Cyclone Posted March 12, 2013 Share Posted March 12, 2013 Let's deal with both those nonsenses together. 1. Assume no tax relief on interest at all. For any business? Well done, you've just made the UK massively less attractive to business of all size. You've single handedly destroyed any hope of growth for 25 years. 2. All the so-clever offshore avoidance devices disappear. There is only one scheme that works like that, and it's been closed down. And it wasn't even based on interest offsetting. 3. Capital Allowances could be retained, enabling inward investment to continue. It wouldn't continue, businesses need access to debt and they expect to offset the cost against profit. 4. As matters stand, your much-vaunted UK corporate investment might well be a figment of your imagination. 5. No company will refuse to invest merely because tax relief on interest is unavailable, you know. They most certainly will. It's a ludicrous proposal, poorly thought out and poorly understood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnvqsos Posted March 12, 2013 Share Posted March 12, 2013 I am sure where tax relief is sought on house purchase it can be readily identified and made exempt from relief. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L00b Posted March 12, 2013 Share Posted March 12, 2013 I am sure where tax relief is sought on house purchase it can be readily identified and made exempt from relief.Indeed, e.g. just limit the exclusion to certain SPVs according to relevant criteria (e.g. type of asset, e.g. dwellings in the case of BTLs (rather than 'properly commercial' property such as offices/warehouses/plants). That'd be a start, without endangering 'standard', debt-based investment (and the interest relief thereon) in plant, machinery, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted March 13, 2013 Share Posted March 13, 2013 I am sure where tax relief is sought on house purchase it can be readily identified and made exempt from relief. It could. Although that wasn't what Jeffrey suggested. But why should it be? It's a legitimate expense of the business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnvqsos Posted March 13, 2013 Share Posted March 13, 2013 There's an easy answer: remove all tax relief on borrowings (inc. BTL mortgage advances). I would like this comment to be noted buy other posters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffrey Shaw Posted March 13, 2013 Share Posted March 13, 2013 I would like this comment to be noted buy [sic] other posters. Yes- because loss of BTL mortgage interest relief for private landlords might free more housing for first-time buyers. Don't you want that, then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted March 13, 2013 Share Posted March 13, 2013 Yes- because loss of BTL mortgage interest relief for private landlords might free more housing for first-time buyers. Don't you want that, then? BTL should just be banned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffrey Shaw Posted March 13, 2013 Share Posted March 13, 2013 BTL should just be banned. Not too democratic, that, plus who'd house all the newly-homeless? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted March 13, 2013 Share Posted March 13, 2013 Not too democratic, that, plus who'd house all the newly-homeless? I wouldn't make it instant, ban new Buy To Let, encourage Build to Let and give the Buy To Let landlords 10 years to sell up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted March 13, 2013 Share Posted March 13, 2013 I wouldn't make it instant, ban new Buy To Let, encourage Build to Let and give the Buy To Let landlords 10 years to sell up. To what end? Do you particularly want to force people to live on the street? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.