Henry and Vanessa cross swords over changes to tax treatment of landlords

| Rosalind Renshaw

A loud spat erupted yesterday on Twitter between TV housing pundit Henry Pryor and Vanessa Warwick of landlord website Property Tribes.

It was over the campaign against the so-called ‘tenant tax’ – in reality, the phased-in changes to the tax treatment of mortgaged landlords which begins tomorrow, and which was introduced under Section 24 of the Finance Act following George Osborne’s Budget of last year.

Pryor opened fire with: “Lots of respectable people are going to tell you that there’s a ‘Tenant Tax’ coming in on Thursday. There isn’t.”

He went on to demand: “Is Section 24 about the tax treatment of a minority of landlords? How many tenants will be taxed more?”

Not letting the matter drop, he went on: “This is complete nonsense and may unsettle a lot of tenants quite unnecessarily. It is not a tenant tax & most landlords aren’t affected.”

Warwick protested: “Why are you attacking me Henry? I am just sharing information.”

She told him that he was a member of Property Tribes, “so feel free to post your thoughts there”. She said she would not respond to him further.

Pryor appeared to have the last word, saying he had deleted his account and telling Warwick: “If you can’t debate & you can’t be clear about what you support & what you report then it has little value.”

However, he then went on to lock horns with others, describing a claim from the Residential Landlords Association that 1m families would see their rents go up as scaremongering and “complete pants”.

Engaging with Steve Bolton, founder of the ‘Tenant Tax’ campaign, Pryor next said: “I gather that as a tenant, I’m facing a new tax from Thursday. Can you tell me more please.”

A calm Bolton replied that he got Pryor’s point. Landlords would have to pay more tax, but the evidence showed tenants would suffer higher rents.

A mollified Pryor congratulated Bolton on his “measured, polite and adult” response. Pryor even wished him good luck with his campaign.

We don’t, however, think this will be the end of it . . .

 

x

Email the story to a friend!

More top news stories



17 Comments

  1. Jrsteeve
    April 5, 2017 at 07:10

    Pryor really is a self serving idiot, please go away.

    Report
    1. Henry_Pryor
      April 5, 2017 at 08:18

      This is supposed to be a ‘news’ site. Regular posters here aren’t going to regard this as such. 

      Report
      1. PeeBee
        April 5, 2017 at 08:40

        I disagree – it’s the best news item of the day.
        I only have one issue with it – I have yet to agree with a single comment or statement from either of the protagonists, so am now at a loss as to who to side with.
        It would be a vote against one rather than support for the other!

        Report
  2. Headache
    April 5, 2017 at 07:36

    In an unregulated Lettings industry the poor tenant will always pay one way or another.

    Report
  3. PeeBee
    April 5, 2017 at 08:28

    “If you can’t debate & you can’t be clear about what you support & what you report then it has little value.”

    That’s rich – coming from the bloke who ran away from an argument with an annoying speck of pondlife some five years ago…

    Report
    1. Henry_Pryor
      April 5, 2017 at 08:58

      From 5 years ago…?
      Whatever it was I humbly appologise. Can we start again or shall we invite Ros to instigate a Truth & Reconciliation Committee?

      Report
      1. PeeBee
        April 6, 2017 at 08:24

        Hang on…
        Politeness toward – and an apparent willingness to engage with – nameless bacterium?
        Time to ‘fess up, I’m afraid… you’re not the real Henry Pryor – are you?

        Report
  4. Simon Bradbury
    April 5, 2017 at 08:30

    Henry is suggesting the sensible and (in my view) totally sustainable contention that…  “It is not a tenant tax & most landlords aren’t affected.”

    This is a statement of FACT.

    Of course people can debate the issue – but Henry is speaking the truth.

    This “tenant tax” is about as much a tax on tenants as the “Poll tax” was a tax on Polish people!

    Report
  5. Woodentop
    April 5, 2017 at 09:00

    Good old journalism coining a phrase that is a knock on effect for many. Tenants are more than likely to pay for any loss the landlord suffers. It is their only way to recover the costs, just like any other business venture. Landlords tax as a consequence will effect tenants and seems more in line with what was being portrayed for tenants. Landlords who will suffer a tax charge will pass on that charge (tax). This story sounds more about certain people splitting hairs, “is it a tax”, to say something and when someone has a difference of opinion, throws the rattle out of the pram. But then there are some trolls you can’t debate with!

    Report
  6. hodge
    April 5, 2017 at 10:22

    Cant help but snigger at the FACTS.  There are a significant number of landlords who don’t pay tax or declare it full stop. My daughter is at UCL and many of the students tell her in conversation that landlords still have post arriving at the let and have done for years. there,s a good reason for that and it,s because they are on the voters roll there.   Only 2% of the population of India pay tax so why would they pay tax here it,s a cultural thing not racist before anyone jumps up and down. Foreign landlords often come into the agents looking for tenant find only, theres a reason for that too.

