Sanity check if I may please - Structure

[TheGreenBastard]

Are you being deliberately obtuse? Holding a BTL in a corporate structure obviously isn’t a requirement to operating a BTL and makes much less sense with the associated company rules.

You're projecting again, your post makes some weird smug assumption we don't know, we do, we're well aware.

A Ltd. company isn't a requirement for BTL, but it sure as hell makes a lot of sense if you want to turn a profit, even in the scope of ACR.

[eek]

You're projecting again, your post makes some weird smug assumption we don't know, we do, we're well aware.

A Ltd. company isn't a requirement for BTL, but it sure as hell makes a lot of sense if you want to turn a profit, even in the scope of ACR.

Add a second Limited (say a SPV for BTL) and all profit above £25,000 in your consultancy limited company is taxed at 26.5% rather than 19% which means you are paying an extra £1875 in tax.

But then again some of us are quicker at picking up the issues and complexity a plan creates.

[TheGreenBastard]

Add a second SPV Limited for BTL and all profit above £25,000 in your consultancy limited company is taxed at 26.5% rather than 19% which means you are paying an extra £1875 in tax.

But then again some of us are quicker at picking up the issues and complexity a plan creates.

Now do some calculations for holding a BTL property in your personal name (whilst having income from employment), you're quicker at not picking up the entire story.

[jamesbrown]

You're projecting again, your post makes some weird smug assumption we don't know, we do, we're well aware.

A Ltd. company isn't a requirement for BTL, but it sure as hell makes a lot of sense if you want to turn a profit, even in the scope of ACR.

You're projecting again. Your post makes some weird, self-obsessed assumption that I'm talking to you, personally. I couldn't care less about you, personally.

In general, the associated company rules make a BTL within a company wrapper less profitable, and many accidental landlords with contracting companies haven't yet clocked this, precisely as I said.

[TheGreenBastard]

You're projecting again. Your post makes some weird, self-obsessed assumption that I'm talking to you, personally. I couldn't care less about you, personally.

In general, the associated company rules make a BTL within a company wrapper less profitable, and many accidental landlords with contracting companies haven't yet clocked this, precisely as I said.

Oh you didn't quote me.

How does one become an accidental landlord, but the properties are within a SPV? Just accept you don't know what you're talking about.

[eek]

Now do some calculations for holding a BTL property in your personal name (whilst having income from employment), you're quicker at not picking up the entire story.

£0 - it's in the name of the Mrs...

[TheGreenBastard]

£0 - it's in the name of the Mrs...

And then additional properties in the dog and cat's names?

[eek]

And then additional properties in the dog and cat's names?

WTF would I want BTL properties - way too much like hard work and given the way various taxes work - not really worth the effort....

Also calling you out as a fool is seriously offtopic so I apologise to the OP who when talking about passive income was talking about proper passive income not bad property investment masquerading as a "business"

Edit - the only reason I mentioned it was to highlight the consequences an SPV or other limited company imposes on your consultancy company.

[jamesbrown]

Oh you didn't quote me.

How does one become an accidental landlord, but the properties are within a SPV? Just accept you don't know what you're talking about.

It clearly isn't just an act with you

Probably because they received advice at the time that it was the most profitable way to organise their BTL. That calculation has changed, and I predict that a majority are unware of the associated company rules and how it affects their profit margin.

[TheGreenBastard]

WTF would I want BTL properties - way too much like hard work and given the way various taxes work - not really worth the effort....

Also calling you out as a fool is seriously offtopic so I apologise to the OP who when talking about passive income was talking about proper passive income not bad property investment masquerading as a "business"

Edit - the only reason I mentioned it was to highlight the consequences an SPV or other limited company imposes on your consultancy company.

I mean, just how narcissistic do you need to be to post this? The guy from the accountancy firm highlighted the issue, why can't the local clique just leave it at that? One-upmanship and displaying how smart you (think) you are, and it turns out you don't even have real life experience on the matter.

People who do this as a business are taking their time to offer sound advice, and this kind of crap is spewed "becuz I dunt like BTL innit". I thought that kinda crap was for general.