Forum menu
There is a certain amount of crap and NIMBYism about building on the green belt. Brown field sites sometime have greater biodiversity than lots of the farm land in the green belt. In Manchester there is some contoversy about Ryebank Fields which the "lovely" MMU are selling for housing. It's area of really nice wild space with really interesting plants and critters and would knock spots of much of the monculture farm land surounding Manchester. It will also be missed by the local residents who value it as green space which can be in short supply is cities.
One of the sites in Didsbury had an amazing range of plants which is currently being turned into crappy flats.
It seems to me that owning several houses is quite wrong when people are homeless, and we could start with a certain Charles Windsor who has lots of houses which he can't live in all year round.
"buying again in a devalued property market means they can still do so as the house they want to buy would be equally devalued."
No, if they have a mortgage that's more than the property is worth, it will bankrupt them, or at the very least, lock them into that house permanently, regardless of changed circumstances (job etc).
That's the problem with a property price crash. Most people aren't directly affected, but a minority get bankrupted.
(Those who aren't directly affected by the drop in house prices may then be hit by the general economic problems arising.)
Nick - I assume you don’t actually mean 100% inheritance tax? But rather abolish the “threshold” for IHT? Presumably not expecting couples to pay? I think there’s probably arguments for an exemption for adult children who have always lived with the parents (often for disability type reasons) and perhaps even if a child has been a live in carer for a (long) period.
Personally I’d treat inheritance the same as any other income - that would be an incentive for people to be “tax efficient” by distributing it more widely.
From a housing crisis perspective - offer “bonus” to councils who meet certain brownfield, social housing etc targets and they’ll find ways to overcome barriers!
one thing I don’t think (but I did just skim read) anyone else has mentioned is that there’s actually (at least round here) a fair amount of land around that’s zoned for housing - the issue is the landowners want to release this slowly to maximise value. If this is a national emergency - compulsory purchase; potentially with value based on its non housing use for anything that’s been sitting unused for a decades and could have been developed previously.
But I 100% would support the need for CGT on own residence. I know that pre-election they said they wouldn’t but it’s crazy that the comfortably off make money on property booms whilst the poorest are increasingly trapped.
these both amount to the same thing - taxation on unearned wealth.
presumably your statement above is only actually true if you sold it to her at market value – if you are willing to rent at 1/3rd below market, why not sell at the equivalent…
Its an interesting point and I do not know what to do. 1/3 below market value would be 70 000 discount. More than the total rent I have had in the entire time I have been renting it I think. 4 times what she has paid me in rent.
I have 3 options -
sell on the same deal I bought it for - make it worth my while" ie 5% over value
~Sell it at an agreed market value
Sell it to her at a discount because it will be an easy sale, I retain my good neighbour and its a nice thing to do. I was thinking 5% below market value. £10 000 discount. which would be half the rent I have had from her approximately.
Mrs TJ did a lot of work in housing. I think she would want me to go for option 3.
would anyone else give away £10 000 like that? If its any help the tenant earns more than I ever did by quite a lot
TJ - would you consider selling it at current market rate, minus the money she has paid you to date in rent?
you’d be no worse off than if you’d just sold up X years ago, tenant would clearly benefit in having a lower mortgage from having saved up more deposit via the bank of TJ.
edit - I typed that before your most recent reply
PCA – BTL acts as a mechanism to transfer money from poor to rich.
Yes, in the general sense that wealth in a capitalist society flows towards those with capital. But I need hardly lecture the Czar of a real estate empire about that 😉
What's weirder is the government taking tax from the middle class to pay for housing for the working class but filtering that money through the pockets of a million private landlords instead of owning the housing itself.
But I 100% would support the need for CGT on own residence. I know that pre-election they said they wouldn’t but it’s crazy that the comfortably off make money on property booms whilst the poorest are increasingly trapped.
You'd completely break the housing market by doing this, as it puts a penalty on moving home.
