For a government that wants to fix the UK’s ‘broken’ housing market, yesterday’s budget was thin on measures to support the private rental sector, and introduced several measures that will reduce landlords’ desire to invest in buy-to-let.That is the message from many corners of the lettings industry this morning following yesterday’s budget, which closed the ‘lettings relief’ loophole that has enabled landlords to claim increased relief on a property they sell if it has been rented out.“With the demand for private rented housing rising whilst supply is shrinking, we needed pro-growth taxation measures to ensure that tenants have an adequate supply of housing to choose from,” says David Smith, Policy Director for the Residential Landlords’ Association.“Despite being given innovative suggestions to protect tenants in their homes, encourage sale to tenants, and improve energy efficiency, we got a damp squib with little more than promises of further consultations. “Eventually the government will need to stop consulting on the housing crisis and take action.”More respectJames Davis (left), CEO online lettings company Upad, says he doesn’t understand why the government is singling out landlords and the private rental sector for punishment.“It would be nice if [the] government viewed landlords with more respect and recognised that for many, working within the PRS is a business choice which should, therefore, command the same respect as more mainstream business areas,” he says.“Every year, without fail, UK Plc builds too few new homes. That deficit of new homes grows and grows and the contribution that the private rented sector makes in delivering sufficient quantities of homes is, therefore, vital.”Neil Cobbold, CEO of Payprop (right), says the budget missed several opportunities including to clamp down on Airbnb more heavily, putting the taxation of landlords on a more equal and fairer footing with other businesses, and the introduction of tax breaks to encourage landlords to offer longer, more secure tenancies to renters.John Lomas, co-founder Accommodation.co.uk (left), says: “Once again the Budget has been anticlimactic for Generation Rent as the Chancellor has done nothing for the millions suffering from rising rents. Whilst the volume of renters is increasing there is a massive shortage of supply in rental property, resulting in upward pressure on rents.“It is a shame that the change in mortgage interest tax relief, known as the Section 24 tax, hasn’t been scrapped – as the government has done in Ireland – resulting in landlords continuing to be forced out of the the private rented sector due to tax increases that make their businesses nonviable. james davis Philip Hammond neil cobbold budget 2018 David Smith the chancellor October 30, 2018Nigel LewisWhat’s your opinion? Cancel replyYou must be logged in to post a comment.Please note: This is a site for professional discussion. Comments will carry your full name and company.This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.Related articles BREAKING: Evictions paperwork must now include ‘breathing space’ scheme details30th April 2021 City dwellers most satisfied with where they live30th April 2021 Hong Kong remains most expensive city to rent with London in 4th place30th April 2021 Home » News » Housing Market » Why did Hammond continue his attack on landlords, wonders lettings industry previous nextHousing MarketWhy did Hammond continue his attack on landlords, wonders lettings industryMeasures to increase tax for landlords, and a lack of measures to help increase supply for ‘generation rent’ puzzle senior figures.Nigel Lewis30th October 201803,595 Views
Students and panelists gathered for the semester’s fourth installment of “Students Talk Back: A Politics and Public Policy Forum,” to discuss Russia’s recent efforts to annex the Crimea region of Ukraine and the role of U.S. diplomacy in the conflict. The Students Talk Back series is a semimonthly forum presented in partnership with the Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Science’s Jesse M. Unruh Institute of Politics, the College Democrats, the College Republicans and the Daily Trojan.The theme for the discussion was “The Crisis in Ukraine: Is US/European Diplomacy Enough?”The forum was moderated by Yasmeen Serhan, editorial director of the Daily Trojan, and Kerstyn Olson, interim director of the Unruh Institute.Olson began by stressing the importance of geopolitical issues for students in California who will soon be voting in midterm and national elections.“Given that we are living in a very tried-and-true blue state, I think it’s important — especially in a midterm election year — for USC students to not only think about issues that are of great import to California voters, but what will be important to voters in the so-called swing states,” Olson said. “Foreign policy is, of course, of incredible importance to all voters.”The moderators were joined on the panel by Rod Pacheco, a former state assemblyman and former district attorney of Riverside; Paul Feldman, an assistant foreign editor at the Los Angeles Times, and students Jessica Blakely and Shikhar Gupta.The first topic of discussion dealt with the legality of the Crimean referendum, which, if approved, will potentially allow the Crimea region of Ukraine to become part of Russia.“They don’t have a constitution that allows them to do this,” Pacheco said. “If there was a legal basis for the move, then Putin, Russia et. al. would have offered it, and the fact that they haven’t means they don’t have one.”For Feldman, who has been with the Los Angeles Times for more than three decades, the lack of a legal basis is less important because no one will enforce it.“It’s an issue more about real politics than legal basis, because there is no one that is going to be enforcing legal basis anyways,” he said. “It does appear right now that whatever happens, whoever puts up a fuss about the legal basis part probably is not going to get very far.”Blakely, a senior majoring in international relations and global health, agreed.“Paying attention to what the international law would say might not be one of Putin’s priorities either,” she said.Gupta, a sophomore majoring in international relations, provided some historical background for the audience members less familiar with the crisis.“[Ukraine] has historically been a part of various nations, empires, kingdoms and what not,” he said.Citing the transfer of Crimea to Ukraine by then-First Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union Nikita Kruschev in 1954, Gupta discussed the resulting implication: Nearly 60 percent of Crimeans identify as Russian.Pacheco, however, stressed the importance of Crimea as a military outpost.“This is a very important strategic base for Russia — they have a major naval facility there, it is a warm water port, they can reach any point in the Middle East, anywhere throughout the Mediterranean,” he said. “That was the basis for them invading in the first place under Peter the Great.”While the first half of the discussion focused on questions from the moderators, during the second half, audience members were invited to ask questions of the panelists.Luke Phillips, a sophomore majoring in international relations, commented on the implications of the Ukraine crisis for the future of U.S. foreign policy.“There is going to be a seat change in U.S. politics within the next decade, and I don’t think it’s going to come with a change in the administration,” Phillips said.The next Students Talk Back is Wednesday, March 26, in the Forum at the Ronald Tutor Campus Center.
The atheletics community is bracing itself for more revelations from the WADA Independent Commission.The investigation headed by former WADA president Dick Pound has already revealed allegations of a widespread doping cover-up in Russian athletics The second-half of their report is expected to focus on corruption within world governing body, the IAAF.