To think rich people shouldn’t be allowed to buy multiple houses when others can’t afford one?

[YourTealBalonz]

I know people say “it’s their money” but I genuinely think the housing crisis is made worse by second-home buyers and landlords snapping up properties just to sit on them. It drives up prices and freezes people out of the market. I’m glad council tax rules are starting to push back on this. AIBU to think second home ownership should be discouraged more openly?

Wealth is relative, and in West Wales 'rich' people regularly buy property that locals would love to have as homes. Many normal terraced cottages are second homes here.

My grievance is with those who have a second home just for themselves and only use the for a holiday a few weeks of the year. I think there should be either higher taxation or rules to say you have to rent it out as a holiday let for at least 6 months of the year. I lived surrounded by such properties when I purchased my first home and it was depressing. These were ideal first time buyer type properties too.

Already happening ... double council tax, increased stamp duty, capital gains tax.

In Ireland you pay a non resident tax if you don’t live in your property, is there similar in the uk? And I get your way of thinking but if someone can’t afford a house it doesn’t matter how many houses someone else has (but I get that for demand it’s right)

This was my view. Why this is not a addressed is concerning wealthy foreigners and even more so those states like Russia who are hostile to our democracy. To own a huge swathe of London which is also a financial hub both internationally as well as domestically could bring the capital to its knees. As it quickly becomes unaffordable for even those on decent salaries. Which then pushes out key workers and pushes the capital into decline. We had to move from London where we had family and friends to 100 miles away as the jump to a 3 bed family home was not affordable. Dh is a key worker. Since moving their continues to be an exodus of people leaving London to relocate to a cheaper area, though their domestic set up would be relevant as whether it's a move on the basis it's desirable/ second home / case of need etc. So the government really needs to get a grip on this.

Double or triple council tax, but many just register the husband as primary resident at one address and wife in the other, and register at a local GP and electoral roll so it all matches up. If you can afford private GP back where you actually reside, then it has no negative impact on them to do this.

In your mind, is the primary reason for taxation to have ‘negative impact’ on people?

I did not say that. Being registered at a property that they do not actually reside in has no negative impact on them if they can afford to access a private GP and other services outside of the public sector, and therefore they will not be caught out on their fraud.

The OP seems to think that if no one is buying the chocolate the shop keeper will drop the price and she’ll be able to afford a bar. If all the chocolate is selling out really quickly, the price of chocolate will go up (fair play to the shop keeper) and the OP won’t be able to buy a bar until she’s saved up for quite a while.

In Austria the council will actually check that the house/flat are actually continuously occupied - they literally drive around and check. Fines can be very high if you’re not actually living there!

I would dearly love to see punitive taxes on land banking. Around here there are multiple sites where large houses have been demolished, hoardings erected around the site and then nothing happens, in most cases for many many years. They invariably have a notice on them saying they want to buy more land.

Blame Gary Stevenson

But do you though? Your language suggests you think some people deserve negative impacts.

And how do you feel mass immigration has affected the housing shortage? Or is it just the super wealthy we should blame for everything?

There are two separate issues at play here. The welfare system and housing shortage. The shortage affects those who are working and earning a decent salary (but cannot afford to buy) in the same way though. These middling earners are looking for rental properties in MC areas, of which there is a massive shortage. Competition for one unit is very high, which often forces them to search 'down' into areas which historically would have been DHSS friendly. This has a knock on affect to those on welfare, as there is a LHA cap which they either have to stay under, or pay extra out of pocket. They are then forced into b&b's and other emergency accommodation.
The real solution in my opinion (as a long term renter) is to implement a private rental cap. Landlords know the demand is so high and can charge what they want for a space in a double bed now. Some landlords are very decent though and have not taken advantage. Several of my LLs were obviously second home owners (one of them had 19 properties) but charged fair prices. I'm not against BTL properties, as long as they are at a fair price.

We need to try and keep families together as so many homes are being under occupied through single households.

Go back to incentivising marriage through tax breaks. Make sure that men are properly pursued for child maintenance, with the removal of a driving license if they fail to pay, that would make them rethink cheating and encourage downsizing through lowering stamp duty if you are selling a larger property to move into a smaller one.

Why are they doing this? In the hope house prices go up and they can earn more on the property once it is built?

What a driving licence got to do with child maintenance? It's purely crude and punitive.

Let's take away someone's means to earn, which would trickle down to their seed.

I think I’ve found a male poster!

I don’t think you have I think you’ve found someone that thinks your idea is ridiculous. What about those that don’t drive?

Family members have rental properties, they aren't greedy bad landlords. One of them charges less than the council do for a three bed property.

Second home owners, I'm on the fence. I personally have never desired a second home, I'd feel terrible leaving a perfectly good property empty. I know a family who inherited a property on the coast, it was left to three adult children (in 60s/ 70s - their mother who bought it to retire to died in her 90s), and rather than sell it the three children use it as a holiday home (along with their kids and grandkids) and split the costs three ways. It's nearly always in use. It's an amazing ground floor apartment with sea views and they love it, and couldn't bear to part with it. I don't begrudge them not selling. If. It was used less I might.

I don't really know. I suppose it is that land has a value that will only increase as time goes by. I find it really frustrating that the sites are ugly and overgrown and a beautiful house has often been torn down for no good reason.

If they had to pay high taxes it might discourage them and benefit the public purse.

I feel the same about foreign investors who buy up properties and leave them empty because they want somewhere to park their money. They too should be highly taxed, in my opinion anyway.

Is that true about single parents? I well remember in the late 60s an older woman, a staff member in the supermarket where I had a holiday job, telling a much younger woman to ‘…put your name down for a house, love, in case you fall for a baby.’

@EvangelicalAboutButteredToast
They do it to
-stack up land so they can develop when their programme allows
-because the area may be sensitive to development at the moment but not in the future
-so they can work on planning applications in one area whilst building in another to allow for continuous work

-If developers didnt stack land Theyd be twiddling their thumbs for years between jobs

It’s ok most private landlords are selling up, so now you’ll have crazy high rent prices and large corporate owned 2nd homes. Happy?