So how long until the tax man comes down hard on landlords?

So how long until the tax man comes down hard on landlords?

Author
Discussion

JonRB

74,880 posts

273 months

Tuesday 17th August 2010
quotequote all
Mario149 said:
Never mind having to pay additional money, you'd rack up legal fees so quickly it would be academic adding another X £k to the total cost!
Which is why being a member of the PCG is so important, as members are covered for a lot of those fees.

rfisher

5,024 posts

284 months

Tuesday 17th August 2010
quotequote all
Welshbeef said:
...... if you have your own residential mortgage, up the ltv on the buy to let while dumping the equity released into your residential mortgage therefore little or no tax due.
Or words to that effect.

I enquired about this and was informed that it's a no no.

You can only claim tax relief on the interest payments directly relating to the original loan used to buy the house in the first place.

If you subsequently remortgage to a higher LTV, use some of the money to decrease the capital outstanding on your residential mortgage and claim tax relief on the rest, you're being naughty.

All tax relief has to relate to the original loan used to purchase the property.

I'm happy to be corrected if this is not the case.

RichyBoy

3,741 posts

218 months

Tuesday 17th August 2010
quotequote all
Couldn't a disgruntled tenant just grass the landlord up to the revenue or the lender?

IR scares me so I err on the side of caution, early this year I started renting a few rooms out in the my flat and even apportioned the expenses to the rented rooms as oppose to just deducting the full expenses from the rental income.

Welshbeef

49,633 posts

199 months

Tuesday 17th August 2010
quotequote all
RichyBoy said:
Couldn't a disgruntled tenant just grass the landlord up to the revenue or the lender?

IR scares me so I err on the side of caution, early this year I started renting a few rooms out in the my flat and even apportioned the expenses to the rented rooms as oppose to just deducting the full expenses from the rental income.
grass them up for what?

They are a tennant. They put their own names down on the electoral role they have a receive a gas cert every year deposit has to be handled by a thrid party

no tennant would know if a landlord was or was not declaring his rental income odd to suppose they would not be.

VernalEquinox

142 posts

212 months

Tuesday 17th August 2010
quotequote all
Welshbeef said:
grass them up for what?

They are a tennant. They put their own names down on the electoral role they have a receive a gas cert every year deposit has to be handled by a thrid party

no tennant would know if a landlord was or was not declaring his rental income odd to suppose they would not be.
There's a fair clue that all may not be above board when the landlord's bank statements are still coming to the house that you're now renting from them.

Welshbeef

49,633 posts

199 months

Tuesday 17th August 2010
quotequote all
VernalEquinox said:
Welshbeef said:
grass them up for what?

They are a tennant. They put their own names down on the electoral role they have a receive a gas cert every year deposit has to be handled by a thrid party

no tennant would know if a landlord was or was not declaring his rental income odd to suppose they would not be.
There's a fair clue that all may not be above board when the landlord's bank statements are still coming to the house that you're now renting from them.
still doesn't mean he isn't paying his tax. Took me ages to change all my accounts over to new address but I do appreciate your point.
The key thing though if your a tennant get the electoral role remove him from it and replace with people who live in the house. Likewise with council tax you should always inform them it's a rented house.

Still to me it is the naive landlord who doesn't do it properly as it shouldn't cost a thing if done properly.

Best way I guess is with dodgy landlords who clearly have a residential mortgage without permission to let change of electoral role will begin to ring alarm bells plus a letter to said mortgage provider from tennant will cause a whole load of grief and probably lead to the mortgage being called in without much notice

rfisher

5,024 posts

284 months

Thursday 19th August 2010
quotequote all
So do we have an answer to this point?

I said "You can only claim tax relief on the interest payments directly relating to the original loan used to buy the house in the first place.

If you subsequently remortgage to a higher LTV, use some of the money to decrease the capital outstanding on your residential mortgage and claim tax relief on the rest, you're being naughty.

All tax relief has to relate to the original loan used to purchase the property."

I'd be very interested to know if you can just borrow £1000s on a property you are renting AFTER HAVING PAID OFF THE ORIGINAL LOAN and reclaim the tax on the interest on the new loan.

JonRB

74,880 posts

273 months

Thursday 19th August 2010
quotequote all
My understanding was that you could offset the interest component of your BTL mortgage against tax. Full stop.

I have never heard the caveat that it is for the original loan only and my accountants never queried it or advised against it when I remortgaged.

Welshbeef

49,633 posts

199 months

Thursday 19th August 2010
quotequote all
JonRB said:
My understanding was that you could offset the interest component of your BTL mortgage against tax. Full stop.

I have never heard the caveat that it is for the original loan only and my accountants never queried it or advised against it when I remortgaged.
Ditto.

rfisher

5,024 posts

284 months

Thursday 19th August 2010
quotequote all
Well that's very interesting.

Eric thought differently.

If you are both correct and this is common practice (and legal), then there must be a lot of people who are living mortgage free in their residential property having borrowed the money to pay off the residential mortgage against their rental property or properties.

Plus they're getting tax relief on the interest component of the mortgage(s) for the rental properties.

Sounds too good to be true.

Don't believe it.

pilchardthecat

7,483 posts

180 months

Thursday 19th August 2010
quotequote all
rfisher said:
Well that's very interesting.

Eric thought differently.

If you are both correct and this is common practice (and legal), then there must be a lot of people who are living mortgage free in their residential property having borrowed the money to pay off the residential mortgage against their rental property or properties.

Plus they're getting tax relief on the interest component of the mortgage(s) for the rental properties.

