I'm not sure I'd tax BTL out of existence. We do need private rental accomodation but some get rich quick landlords are not helpful. We could use something to advantage long-term landlords.
Like you I don't care if my house drops in value. In fact I'd rather it did since I would then have to spend a smaller proportion of my income on housing. I can't understand why the media think rising house prices are a good thing since it benefits only a few.
Why is it, as soon as someone points out a drawback in capitalism, someone always compares things with the Soviet Union on North Korea? I don't see why we have to have one extreme or another. No system is perfect and improvements can always be made.
If BtL property was taxed "out of existence", then were would all the tenants live?
Would you, though?
The only time absolute values matter is when you step on or off the ladder. When you're on it, then the gaps between the rungs - the price to change - is what matters.
Apart from that, you've got to feed the mortgage monkey on your back. If prices drop and you get into -ve equity, then you don't suddenly owe less. You just lose the option to step off the ladder.
OK, suggest a different nation-level non-capitalist economy to compare to?
East Germany? Albania?
On Tuesday 01 October 2013 08:22 Artic wrote in uk.d-i-y:
You can DIY gas and you can DIY electrical work, subject to certain electrical work being notifiable.
You can build a house starting with a green (or brown) field site as long as you follow the process - meaning *you* can dig the foundations, pour the concrete, lay the bricks, build the roof, lay in the gas, water and electrics.
+1
I'll take that as the answer "I have no idea" to my question, then, shall I?
Sssh. Don't muddy a pure moral ideology with sordid practicality. The Labour party never has..
On Tuesday 01 October 2013 10:02 The Natural Philosopher wrote in uk.d-i-y:
Perhaps there should be *tax breaks* for residential landlords (any, not just BTL) who join a central scheme that guarantees that the property meets certain standards and the rent is within bands by property and location.
The scheme would inspect the property on a regular basis.
Moderated quality, moderated rents and the average reasonable landlord does not lose out thanks to the tax break.
Yeah yeah, I know it would be tricky to set the parameters, but I'm just throwing a bone. It would of course be optional - but the tenants would be attracted to scheme members so there's an inherent incentive.
They could have different quality bands - eg "student house" - bare minimum, all rooms bar kitchen/bathroom are bedrooms but everything is safe, clean and works, heating/insulation is reasonably efficient and faults are rectified promptly.
I can see a lot of milage in that.
Bloody silly and when it used to be the case before, us disabled were allowed to do it every week.
No new ideas, just old ones dressed up. Brian
They'd be able to buy instead of spending their money down a black hole. All the BTRs, let's say 10% of the population) go on about is their building up their pension pot. Well what about the poor sods who are still going to be paying rent?
Even the ones on housing benefit, or with poor credit records, or who don't necessarily want to live in the same property or area for more than a year or so?
If it was all about "being able to", then the only rental properties would be at the very bottom end of the market. Which they clearly aren't.
I rather suspect you're damn near an order of magnitude out. A quick google suggests 15% of the housing stock is privately rented - and that ignores the weighting towards smaller households, as well as multiple- property landlords.
Jesus. Rent controls. Do you know how badly that goes wrong?
I idle wonder why there's a need for a distinction. Does it really matter whether somebody purchases a property especially to rent out, versus living in it for a while before their circumstances change?
Either way, somebody's renting a property out. The only difference is a bit of history.
And you dont coisnider that a moirgage is nothing morte than a slightly expesniv rental, and teh same money is going down the same black hole into the banks?
Tyhe will be paying less than a mortgage since they dont end up owning the property.
Sotheuy camn put it n their won pension pots.
Most BTRs anwyay are for 'social housing' so they don't even pay for the rent.
>
Not really. It's a loan, just the same as a loan to buy a car or a TV.
At the end of the period, you've paid off the money you borrowed.
It's just a big secured loan. You owned the item (house, car, tv) outright from day 1, but you promised to give the item to the lender if you failed to pay what you owed on the loan.
The difference between that and renting is really not a very hard concept.
what about the fact that a loan is just 'renting' the money you need to buy the house.
As well as actually buying the house with it?
The similarity between that and renting is really not a very hard concept.
Yes I accept what you're saying. I was sort of thinking along the lines, that if your BTL landlords each had 10 properties, then there would be one benefiting to every ten paying rent with no end gain. I'd just prefer it if most people had the chance to buy their home and presently prices are unnecessarily inflated. I'm tired of houses being promoted as investment vehicles, when we should be trying to get families into them and them prepared to do them up themselves over time.
On le continent the majority of housing is rented.
Reantal is very suitable for people who move around a lot, who havent the skills or the time to maintain properties amd so on.
I realy dont see whty te big thing about owning proeprty is so big.
In the end, its a cost benefit equation, and once the speclative element of capital gains is taken out, its ddiesnt make a huge amount of differnec to the househilder whether they won it or not, financially.
The money that went on mortage interst over and above that that went on rent, could be used to creaate the same capital sum.
In a falling housing market, the smart money is in renting, anyway.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.