Given the example on a previous page, it would make zero financial sense of an elderly person downsizing, which would free up housing stock, due to a potential high tax bill
My dad bought his house in 1964 for £6,000, it’s now worth several hundred thousand (about 450 fwiw, albeit he has extended twice and of course invested in it over the years, plus remortgaged to finance a business so he is a long way from 444k in profit) I’m assuming if he was to sell he wouldn’t pay tax on 444k?
it’s crazy that the comfortably off make money on property booms
if you buy a house for £100, sell it for £200, and buy a replacement house for £200...you haven't actually made money. You have to downsize, move somewhere cheaper or die to make money. We don't want to make downsizing or moving less attractive because that locks up supply.
if you buy a house for £100, sell it for £200, and buy a replacement house for £200…you haven’t actually made money. You have to downsize, move somewhere cheaper or die to make money. We don’t want to make downsizing or moving less attractive because that locks up supply.
if its your sole residence, yes. If its the 4th property in your slumlord empire, you've just made a bucket load of cash
TJ it does sound like you are the genuine edge case perhaps with atypical circumstances, being willing to hold out on a sale unless and until it becomes affordable for the tenant to buy is not the norm.
I don't disagree that rental properties are needed, does the whole sector need to be serviced by private landlords and investments funds though?
Rents would fall if everyone was piling in on BTL and everything else stayed the same. It’s 20 years of cheap interest rates, constraints on new construction, and massive increase in demand that are the problem, not BTL.
Can't there be more than one factor?
I mean demand (both to buy and rent) has been pushed by a lack of supply, a lack of building limits that supply, BTLs soak up some more supply and then you add a growing population they're all exacerbating factors, Oh and then someone spiked the interest rates in 2022...
But this has been an been taking place over most of the last 40 odd years.
You don't honestly believe more Private landlords are the solution do you?
Their numbers have grown at the same time as our housing Crisis has formed, they are a contributing factor, yes along with a lack of investment in building both social and private housing...
Hence if we just build new homes for the older asset holding class to buy up and rent on to younger (poorer) generations we won't actually improve much.
Social housing is needed to provide an affordable option and rebalance the housing sector, so that people can either afford to save for deposits, have disposable income to churn back into the economy or just ensure a minimum standard of living for the least fortunate/well off in our society.
The discussion is arse about face, why are we as a society accommodating (mostly) well off people, wanting a nice little nest egg to help trim a decade off their working life, leveraging an asset that could serve far more pressing social needs?
It does come back to the fundamental question, who is the country actually being run for the benefit of?
Nick – I assume you don’t actually mean 100% inheritance tax?
Yes, you assume correctly. Your phrase "taxation of unearned wealth" is much better.
who is the country actually being run for the benefit of?
Highly anecdotal, but from where I'm sitting, it seems to be my dog
With a shortage of brickies, labourers, plumbers, roofers, sparkies etc....who is going to build all these new houses......or if the local builder types all get 'bought up' by a few of the big housebuilders...how are the rest of the Uk going to get their bathrooms/kitchens, extentions, re-wires etc completed?
Rent controls / fair rents.
Secure tenancies.
Right to buy extended to private landlords and ended for social housing.
Cookea - for sure I am very atypical as a landlord
Highly anecdotal, but from where I’m sitting, it seems to be my dog
Get a cat and it's not just the country, it thinks the world is theirs to do its bidding.
With a shortage of brickies, labourers, plumbers, roofers, sparkies etc….who is going to build all these new houses
Don't say it too loudly, but immigrant workforce (who will ironically need somewhere to live while they are building houses)
Don’t say it too loudly, but immigrant workforce (who will ironically need somewhere to live while they are building houses)
Well wasn't that the point of 2016?
They did actually run the Leave campaign on "taking back control" people seem to have heard "boot 'em all out". But there's arguably nothing more 'Brexity' than issuing time limited Visas for foreign construction workers, and maybe a few more to bolster the training up of our native workforce.
They will not come on restricted visas when they can work elsewhere with FOM
Quite possibly, but as noted above we are rather hampered by a diminished construction industry and a skills gap.