Sounds too good to be true.

Don't believe it.
If the subsequent loan secured against the property is used for reasons other than the rental 'business' the costs of the interst on the loan can't be offset against the rental income. If you spent the secondary loan on extensions or improvements you could.

The fact that the money you are borrowing is secured on the property is irrelevent - it's what you use the money for that matters.

Eric Mc

122,185 posts

266 months

Thursday 19th August 2010
quotequote all
Interest is allowable for tax purposes on the basis of what the loan was for.

If the loan was to buy a rental property, set up a business, acquire a buisiness asset etc, then the interest can be offset against the rental profits, business profits etc.

If you take out a loan to buy your own residence then you cannot use the interest on that loan against rental or business income (or any other kind of taxable income for that matter).

If you extend an existing loan that had ORIGINALLY been taken out to fund a business or a rental property but the EXTENDED aspect of the loan does not relate to a business or a rental property, then THAT PORTION OF THE INTEREST relating to the additional loan amount will not be offsetable for tax purposes.

JonRB

74,880 posts

273 months

Thursday 19th August 2010
quotequote all
Eric Mc said:
If you extend an existing loan that had ORIGINALLY been taken out to fund a business or a rental property but the EXTENDED aspect of the loan does not relate to a business or a rental property, then THAT PORTION OF THE INTEREST relating to the additional loan amount will not be offsetable for tax purposes.
Thanks for the clarification, Eric.

One (related) point to note is that one should always overpay one's residential mortgage in preference to the BTL, if one finds oneself with additional funds, precisely so you don't decrease the original loan of the BTL property and hence reduce the interest payments you can offset against tax.

I'm well out of the BTL game now anyway, so it's no longer relevant to me personally but I thought I'd mention it.

pilchardthecat

7,483 posts

180 months

Thursday 19th August 2010
quotequote all
JonRB said:
Eric Mc said:
If you extend an existing loan that had ORIGINALLY been taken out to fund a business or a rental property but the EXTENDED aspect of the loan does not relate to a business or a rental property, then THAT PORTION OF THE INTEREST relating to the additional loan amount will not be offsetable for tax purposes.
Thanks for the clarification, Eric.

One (related) point to note is that one should always overpay one's residential mortgage in preference to the BTL, if one finds oneself with additional funds, precisely so you don't decrease the original loan of the BTL property and hence reduce the interest payments you can offset against tax.

I'm well out of the BTL game now anyway, so it's no longer relevant to me personally but I thought I'd mention it.
Fairly certain you can draw down overpayments on the initial loan

Eric Mc

122,185 posts

266 months

Thursday 19th August 2010
quotequote all
pilchardthecat said:
JonRB said:
Eric Mc said:
If you extend an existing loan that had ORIGINALLY been taken out to fund a business or a rental property but the EXTENDED aspect of the loan does not relate to a business or a rental property, then THAT PORTION OF THE INTEREST relating to the additional loan amount will not be offsetable for tax purposes.
Thanks for the clarification, Eric.

One (related) point to note is that one should always overpay one's residential mortgage in preference to the BTL, if one finds oneself with additional funds, precisely so you don't decrease the original loan of the BTL property and hence reduce the interest payments you can offset against tax.

I'm well out of the BTL game now anyway, so it's no longer relevant to me personally but I thought I'd mention it.
Fairly certain you can draw down overpayments on the initial loan
Are you talking "tax matters" or just "loan matters"?

JonRB

74,880 posts

273 months

Thursday 19th August 2010
quotequote all
pilchardthecat said:
Fairly certain you can draw down overpayments on the initial loan
You're only charged interest on the outstanding loan amount. Therefore reducing the loan by any means will reduce the interest payment and hence what you can offset against tax.

What I was saying is that if you found yourself with a surplus or £1000 and had both a residential and BTL mortgage (on two respective properties, obviously) then it makes far more financial sense to overpay the residential mortgage.

pilchardthecat

7,483 posts

180 months

Thursday 19th August 2010
quotequote all
JonRB said:
pilchardthecat said:
Fairly certain you can draw down overpayments on the initial loan
You're only charged interest on the outstanding loan amount. Therefore reducing the loan by any means will reduce the interest payment and hence what you can offset against tax.

What I was saying is that if you found yourself with a surplus or £1000 and had both a residential and BTL mortgage (on two respective properties, obviously) then it makes far more financial sense to overpay the residential mortgage.
My point was that if you had previously overpaid and reduced the interest on the original loan, you could borrow back the overpayment and then start claiming the full interest again.

But yes, which debt you choose to pay off with your rofit is entirely up to you. The purpose of the 'loan' wouldn't matter in this case

Edited by pilchardthecat on Thursday 19th August 15:12

Eric Mc

122,185 posts

266 months

Thursday 19th August 2010
quotequote all
The PURPOSE of the loan absolutely matters for tax purposes.

pilchardthecat

7,483 posts

180 months

Thursday 19th August 2010
quotequote all
Eric Mc said:
The PURPOSE of the loan absolutely matters for tax purposes.
Not if you are drawing down a prior overpayment of the original loan.

JonRB

74,880 posts

273 months

Thursday 19th August 2010
quotequote all
pilchardthecat said:
Eric Mc said:
The PURPOSE of the loan absolutely matters for tax purposes.
Not if you are drawing down a prior overpayment of the original loan.
Regardless, you've still lost the benefit of being able to offset the difference in the interest payments against tax.

I'd suggest there are more tax efficient vehicles for using that extra money than overpaying the BTL mortgage.