018 - Comments: 2652
1:11 PM, 19th October 2026, About 2 weeks ago
Reply to the comment left by Bristol Landlord at 18/10/2026 – 02:22
It’s an interesting story and for anyone considering these issues an additional factor is that even if you are living abroad, if you are invested in land and property in the UK then you are still liable for inheritance tax at 40%, the risk of which will increase from April 2027 because of Rachel Reeves’ changes including pensions in the IHT net. However, in some countries outside the UK there is no inheritance tax payable on assets left to family members and I believe that Cyprus is one of those countries.