Whatever carrots can be dangled to stimulate the sector and deliver the 1.5m houses promised within this parliament need to be considered. It's a bold promise to make, they must have some idea how they're going to deliver it, time is very much a factor and brickies don't grow on trees....
With a shortage of brickies, labourers, plumbers, roofers, sparkies etc….who is going to build all these new houses……
Lord Timpson might have some suggestions?
Build higher density in cities, go to any European city and there are endless rows or good looking large apartment blocks of 4-5 stories, make them cheap and attractive with large rooms and plenty of folks will get over their need for a house as opposed to a flat. Covenant the mortgages on them to make them owner occupier only.
This. And build them near transport hubs so people have less need to drive. We used to do this (1930s mansion blocks) and if you compare the footprint of a British town with a similarly sized European one…
Massively increase the costs of having second homes and buy-to-let properties.
This.
Don’t say it too loudly, but immigrant workforce (who will ironically need somewhere to live while they are building houses)
Considering 90%-ish of new housing supply just goes to offsetting the additional housing demand caused by net migration, this sounds a bit like drinking salt water to cure your thirst...
They will not come on restricted visas when they can work elsewhere with FOM
Immigrants have come to the UK in increasing numbers since Brexit. They're just not immigrants from the EU...if that matters to you.
demand (both to buy and rent) has been pushed by a lack of supply, a lack of building limits that supply, BTLs soak up some more supply
BTL doesn't reduce the aggregate supply of housing in the UK. Not by a single unit. The flat or house still exists and people still live in it - it's just on the rental market instead of being owner-occupied.
politecameraaction you’re ignoring two things; one that most workers born elsewhere will not be working in construction, and secondly that construction workers are more likely to be from the EU/EEA than from outside Europe.
If you’re past the point of breaking even why not?
Oh, ok - cool. When I get to that point, that's what I'll do, thanks.
I'm a BTL landlord of one property, got into it because I didn't have a pension and it seemed like a viable alternative. Although I've made a modest profit over the years (we're talking <£200/mth before 40% tax...) with current mortgage rates, I actually lose £200/month, the rent I charge is about 75% of the market rate in the area... why do it do this (and the agency I let though are constantly at me to change things)? Because the tenant is a good guy, he looks after the place, he's there for the long term, and he's expressed an interest in buying it in the next 6 months. I'm also a good landlord, keep on top of maintenance and decoration because it's the right thing to do. Clearly a monthly loss is not sustainable in the long term, but I feel that even if the tenant decides not to buy, my mortgage rate will probably drop me into a breakeven position in the next 12 months so... hey. The property has also cleary got a capital gain element, although over the since I bought in 2007 (and just before the crash) it is surprisingly low for a 2 bed flat in a desirable part of south Manchester. It's certainly not retirement money anyway!
Its an interesting point and I do not know what to do. 1/3 below market value would be 70 000 discount. More than the total rent I have had in the entire time I have been renting it I think. 4 times what she has paid me in rent.
but presumably you’d still be making a significant capital gain? I’m not seriously suggesting you do this - but on another thread you were complaining Angela Rayner wasn’t left wing enough! :heart:
whilst I can see the good karma temptation to sell at a discount and keep the good neighbour… consider for a moment that you sell to her next month. Then her circumstances change - new job, new partner, ill parent, inheritance, and 12-18 months time she’s selling up for a profit and will inevitably take the best offer so you get shitty neighbours.
if you want to sell - then selling with a tenant is a PITA, and nobody will want a property with a sitting tenant paying 30% below market rate. So in that sense it is worth less than vacant possession market value anyway. But that is if YOU want to sell. If she wants to buy then at the very least she’ll be expecting to pay market rate. If she knows she gets a good deal on the rent she can’t really expect to get a good deal on the purchase too unless she thinks you are a mug/vulnerable. If I had been exploiting someone at full market rent and then there was an option for them to buy it - I like to think I would not screw them on the price. I’m not sure that makes sense when she’s essentially been exploiting you.
most workers born elsewhere will not be working in construction
Exactly - the suggested immigration of more construction workers comes in addition to the existing levels of migration!!!
