Investors make it hard on FTB's: Why doesnt the Govt clamp down on them?

F

foxylady

Registered User
Messages
1,460
When are the government going to clamp down on investors if at all because they are really making life even harder for us first time buyers as if it wasnt already hard enough. I recently was to view a house and got a call back off the auctioneer to say it was sold to an investor who offered 10k over the asking without even looking at the place. Two days later i tried to look at another property that had just gone on the market and same thing had happened.Talk about frustrating
 
Re: Investors

I understand your frustration but I don't think the government will do anything about it - I'd say hang on in there though because the change in the market will mean that investors can get better returns elsewhere, and so the numbers of buy to lets should decrease substantially. For people looking primarily for somewhere to live, it doesn't really matter if projected house price growth slows to 4%...but for investors, it means that easier money is to be had elsewhere - and without any tenant or upkeep hassles.
 
Re: Investors

tax them higher .
Why do that? I understand your frustration, but why punish people for showing some initiative and entrepreneurial get up and go? All that will do is discourage people who want to purchase an investment property as well as their PPR, and pave the way for companies who can absorb higher taxes but still profit when they sell it on.
 
Re: Investors

Fly said:
I understand your frustration but I don't think the government will do anything about it - I'd say hang on in there though because the change in the market will mean that investors can get better returns elsewhere, and so the numbers of buy to lets should decrease substantially. For people looking primarily for somewhere to live, it doesn't really matter if projected house price growth slows to 4%...but for investors, it means that easier money is to be had elsewhere - and without any tenant or upkeep hassles.
Click to expand...




Fly; the implication for me in what you are saying is that ...hang on in there, because eventually prices will go up so high that the only people who will buy are the people that have to; i.e. first time buyers, its not a worthwile investment for anyone else......

in other words the people who are taking all the risk of buying at the top of the market, just before interest rates start to rise later next year, are the people who can least afford to see house prices fall
 
Re: Investors

foxylady said:
tax them higher .
Click to expand...

Aren't they already taxed higher than owner occupiers? Even if they can offset 100% of mortgage interest and other expenses against rental income, unlike some owner occupiers they are never exempt from stamp duty on the purchase and unlike all owner occupiers they are never exempt from CGT on the eventual disposal. Also, while (in my opinion) the Government should not unnecessarily interfere with or overregulate the property or any other market in such a way as to distort the market, they do still have some level of responsibility to ensure that there is an adequate supply of public and private rented accommodation available to those who do not decide to buy for whatever reason.

Just for the record I am not a property investor myself and have no vested interest in this area.
 
foxylady said:
When are the government going to clamp down on investors if at all because they are really making life even harder for us first time buyers
Click to expand...

The reason why is of course because if they did so, the builders who fill the FF tent at the Galway Races would stop lashing out the donations that keep the party going. Happy investors = happy builders - Not too many political donations coming in from First Time Buyers, I guess.

Of course, the Govt could simply even the playing field - and cap or restrict mortgage interest relief for investors in the same way that it is capped for residential buyers. This would stop the current obscenity whereby investors use interest-only loans to ensure that the Govt effectively subsidises the bank interest for them.
 
RainyDay said:
The reason why is of course because if they did so, the builders who fill the FF tent at the Galway Races would stop lashing out the donations that keep the party going. Happy investors = happy builders - Not too many political donations coming in from First Time Buyers, I guess.

Of course, the Govt could simply even the playing field - and cap or restrict mortgage interest relief for investors in the same way that it is capped for residential buyers. This would stop the current obscenity whereby investors use interest-only loans to ensure that the Govt effectively subsidises the bank interest for them.
Click to expand...

Might be no harm if you declare your vested interest in this context for people who might not be already aware of it?
 
ClubMan said:
Might be no harm if you declare your vested interest in this context for people who might not be already aware of it?
Click to expand...
I'm guessing that you're referring to my Labour party membership, but I'm not clear why this would be seen as a 'vested interest' in this (or any other socio-economic matter)?
 
