Owning your home.

All landlords I know use the capital growth as the their main source of finance to grow their portfolio. They’ll purchase a property with a mortgage, then years later when it comes to remortgage, if the property has gone up in value, they’ll take out some equity and use that to fund their next purchase.

I’m guessing you might know this already, but as the original property isn’t sold there is no tax due when it’s revalued for the mortgage and the equity is released free of any tax.

That above strategy can be used if it’s in your own name or a limited company.

I do think in most cases a limited company is still the better option, but there is no tax dodge/loophole vs it being in a limited company over your own name like was mentioned previously. Pros & cons to both and one method is not always the best, it comes down to individual circumstances.
I think the general issue is, it does give a company a competitive advantage when compared to a young individual wanting to purchase a starter property. It disproportionately affects the bottom end of the market, as from purely a business perspective, the risk/reward is much better.
As regards the tax side of things, even taking into account the 3% landlord surcharge on stamp duty, if you do the maths it’s still more tax efficient setting up a company to buy and let property than doing it outside a company wrapper.
 
unless they bought them a while back
they’ll have paid thousands in stamp duty as limited companies pay a 3% surcharge.

Then they’ll pay corporation tax on any profits and beyond taking out their dividend allowance, or money they’ve already put in, they’ll be liable for tax on the money they take out. The same way another business owner would be.

There’s no loopholes for dodging tax by putting it a limited company.
He did buy a whole a go and the way he explained it was by claiming up keep etc he pays very little tax takes dividend etc, he’s a clever lad and I don’t doubt what he says he will pay a lot less than your or me on an individual house
 
He did buy a whole a go and the way he explained it was by claiming up keep etc he pays very little tax takes dividend etc, he’s a clever lad and I don’t doubt what he says he will pay a lot less than your or me on an individual house
I have a couple that I rent out which I bought in 2008, both ex council houses and there are tax advantages to having them held within a business. Maybe not as much as your mate makes out and if he’s talking big sums, I would question how much he is flexing the tax rules.

The HMRC will allow you a bit of leeway, in fact I’ve generally found them quite helpful, but if you take the piss then they will eventually come knocking.
 
Interesting how this thread had moved on from the first post suggesting that it was a waste of effort buying a house and it is better to rent. To the last few posts about buying several houses and using limited companies to reduce tax liability etc.

Who is right? The poor guy who does not speculate, continues to rent and is still poor. Or the poor guy who speculates, buys several houses and is no longer poor? Hmmm?
 
Interesting how this thread had moved on from the first post suggesting that it was a waste of effort buying a house and it is better to rent. To the last few posts about buying several houses and using limited companies to reduce tax liability etc.

Who is right? The poor guy who does not speculate, continues to rent and is still poor. Or the poor guy who speculates, buys several houses and is no longer poor? Hmmm?

If you can't beat them, join them. I'm from a low income family and my partner is from abject poverty. This means it has been harder for us to get a leg up onto the ladder as we've had to rent into our 30s and live in some proper shitholes in the process.

I wouldn't have changed anything. At times it's been hard but we will own our own place soon enough, I've secured better work by asking for more and fighting out of my comfort zone. Eventually we will also be landlords and developers. We will likely have missed the boat for the big returns but will still be wealthy one day. Being poor is somewhat a choice in the modern world and we will not allow ourselves to make the same mistakes our parents did, nor will we bring kids into the world if we can't give them a good start in life.
 
Not sure what the % is

But how many can pay off a mortgage or get a whopping lumpsum when their Grandparents/Parents pass away who have paid off their mortgages etc

There will be plenty in that category; offspring of the post-war boomers who themselves benefited from almost uninterrupted house price growth.

Some stand to get double bubble once in-laws are factored in.

It’s an unwitting advert for home ownership and stable relationships! (One that will no doubt continue in the future.)

Not much consolation for those who get no windfalls though.
 
There will be plenty in that category; offspring of the post-war boomers who themselves benefited from almost uninterrupted house price growth.

Some stand to get double bubble once in-laws are factored in.

It’s an unwitting advert for home ownership and stable relationships! (One that will no doubt continue in the future.)

Not much consolation for those who get no windfalls though.
We have one kid she will be well off when my parents go and me and my wife, at some point prices should peak n certain areas surely
 
Last edited:
3 marriages, 2 divorces, 1 mistress, 12 mortgages... Just paid off house and living mortgage free at 60.
Massive financial burden lifted. Wife retired at 60. I carry on but choose to. Would have had a nicer house without divorces but have a nicer wife and life instead...
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.