A great article on why housing benefit needs to be reformed. Setting housing benefit levels at median rents is unfair to those who rent with their own money, as it clearly pushes up rents.
The conservatives have an interesting new proposal, to end:
restrictions on people starting a business in social housing, to enable social tenants to become entrepreneurs
This is a great idea, and very useful. But I fail to see why this should only apply to people in social housing. Can we please have the same applied to the AST?
Yet another example of the invisibility of private tenants to politicians.
The government finally acts on security of tenure guaranteeing tenure for five years. There is a catch: to qualify you must buy the house first and use a sale and rent back scheme.
I’m amazed at this. Security of tenure is an important issue. This government policy recognises security of tenure is important, but only for a certain class of people: former home owners. When will the government see that a whole generation is having to rent. Why should they be denied security of tenure just because they haven’t yet bought a house they cannot afford.
The Guardian reports that the TUC want an empty homes tax. It’s good to see that the number of empty homes in the UK getting some press. Of course, this is a politically appealing act that would still exempt people who put in a caretaker in a vacant house, or a older person alone in a large house. In reality the burden of taxation should be moved onto housing so that opportunity costs become explicit to those who choose to keep properties underused or empty.
says the Mail. The pinups of buy to let in arrears?
Following on from the post on the welfare state for landlords, now the government wants to keep house prices high by engaging in mortgage lending. It’s off topic, I know, but if the government felt no need to control prices on the way up then why the sudden rush to prop it up?
This essay is very interesting:
In terms of privately rented housing in the last 25 years, the single biggest change in housing law was effected by the Housing Act 1988. This abolished rent control from January 15th 1989 and brought in the Assured Shorthold Tenancy, the most common form of private rental agreement today. Its impact and knock on effects have been enormous. Problems with high rents, inflated housing benefit levels, high levels of tenant debt lack of security and summary repossession all derived from this piece of legislation.
And the problem of median rents isn’t even mentioned.
I am considering using http://www.oneclickor.gs/ to open up rental rights to its constituency. What do you think?
The EU is forcing the British government to end tax breaks on owning second homes. Not that you’d know it looking at the headlines:
This story is being reported in entirely the wrong way. Tax breaks need to be justified, and second home owners would seem to be a unlikely lot for a break given the size of fiscal deficit we are facing. Given that we supposedly face a housing shortage:
you would think removing a tax break for holiday homes might actually be a good idea that would help rural communities by reducing demand on scarce housing. However, those journalists seem incapable of looking into even their own archives.
This is the tip of the Iceberg when it comes to the bad shape of property tax in the UK. I recently heard of two retired couples who would rather bounce around in their huge homes for a few more years than pay the £50,000 stamp duty bill they will face when selling. This is exactly the wrong incentive - moving house creates employment for many trades, facilitates labour mobility and allows people to free up housing that is too large for them. Current tax policy actively discourages this. Even worse, it makes tax receipts dependent on how many people move house, which is at an all time low. Time to tax housing properly, as it is in every other developed country.
It appears that the communities secretary, John Denham, wishes to Fast Track the legislation required to introduce the proposed database of every private landlord in the country.
Sadly, what might be seen as a sensible and small step in the right direction, is vociferously opposed by many of those who it seeks to register.
Whether on the grounds that agreeing to a minimum standard of conduct and registering as a landlord is too “beurocratic”:
“The last thing the Government should be doing at the moment is discouraging homeowners from taking in lodgers by over-legislating and forcing people to sign up to a national register,”
said Matt Hutchinson, director of Spareroom.co.uk, a house share website.
“Falling property prices have left thousands of homeowners in negative equity and struggling to make ends meet, and being able to bring in some extra income by taking in a lodger has proved a lifeline for many people.”
or over fears that the database will be used by tax officials to track down those who are evading the correct tax payments on their investments:
Richard Price, director of operations at the National Landlords Assoc, said he was also against any extension to spare-room landlords:
“There should be more effective ways for HMRC to find tax evaders that do not result in homeowners withdrawing their contribution to the housing shortage.”
Revenue and Customs admitted yesterday that it has few details about tax income from private landlords, as it is split between personal self-assessment forms and corporate returns. Nor does it have any idea how many evade payments.
Officials from the Department of Communities and Local Government said that the measures were not intended as a tax crackdown but to strengthen local authorities in tackling bad landlords with a record of exploiting vulnerable tenants. Those failing to undertake essential repairs or improperly not returning deposits would incur penalty points and serial offenders would be struck off the register and barred from letting their properties, he said.
source: http://property.timesonline.co.uk
Recent Comments