Letting and estate agent haart is calling on the Chancellor to give landlords a break in the Budget, as figures show a reduction in the number of investors entering the rental market.
The firm says that the number of new landlords registering to buy was 2.9% down on a monthly basis in August, and 28.4% down on the year.
Haart is calling on the Government to remove the additional 3% Stamp Duty charge on the purchase of second and buy-to-let homes, which has been imposed on landlords since April 2016.
Haart would also like to see a reversal of tax relief changes which are currently being phased in and which will see mortgage interest tax relief replaced by a tax credit limited to the basic rate of tax.
Paul Sloan, development director for haart, said: “We are continuing to see buy-to-let purchasers fall on the year. The additional tax burden which has been placed on the sector has certainly been a setback and we would urge the Chancellor to remove this in the Budget to encourage investors into the market.
“Landlords have in the past been a popular target for taxation, but the reality is that more and more people need rental properties to live in – and investors are needed to provide them.
“The continued media commentary on the effect that the UK’s departure from the EU might have on the housing market is also unhelpful, especially given that it is largely sensational speculation not based on fact.
“The facts are that property ownership is unsuitable or unaffordable for many and there is insufficient availability of social housing, making privately rented property an accessible and affordable option that is increasingly in demand.”
Comments (2)
Is that 3% extra on top of the normal stamp duty? So if they pay 2%, then this additional one? That hardly seems fair! Maybe a flat 3% no matter the price would be better. Then it still generates revenue, but is fairer for Landlords.
The mortgage relief should never have been stopped though. If a mortgage is £400 a month and the tenant pays £600 a month, then after management fees etc, there is barely a profit, never mind if there are any repairs needed!
The inevitable outcome of all this vote winning meddling is that there will be fewer houses available.
Fewer houses available will create imbalance in supply and demand, which in turn will force a market rise as more renters vie for less properties. (Not all renters want to live in social housing).
As an agent, I for one would prefer to look after less properties and have less tenants on my books, but with increased rents and commissions filling the shortfall. Working less for more sounds like a win win.
The problem is, all the remaining agents will be fighting over that same diminished stock.
In the end, the tenants are the biggest losers, followed by the agents. The landlords should be able to level the playing field, but the real winner is government!
With the increased revenue from tax hikes and corporation tax as landlords place their portfolio’s into limited companies. Not forgetting the stamp duty some will pay by transferring the sale of their properties to those limited companies.
Smoke and mirrors as usual.