What's more, the industry itself estimates that you need an additional 30,000 workers to build 10,000 homes. But if you bring 30,000 additional workers into the UK, then they need somewhere to live. And if they live ~3 to a home (which is above typical UK density, as mentioned above), then you need to add 10,000 homes to the UK hosting stock on the first day the builders arrive to avoid a worsening of the supply/demand relationship!
There is no way to build the UK out of a housing shortage using mostly foreign labour and maintaining net immigration across the rest of the economy...unless you want to imitate Dubai and make builders live in tents or Portakabins on site, or temporary barracks miles away.
I have NFI what the answer is.
and secondly that construction workers are more likely to be from the EU/EEA than from outside Europe.
Historically, yes, but t²here's been a 25-30% decline in EU workers over the last 3-4 years. (Figures are difficult to come by because of the casualisation of the sector). Now there's no difference between Hungary or Ukraine or Uganda for immigration purposes. Morocco and Turkey are only a few hours drive further than Romania. Some of our Europhile friends who criticise Brexiteer racism seem a bit squeamish about non-EU migrant labour.
https://www.hbf.co.uk/news/skills-shortfall-home-building-research-workforce-census/
Several years ago youngsters were mostly encouraged to go to university. This left a huge gap in students going to college to learn a hands on skill, eg plumbing, bricklaying, electricians and builders, roofers and other trades in general. These and mostly other less skilled jobs such as carpet fitters, tilers, gardeners etc. are still looked down on, as 'lowly' jobs. My own job as a soft furnisher is semi skilled, yet seen as a non desirable job. When I retire nobody is going to do my type of work as it's so badly paid and not thought of as proper employment. I can't even get a decent curtain fitter, because no youngster will want to train in that type of work, which is hard and badly paid.
But, all the jobs I've mentioned above are needed to create a home.
Ta Poly. I feel quite conflicted about the whole thing
she has not been exploiting me tho - I have done this quite willingly
no youngster will want to train in that type of work, which is hard and badly paid.
Would they want to if it was hard and well paid?
As the numbers of people in a job decrease the amount the remaining people can charge will increase (as long as the job is still needed of course) and a new equilibrium will be reached.
politecameraaction, your logic is so flawed that I don't know where to begin... it's like suggesting we can't let people into the UK to help with NHS staffing because those workers will also need the support of the NHS.
politecameraaction, your logic is so flawed that I don’t know where to begin… it’s like suggesting we can’t let people into the UK to help with NHS staffing because those workers will also need the support of the NHS.
It's not comparable. 100% of people that enter the UK themselves need housing for the duration of their stay. 100% of NHS workers don't need constant medical attention for the duration of their stay.
It is entirely comparable. Construction workers will contribute to building hundreds of homes, not just one... just as a surgeon will operate on hundreds of patients, even if they need some operations themselves. The idea that a construction worker adds to the demand for homes in any way equivalent to what they can add to the supply of homes, is totally flawed.
Construction workers will contribute to building hundreds of homes, not just one…
Did you read the link with the industry estimate that construction of an additional 10,000 homes requires 30,000 additional workers?
Net migration to the UK was 685,000 last year, and only 212,000 new homes were completed. The government wants to raise that to 300,000 new homes per annum - which means about 300,000 more skilled construction workers would need to arrive to deliver those 100,000 extra homes? Where are they going to live - and their dependents?
Blindly and blithely relying on more immigration to fix the problem isn't gonna work. The only way Gulf States have knocked up so many houses to serve their massive immigration in the last 20 years is by having millions of forced labourers living in barracks as single men and working 6-7 days a week. The UK isn't going to do that (I hope).
But since you raised it, how is relying on overseas workers medical workers for the NHS long term staffing needs working out for the NHS and their countries of origin, by the way?
also conveniently forgetting that without immigration we face a falling and aging population
Again - the rate of net migration is far, far above the rate by which the UK population is falling. Oxford Uni Migration Observatory sez:
The UK’s population would grow from 67 million in 2021 to 77 million in 2046, and that net migration would account for 92% of this growth.
