Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
tomandlu

Buy-to-let has skewed housing market and must be curbed, says thinktank

Recommended Posts

From most of our POVs, this is Mastermind specialist subject - the bleedin' obvious. Still, good to see, although I don't understand the privileged status being proposed for existing BTLs... oh, wait, yes I do.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/jun/25/home-ownership-out-of-reach-for-2-million-uk-families-says-thinktank

Quote

Private landlords have put home ownership beyond the reach of at least 2 million families, research shows, while Britain has built only half as many new homes as France over the same period.

The radical report from the new Conservative thinktank Onward recommends ending or severely curtailing tax breaks for buy-to-let and private landlords, a stronger role for local councils and major reform of the planning system to allow communities rather than developers to lead the process.

The report, which was written by Neil O’Brien, a former aide to George Osborne who also worked for Theresa May at No 10, calls for government intervention in the housing market, including giving London councils the power to limit foreign ownership.

“We need to change the balance between the rented sector and home ownership,” O’Brien said. “We should protect existing landlords but discourage more people from investing in rental property, because the buy-to-let boom has bid up prices and reduced homeownership among younger people.”

Previous governments have already acted to curb tax relief on mortgage repayments and maintenance for landlords, but the thinktank says it is still a privileged form of investment that reduces the number of homes available for owner-occupiers while reducing the amount of capital available for more productive investment.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, tomandlu said:

From most of our POVs, this is Mastermind specialist subject - the bleedin' obvious. Still, good to see, although I don't understand the privileged status being proposed for existing BTLs... oh, wait, yes I do.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/jun/25/home-ownership-out-of-reach-for-2-million-uk-families-says-thinktank

 

Don't agree with communities leading the planning process - Nimbys will ensure no houses are built anywhere...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Houdini said:

Don't agree with communities leading the planning process - Nimbys will ensure no houses are built anywhere...

IMHO we tend to ascribe to much malice and selfishness to 'nimbys'. Sure, there are a-holes, but the majority of protests tend to be against large-scale, developer-led, under-resourced sites. And by adding financial incentives to the community for development, I think you'd find a lot of the genuine nimbys driven underground and/or marginalised.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Incredible stuff - who would have guessed Btl would have inflated prices ?! And what an idea - planning gain going to the communities that create it and are rendered homeless by it.

Whoever came up with the idea of councils planning and developing land like er...in the rest of Europe, should get a knighthood.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Houdini said:

Don't agree with communities leading the planning process - Nimbys will ensure no houses are built anywhere...

This is what I found when I was involved in a series of community workshops in London. The workshops were infiltrated by hardline anti-development people, who were not interested in helping shape a great scheme. They pretended to be pro-development, but were really only interested in covertly using the process to sabotage the process, so that it failed.

Edited by FabulousSophie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, pig said:

Incredible stuff - who would have guessed Btl would have inflated prices ?! And what an idea - planning gain going to the communities that create it and are rendered homeless by it.

Whoever came up with the idea of councils planning and developing land like er...in the rest of Europe, should get a knighthood.

 

I think they're too busy trying to work out what 1+1 might equal to be picking up knighthoods.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, tomandlu said:

I think they're too busy trying to work out what 1+1 might equal to be picking up knighthoods.

On the other hand its a 'think tank' - maybe a ZX Spectrum was set the problem in 1982 and has finally smashed it lol.

I wonder why now though...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, pig said:

On the other hand its a 'think tank' - maybe a ZX Spectrum was set the problem in 1982 and has finally smashed it lol.

I wonder why now though...

For the same reason they're suggesting excluding existing BTLs from any further measures - votes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, tomandlu said:

From most of our POVs, this is Mastermind specialist subject - the bleedin' obvious. Still, good to see, although I don't understand the privileged status being proposed for existing BTLs... oh, wait, yes I do.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/jun/25/home-ownership-out-of-reach-for-2-million-uk-families-says-thinktank

 

Yes, I saw this in the Times earlier - sounds good until you get to the bit about protecting existing LLs. 

Something about horses and stable doors springs to mind...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Mrs Bear said:

Yes, I saw this in the Times earlier - sounds good until you get to the bit about protecting existing LLs. 

Something about horses and stable doors springs to mind...

They want to woo both sides, but yes, it's a shabby political calculation rather than an all-out rebalancing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, tomandlu said:

For the same reason they're suggesting excluding existing BTLs from any further measures - votes.

I can see the wrath of the millenials come down hard on the Tories boomers in 2022 the very near future. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Mrs Bear said:

Yes, I saw this in the Times earlier - sounds good until you get to the bit about protecting existing LLs. 

Something about horses and stable doors springs to mind...

Thinking about it I don't actually care treating people differently is illegal so a judicial review would remove the issue quickly while allowing the blame to be left with someone unelected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, fru-gal said:

I can see the wrath of the millenials come down hard on the Tories boomers in 2022 the very near future. 

It's not as bad as all that. IMHO CG is a primary motivator for BTL, and existing LLs are going to hopefully encounter some nasty shocks as it is, especially if the BTL market is basically wound-down, even without full-on tax rebalancing in favour of OOs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, tomandlu said:

For the same reason they're suggesting excluding existing BTLs from any further measures - votes.

You often see the vote-protecting issue raised, but in reality, who are the vast maj. of BTLers ever going to vote for?  Corbyn?  LDs?  The Greens?  

Whatever LL-unfriendly measures are ever introduced by the current govt. in the hope of increasing vote share, , I can't see any other party saying, 'No, that's not for us - the poor LLs are  at risk of turning into an endangered species and their human right to have their mortgages paid by their tenants is fundamental.'  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Houdini said:

Thinking about it I don't actually care treating people differently is illegal so a judicial review would remove the issue quickly while allowing the blame to be left with someone unelected.

