Estates agents are being urged to brace themselves for a potential surge in property fall throughs in the coming days, as well as renegotiations on already agreed deals, following the hike in the stamp duty rates this morning for those buying a second home after chancellor Rachel Reeves announced major changes in her Budget yesterday.
Second home buyers in England and Northern Ireland have seen the rate they pay in stamp duty increase from the old rate of 3% to 5% from today, following the change and that is now likely to deter many people from completing on already agreed property deals, according to some market commentators.
Peter Stimson, head of product at MPowered Mortgages, commented: “Buy-to-let landlords and second home owners were expecting another tax squeeze from the Chancellor. But what they got was a whack with a hammer.
“Not an increase in general taxation or the capital gains tax they pay when selling a rental property, but a whopping 2% uplift in the stamp duty payable when buying a home to rent out.
“A sector rendered fragile by successive tax raises and interest rate rises is now likely to be clinging on by its fingernails after the announcement.
“Fewer than one in 10 mortgage applications made this year were for a buy-to-let loan, less than half of what it was just a few years ago.
“That share is now likely to plunge further as would-be landlords run the numbers and decide they just don’t stack up.
“The changes come into force from today, so there’s a real danger that thousands of purchases that were already in the pipeline will now be abandoned.
“But while hammering buy-to-let landlords is almost a national pastime for chancellors of all political stripes, the severity of Rachel Reeves’ decision took many people by surprise.
“The irony is that it’s not just landlords who will feel the pain. A third of Britons don’t own their own home, and for many of them, renting privately is the only option.
“With rents already rising and the supply of rental properties about to be further disrupted, rents could now climb even higher. Far from solving the housing crisis, this, at least in the short term, could well exacerbate it.”
Nick Lyons, chief executive of inventory experts NoLetting Go, agrees that renters will ultimately pay the price of yet another draconian tax announcement targeting private landlords.
He said: “I can’t see any measures [in yesterday’s budget announcement] that will grow the PRS – so it looks like supply will continue to be restricted which means rents continue to rise.”
Paul Johnson, the director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, the independent economic research think tank, also expects the hike in the stamp duty rate on second homes to ultimately impact renters, who have to foot the bill.
He said: “I have long said stamp duty is among our worst taxes. So what do we have? An increase for those buying second properties. You might think fine: a tax on rich people and landlords. But those looking to rent will pay part of the cost as fewer properties made available. I despair.”
Steve Griffiths, chief commercial officer at The Mortgage Lender, believes that landlords should no longer face increased taxation.
He said: “With strong demand for rental properties the need for a healthy private rental sector, and the professional landlords that facilitate this, is clear. We cannot keep asking landlords to bear the brunt of increased taxation, particularly at a time when there is a shortage of affordable homes available to buy and significant affordability challenges for first time buyers.
“It is likely that we’ll see some landlords re-evaluate any additions to their portfolios in light of the 2% increase to 5% on higher rates stamp duty for additional properties, effective immediately, with some smaller landlords weighing up whether it makes commercial sense to continue to operate.
“Not everyone is ready to, or wants to buy a home. The private rental sector provides flexibility and security to millions across the country. If we want to encourage professional landlords that provide quality, energy efficient rental properties, we cannot afford to be punitive.”
Lisa Simon, head of residential at Carter Jonas, added: “The announcement to raise the higher rate of Stamp Duty Land Tax on second homes from 3% to 5% is expected to deal another blow to landlords and investors, further impacting the buy-to-let market and doing little to support the need for long-term rental properties.
“When the initial 3% surcharge was introduced in 2016, it caught the market off guard, leading to a rush of purchases before the tax took effect. However, this latest increase, which is being implemented almost immediately, is unlikely to produce a similar surge in activity. Furthermore, over the past eight years, the private rented sector has faced numerous tax increases, regulatory changes, and additional burdens.
“This new cost is likely to discourage further investment. As more landlords exit the market and the supply of rental properties stagnates or declines, the higher tax rate will worsen the situation, potentially reducing housing options for tenants and driving up rents.”
Only poorly informed buyers, particularly those working with agents who lack a solid understanding of property economics, will withdraw from purchases due to the 2% increase in stamp duty.
A knowledgeable agent will highlight that the trendline price inflation of the average property will cover the entire cost of stamp duty acquisition in just 47 weeks. This timeline is only 19 weeks longer than the previous 3% stamp duty rate.
Any property investor who fails to account for asset inflation—especially when current prices are 8% below trend—should reconsider their investment strategy or seek guidance from agents who can effectively address these short-sighted objections.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Nice sentiment Robert but I think we all know that in reality it’s unlikely to play out like this.