Without meaning to sidetrack the substantive discussion, I think that this information is very relevant in the context of your earlier attacks on the Government in general and FF in particular. As a member of an opposition party presumably you have a vested interest in removing them from power?
 
Don't want to get stuck in the middle of another slanging match between the mods, but didn't the previous attempt to tax landlords at punitive levels after Bacon II just result in huge rent hikes, and landlords not declaring their rental income ?

Personally, although using tax as a way to punish investors may seem attractive, especially to the unreformed socialists in the Labour party and elsewhere, it is far too crude a tool to use.
 
Unregistered said:
but didn't the previous attempt to tax landlords at punitive levels after Bacon II just result in huge rent hikes, and landlords not declaring their rental income ?
Click to expand...

Indeed. It also failed spectacularly in making houses/apts more affordable for FTBs.
 
Yup !! More classic economic policies from the Labour party !! Keep the Red flag flying boys !!
 
Ah sure !! Who'd ever forget the old nationalise the banks ruse !

Oh, how we laughed .....
 
ClubMan said:
Without meaning to sidetrack the substantive discussion, I think that this information is very relevant in the context of your earlier attacks on the Government in general and FF in particular. As a member of an opposition party presumably you have a vested interest in removing them from power?
Click to expand...
Actually no, I have no vested interest - no more than any other citizen. I'm not going to get a bonus payment, or a job as govt advisor or any other explicit benefit directed at me. Of course, I will share in the benefits (as will you and every other poster here) of having a Govt that aims to treat all citizens equally and ensure every citizen has a fair chance at building their own success. But I wouldn't consider that to be a vested interest - as it is not specific to me.

And those who were so quick to pooh-pooh my proposal without actually reading it might want to go back, re-read it and understand why it is different from the Bacon proposals from the early part of this decade. But hey, why let the facts stand in the way of a decent debate. It's a lot easier on the brain to just dismiss the ideas out of hand, ain't it.
 
I presume this is what you mean?
RainyDay said:
Of course, the Govt could simply even the playing field - and cap or restrict mortgage interest relief for investors in the same way that it is capped for residential buyers.
Click to expand...

If so can you please explain:
1. how exactly this proposal would operate
2. what you see as the consequences of such a move for the tenants who depend on private rented accommodation for a roof over their heads - especially those who are not in a position, or who don't necessarily want, to buy their own homes in the foreseeable future.
3. how it can be implemented without repeating the mistakes of Bacon.

(Btw, in seeking to 'even the playing field' I presume you don't propose to remove the current Stamp Duty and CGT concessions that currently discriminate against investors?)
 
Would your "evening of the playing field" include reducing stamp duty rates for investors, and eliminating CGT on any gains made on the sale of the property, or is it the old socialist mantra of tax the hell out of the land owning classes ?
 
Hi Billy
I really meant that when the houses prices stop rising at 5% plus per year, houses are still attractive to people who want somewhere to live, but an investor has different priorities and will probably be looking elsewhere.
I know there's always some risk but if you need somewhere to live and want to know that your monthly outgoings are going to be steady over the next 20 years, then buying is still the way to go. And even if house prices actually go down, as opposed to a slowing of the growth rate, it won't effect people living in them, unless they want to sell, in which case the house they aim to move to has probably also gone down in value.
 
foxylady said:
When are the government going to clamp down on investors if at all because they are really making life even harder for us first time buyers as if it wasnt already hard enough. I recently was to view a house and got a call back off the auctioneer to say it was sold to an investor who offered 10k over the asking without even looking at the place. Two days later i tried to look at another property that had just gone on the market and same thing had happened.Talk about frustrating
Click to expand...

hi foxylady ......... my heart bleeds...

FTB are exempt from
1. stamp duty up to 317,000
2. Can avail of rent a room scheme .... tax free up to 6.000( approx.)
3. Have TRS on the property ............

Oh how tragic oh maybe you want the gov .....to give you an interest free deposit on your house .
I was an FTB when the stamp duty was exempt up to 190.000
and no I am not an investor I have decided against it for similar reasons as FLY said and the grief of being a landlord in an over saturated buy to let market.....
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top