But since you raised it, how is relying on overseas workers medical workers for the NHS long term staffing needs working out for the NHS and their countries of origin, by the way?
Ruddy awful since brexit. No great issue pre brexit. Its one of the tragedies of brexit that we no longer have access to the surplus nurses in the EU
Ruddy awful since brexit. No great issue pre brexit. Its one of the tragedies of brexit that we no longer have access to the surplus nurses in the EU
There's been a massive increase in the number of non-EU foreign care staff in the UK since Brexit - far more than there were ever EU foreign care staff.
Most newly-registered doctors are educated outside the UK, and very few of them were from the EU before Brexit.
There has been a massive increase in the number of non-EU foreign nurses in the UK since Brexit. Nurses from outside the EU are being enrolled at twice the peak of EU nurse registration.
It is just not the case that immigration has reduced since Brexit - despite the intentions of Brexiteers. The exact opposite has happened.
By the way, it is completely nuts that the UK NHS is now mostly reliant on foreign education systems to train enough doctors. Indian and Nigerian taxpayers are subsidising our health service and we are subsidising the Australian and New Zealand health service (to a much smaller degree).
But if you bring 30,000 additional workers into the UK, then they need somewhere to live. And if they live ~3 to a home (which is above typical UK density, as mentioned above), then you need to add 10,000 homes to the UK hosting stock on the first day the builders arrive to avoid a worsening of the supply/demand relationship!
There is no way to build the UK out of a housing shortage using mostly foreign labour and maintaining net immigration across the rest of the economy…unless you want to imitate Dubai and make builders live in tents or Portakabins on site, or temporary barracks miles away.
I saw a documentary on this years back; the migrant workers were housed exactly as you say, in tents and temporary 'Nissan Hut' type accommodation centres. As long as they had a bar/mess hall on site, and a brothel in the nearest town, they seemed to get along just fine, a few scrapes along the way with language and cultural differences but nothing overly serious.
As long as they had a bar/mess hall on site, and a brothel in the nearest town
Are you sure you weren't watching Deadwood? Did Ian McShane point a six shooter at a cattle rustler at any point? The reality is a bit more dismal than you suggest. But if you are comfortable with forced labourers building your next Wimpey home...
https://hir.harvard.edu/taken-hostage-in-the-uae/
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/22/abu-dhabi-happiness-island-misery
the rate of net migration is far, far above the rate by which the UK population is falling
The problem isn’t a shrinking population (well not in England anyway) but an aging one. When it comes to construction, an aging workforce is even more of an issue than in other sectors, for obvious physical reasons. Even if immigration overall falls, the need for more migrant workers in construction isn’t going to fall.
By the way, it is completely nuts that the UK NHS is now mostly reliant on foreign education systems to train enough doctors. Indian and Nigerian taxpayers are subsidising our health service and we are subsidising the Australian and New Zealand health service (to a much smaller degree).
I quite agree. Its disgraceful. However the number of EU nurses we have lost and compared to the number who used to come here brexit is a huge issue and a key reason behind the rise of non EU healthcare recruitment ( but not the only issue and EU nurses coming here is still a sign we do not train enough.)
doctors is a different issue at least in part - its retention of staff that is the key issue not lack of staff being trained
What’s even more barking is solving today’s problems using labour-intensive construction methods that have evolved little in the last 100 years. We should be using high-volume, factory-built modular kits with services pre-installed that can be assembled in days, rather than weeks. OK, it requires a level of precision in terms of groundwork and setting-out that your average Persimmon contractor (other crap house builders also available) would struggle with, but not insurmountable. The UK suffers an acute lack of skilled trades that dates back decades (we were lobbying the Government in 2002) particularly due to post-war demographics where a huge proportion of the working population will retire soon. Yes, it would require an investment in factories to fabricate these kits, but less insurmountable than finding tens of thousands of skilled trades that don’t exist.