Savvy and some underhand investors will use this change as a means of trying to drive a purchase price down and it will create a short term issue for agents to deal with. Nothing we can do about it but manage this unnecessary change thrust upon us by the government.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
On a positive note, no cgt increase for vendors of property.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Mark, I appreciate your perspective, but I think overcoming buyer objections is a crucial skill for negotiators. If a negotiator loses a deal because they struggle to convey that asset inflation can offset the additional costs associated with second home ownership and investor purchases, it may highlight an opportunity for further training and development within the team.
If a deal is so critical that an additional 134-day delay affects an investor’s ability to start realising the benefits of growth and income yield, it may be worth reconsidering their investment strategy. Perhaps focusing on approaches that align better with their strengths could be beneficial.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Not sure I fully agree with you there Robert. If only it were that easy to persuade a buyer to just pay an extra 2% – you could apply it to every transaction you’re doing and people could eventually be persuaded to pay an infinite amount of money for a property! If an agent has done their job properly they should have already squeezed the pips out of the buyer so they are already at the maximum they can (or are prepared to) pay for the property. Suddenly now they are expected to find another 2%. Some will take it on the chin, but a lot won’t. I have one deal going through at the moment at £2.8m where the guy was keeping his existing house as an investment. He’s already been on the phone to say that paying an extra £56k stamp duty simply doesn’t make financial sense so his purchase is now reliant upon his sale (unless of course my vendor would like to drop the price by £56k which they won’t).
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
I can give you detailed accurate figures on his existing home and the new one that will have him wondering if he should be quibbling over £56k on a purchase that will likely increase in value £156800 in the next 12 months. He doesn’t have the full picture or the understanding that £56k on a holding in excess £3m really is nothing at all. If it eats a few months rent so what?
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
If only it were that simple. The reality is that he has just been asked to hand over an extra £56,000. Regardless of percentages, that’s a lot of money which he hadn’t factored in to his calculations. Telling him that the property will increase in value and out-strip that amount within a few months is somewhat irrelevant (and disputable), he is still £56,000 worse off from this deal than he was this time yesterday.
If you’re ever thinking of moving house to Warwickshire give me a shout – I’ll gladly sell you my house for a figure in excess of market value.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Where in Warwickshire? I’ll give you the numbers.
This budget has been on the books since April 2014, it was inevitable. We didn’t know how big the hole would be but if the Conservatives hadn’t given Dido Harding a huge wad of cash for the track and trace system there would be no hole and a chance this red budget was delayed another 5 years
Re your buyer, he should have exchanged last week and saved himself £56k
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Robert,
You are making one massive assumption in your comment and that is capital appreciation. If there is none, your argument will not stand up. You can list all the statistics you like, but the agents on the ground are best placed to advise their clients on true selling prices in their area. Many parts of London have seen zero growth in capital value for 10 years, with many flats worth the same as they were in 2013 or 2015, either side of the previous peak of 2014. With most of the benefits of being a landlord being removed, added to additional SDLT and borrowing costs and ever increasing service charges, most are looking at more attractive investments. It does make you wonder who the Government expects to supply the housing stock required to meet renters’ needs!
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
In SE London, flats have been selling at 2016 prices.
So I concur.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Have you got an area I can look at please Biffabear? Places like Catford (SE13) are currently 17% more than 2016, despite the market there being 8% below the long term trend transaction average
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
I spent 35 years as Director with various financial institutions and seldom came across Btl landlords who did the maths. The guy down the pub has one or my mate reckons or house prices are booming.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
East London is certainly not your core area then! lol!
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
The extra 2% plus the lowered threshold will drive up rents, existing landlords selling need to replaced by new one’s, and ultimately everybody makes a calculation based on return on investment. Those borrowing to renovate and let out on a tight budget now have to find an extra few thousand for a project. I know a new landlord who is trying to do this and getting about a 7% yield, take an extra few percent off for stamp duty and he may as well stick the money in the bank.
The rental market needs an increase in supply – even a tiny reduction in supply will have a knock on effect in rents – a good thing for existing established landlords, more bad news for tenants.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
So the interesting thing is that PRS has ballooned over the past 20 years, from about 2m to circa 4.6m properties today.
Conversely, home ownership has significantly declined, effectively revising the home ownership boom of the Thatcher years.
Does it look like the overall number of available stock will significantly decline? Not with companies such as BlackRock’s private markets arm announcing circa £500m in the sector, nope.
Is it likely that smaller investor and accidental landlords may be priced out? Maybe, but residential property remains a rock-solid investment, hence the above.
Could we be about to witness another uptick in home ownership, increasing family wealth, and social mobility (for that is why Thatcher did it in the first instance)? Fingers crossed
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register