Buy-to-let investors: 'Let us off capital gains tax and we'll sell to first-time buye

[d000hg]

Where's that then?

I'll give you a clue, the ratio is under 7. Which seems entirely reasonable.

Is that comparing median - median btw or have they picked whichever averages give the 'best' graph?

[PurpleGorilla]

The interest rate being taxed would need to affect me.

Well there are plenty of other BTL who are going to get tuliped.

[vetran]

Well there are plenty of other BTL who are going to get tuliped.

please explain why you think that is a good thing? Avoid basing your reasons on envy.

[PurpleGorilla]

please explain why you think that is a good thing? Avoid basing your reasons on envy.

Because housing should not be an asset to be exploited as a financial commodity.

[pjt]

Where's that then?

First time buyers shouldn''t be looking to buy an average priced house. They should be getting something the first rung on the ladder. It takes a long time to get up the ladder for most people so this comparison is a bit misleading!

[vetran]

Because housing should not be an asset to be exploited as a financial commodity.

Of course now I see I'm so wrong. Because the Government is so good at running it

I suppose all the supermarkets should give food away rather than charging for it.

try again.

[PurpleGorilla]

First time buyers shouldn''t be looking to buy an average priced house. They should be getting something the first rung on the ladder. It takes a long time to get up the ladder for most people so this comparison is a bit misleading!

This doesn't mention FTBs

[OwlHoot]

Why is this issue so tricky? Why not just put a tax on renting residential properties out where the landlord does not live in them?

Because the tax would just be passed on to the tenants

[pjt]

This doesn't mention FTBs

It doesn't have to. Your complaint appears to be that people can't afford to buy houses and are therefore forced to rent. If instead these people aimed at the lower end of the market they could pick up a property for much less than the average price. Much like many BTL buyers. Many people actually choose to rent as well by the way, they're not all reluctant renters.

[OwlHoot]

Key point from this is who do the Government want to own the BTLs when they are sold as they no longer make financial sense.

Now it makes sense to give BTL owners a financial incentive to sell to first time buyers or existing tenants rather than overseas interests or the new rental businesses that will rise up to replace amateur BTLs who will make BTL owners look like pussy cats. It suits the governments policy and it would be no more expensive than subsidising large building firms to encourage first time buyers.

If they go on the open market they will be bought by overseas investors or builders who will strip & redo adding 30% to price.

So the proposal , apart from offending lefty something for nothing merchants which is a good thing, makes a lot of sense.

WHS

No doubt civil servants and HMR&C would prefer, for administrative convenience, large commercial companies owning BTLs where possible.

But for a healthy, stable society it is much more desirable to maximise personal/private ownership of property.

Countries with low rates of property owner occupiers tend to have more riots and revolutions, simply because people have less to lose.