Not sure about that. It depends what they change. After all, most new laws, certainly in criminal law, are not applied retrospectively iirc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, tomandlu said:

It's not as bad as all that. IMHO CG is a primary motivator for BTL, and existing LLs are going to hopefully encounter some nasty shocks as it is, especially if the BTL market is basically wound-down, even without full-on tax rebalancing in favour of OOs.

I don't know. I think there are some seriously pissed off and angry people out there who have been priced out by these selfish bastards. I know the media like to present young people as being stupid avocado/iPad obsessed cretins but there are loads who realise how screwed over they have been by the boomer/pensioner generation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mrs Bear said:

You often see the vote-protecting issue raised, but in reality, who are the vast maj. of BTLers ever going to vote for?  Corbyn?  LDs?  The Greens?  

Whatever LL-unfriendly measures are ever introduced by the current govt. in the hope of increasing vote share, , I can't see any other party saying, 'No, that's not for us - the poor LLs are  at risk of turning into an endangered species and their human right to have their mortgages paid by their tenants is fundamental.'  

A special interest party? UKIP? Abstentions?

Or maybe, putting on a very cynical hat, they just know it won't fly with the current BTL-owning Tory MPs. Anyone know what the percentages are for the various parties?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Swing and a miss.

BTL landlords are a symptom, not a cause. 

 

The cause is ultra-low interest rates and a decades-long recession, both a result of government intervention.

 

Even if BTL landlords hadn't taken advantage of the scenario, someone else would and house prices would be just as high as they are now.

 

Yes, BTL are scum, but attacking them will not address the fundamental drivers.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, tomandlu said:

For the same reason they're suggesting excluding existing BTLs from any further measures - votes.

Oh wait, paranoia is setting it. Don’t tell me    after eliminating competition and creating sites developing them rubber-stamping them through planning etc the councils will then flog the land to large investors (their mates ?) to control the market at a knock-down rate...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, fru-gal said:

I don't know. I think there are some seriously pissed off and angry people out there who have been priced out by these selfish bastards. I know the media like to present young people as being stupid avocado/iPad obsessed cretins but there are loads who realise how screwed over they have been by the boomer/pensioner generation.

Well, the issue finally got mainstream coverage as of about 18 months ago. Cassandra-like, I and many others here have banged on about the issue for years, but now it's got traction. A frustrating relief - it was like watching people stand in the middle of a train-track, but somehow ignoring the oncoming train until they heard a station announcement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, tomandlu said:

Well, the issue finally got mainstream coverage as of about 18 months ago. Cassandra-like, I and many others here have banged on about the issue for years, but now it's got traction. A frustrating relief - it was like watching people stand in the middle of a train-track, but somehow ignoring the oncoming train until they heard a station announcement.

The thing is, going forward (sorry to use such a stupid term), the future is the current millenials and the post millenial generation. The boomers/pensioners have had their time in the sun. How many years do politicians think that the young generation (who are already heavily pro-Corbyn/social justice) are going to continue to vote for paying the mortgages/pensions of the rich to live in run-down rabbit hutches. There are plenty of clever millenials who will see that highlighting the disparity will be a big vote winner and the sad thing is, it is all true. It's not like they will even have to exaggerate because anyone under 45 who does not have rich parents will have experience of renting, paying high university fees, not being able to get a doctors appointment, mass immigration, not being able to find work etc.

Edited by fru-gal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, fru-gal said:

The thing is, going forward (sorry to use such a stupid term), the future is the current millenials and the post millenial generation. The boomers/pensioners have had their time in the sun. How many years do politicians think that the young generation (who are already heavily pro-Corbyn/social justice) are going to continue to vote for paying the mortgages/pensions of the rich to live in run-down rabbit hutches. There are plenty of clever millenials who will see that highlighting the disparity will be a big vote winner and the sad thing is, it is all true. It's not like they will even have to exaggerate because anyone under 45 who does not have rich parents will have experience of renting, paying high university fees, not being able to get a doctors appointment, mass immigration, not being able to find work etc.

I think the brainwashing is still strong. It will take some time imo.

I also wish these articles would label it correctly. Its borrow to let not buy to let. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding involving local people in the planning process - it doesn't have to be with an absolute veto right.

It is possible to mandate a certain level of homebuilding, but allow local people a say in where, as long as they cannot just say "no" 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Locke said:

Swing and a miss.

BTL landlords are a symptom, not a cause. 

 

The cause is ultra-low interest rates and a decades-long recession, both a result of government intervention.

 

Even if BTL landlords hadn't taken advantage of the scenario, someone else would and house prices would be just as high as they are now.

 

Yes, BTL are scum, but attacking them will not address the fundamental drivers.

 

 

No.

IO BTL is the result of gormless banking regulation, where large number of loan have been sold at grossly too low a price.

Sort out the pricing on loans:

- IO BTL - commercial bridging loans, APR should be 4%/month.

- IO loans-. Bridging loans. Should be 6%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, disenfranchised said:

Regarding involving local people in the planning process - it doesn't have to be with an absolute veto right.

It is possible to mandate a certain level of homebuilding, but allow local people a say in where, as long as they cannot just say "no" 

I found the anti-development crowd were more sophisticated than that in their methods to undermine development, and they will usually be supported by whichever party is in opposition on a council, be it Tory or Labour, and will use the process to prevent any consensus from forming.

Edited by FabulousSophie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 302 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.