    Report
  7. Vanessa Warwick
    April 5, 2017 at 22:45

    Allow me to say what actually happened.

    I received a confrontational approach from Henry Pryor on twitter yesterday morning which I responded to trying to assist him.

    I sent him a couple of links but he said they didn’t answer his questions.

    I told him that Property Tribes was only an information sharing channel and allows all views to be heard and that he would be welcome to post them on Property Tribes, if he had concerns about the Tenant Tax campaign causing distress to tenants, because he said that they were reading about it on PT.  By that same channel, he could also use his opinion to reassure them via the same medium they were reading about it on.

    He informed me that he had ALREADY deleted his account and he wanted to debate it all on twitter, despite him already having claimed that tenants were reading it on PT, so it’s unlikely they would see it on twitter?

    I explained that I was struggling to answer his questions in 140 characters, and he took that to mean that avoiding being held accountable to his questions.

    Now to an important piece of missing information.   I then phoned him and asked him politely how I could assist his understanding of the campaign.  During a 25 minute phone call, he explained that I was damaging my brand by giving credibility to a false campaign.  I explained that I am just an information sharer.  I thanked him for his concern over my personal brand and that I had taken on board his views that the Tenant Tax is the wrong name for the campaign and that I was not involved in choosing the name.

    He wanted hard statistics about how many landlords would be affected, but I explained to him that part of the problem was that no impact statement or research had been done by Government, and I suggested that he contact the Treasury to ask them why they hadn’t done an impact statement.

    That seemed to satisfy him or he didn’t have the guts to tell me otherwise.  He subsequently claimed I had “ducked out of the argument because I didn’t have the good grace to admit that I had lost it”.

    I did not duck out of any argument and I had the good grace to call him and try and resolve his issues with me in an amicable and professional matter and believed I had done so.  I wonder why he didn’t mention that when contacted by reporters?

    Henry Pryor saying he deleted his account because of his opposition to my approach is the same as saying he’s deleted his Sky account because he didn’t like or agree with what the newsreader reported.

    No one forced him to read Property Tribes just as no one forced him to watch Sky News.  He could have got the same story from the BBC or ITV.

    He attacked the messenger, not the message and I was polite and civil towards him.  It’s a shame he didn’t afford me the same courtesy.

    I also explained that the Tenant Tax campaign is being run by a group of industry stake-holders and that the coalition were behind it, and that Property Tribes was the information sharing channel for the week’s campaign. I am not Property Tribes just as Ros Renshaw is not EYE.

    The very fact that I asked him to share his views on PT shows that it is nothing more than an information sharing channel and the same people who he was concerned about could be communicated with there. My view does not come into it, otherwise than, as a landlord, I support the fight against S24, and the even bigger picture is that if the government succeed here, then what next attack on the landlord community will they come up with?!

    Thank you for reading this lengthy post and please do refer to the twitter stream for verification.

    Report
    1. Simon Bradbury
      April 6, 2017 at 06:59

      Hi Vanessa,
                         Thank you for explaining your position in such a clear and concise way and for sharing your honest held views – including the view that…
                             “…as a landlord, I support the fight against S24, and the even bigger picture is that if the government succeed here, then what next attack on the landlord community will they come up with?!.”
       I also completely take your point that PT is “an information sharing channel” and you personally may, or may not , agree with the views shared on it.
      As a matter of interest, accepting the fact that your own views (sincerely held views that you are clearly happy to share as exampled above) may sometimes differ from other view ponts…
      Do you, as a landlord, think it reasonable and accurate to describe this change in the tax treatment of mortgaged landlords as a “tenant tax”?
      I would emphasise that your response will not be taken as anything other than your personal view as a landlord ( just as your expressed views on the fight against S24 were ) and not necesarily the views of everyone at PT.
       

      Report
      1. Vanessa Warwick
        April 6, 2017 at 08:01

        Hi Simon,

        Speaking as VW Landlord, I was not part of the choosing of the name, and, if I had been, it would not have been my choice.  

        Having said that, I understand that something to engage people on this issue was needed, and the TT name has certainly succeeded in achieving that! 

        As to what would have been a reasonable and accurate name for it, I have not given that any thought or brain power.

        Report
        1. Simon Bradbury
          April 6, 2017 at 08:58

          Thank you Vanessa – much appreciated.

          Report
X

You must be logged in to report this comment!

Log In Register

Back to Homepage

Comments are closed.

Thank you for signing up to our newsletter, we have sent you an email asking you to confirm your subscription. Additionally if you would like to create a free EYE account which allows you to comment on news stories and manage your email subscriptions please enter a password below.