Property Ladder and tax

Oct 01, 2003 14 Replies

If you aren't familiar, the TV program Property Ladder follows wanabee property developers who buy rundown houses and do them up (either spare time or full time) to sell on at at profit.



I wondered, how do they get taxed on this? Assuming they aren't actually living in the property, does the profit count as income or capital gains?



It seems that with hard work, common sense, and a bit of luck, they sometimes make five figure sums for a few months work, so there is potentially a living to be made. It would seem unfair for this to be taxed as CGT if the profits are actually due to their own work. Then again sometimes they mess up and do a lot of work which doesn't add to the property value, and are bailed out by the rising property market, so CGT might be fair.



What if they do actually live in the properties they are renovating (ie they don't have any other house)? Don't they pay *any* tax? Somebody doing that could be working full time, making a good living, and paying no tax at all. True it is a risky game, but so are plenty of other jobs.



Just curious, I'm not thinking of going into this line myself :)



Dom


Most likely income tax - especially for those who said they were "property developers".

If the property is the main residence, and they stay there for a reasonable length of time, then likely to be exempt from CGT and IT. If done too often, the IR is likely to look closely.

I dont see why, as long as the property you are doing up is your only residence, you are exempt from CGT, surely? Otherwise there would need to be rules about how often you can buy and sell in a year or similar.

Because the IR could argue that the property was not being occupied as a "residence*, which they did in the case of Goodwin v. Curtis , and won.

Also, section 224(3) TCGA 1992 denies PPR exemption if the acquisition was wholly or partly for profit:

"(3) Section 223 shall not apply in relation to a gain if the acquisition of, or of the interest in, the dwelling-house or the part of a dwelling-house was made wholly or partly for the purpose of realising a gain from the disposal of it, and shall not apply in relation to a gain so far as attributable to any expenditure which was incurred after the beginning of the period of ownership and was incurred wholly or partly for the purpose of realising a gain from the disposal."

"Tumbleweed" wrote

Maybe exempt from CGT, but IR can still class you as a (serial) "property developer" and hence charge you **Income Tax** as a "trader"!!!

oooh thats nasty! Seems there are laws in place.

snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com (Dominic) wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@posting.google.com:

From watching this program on and off for the past couple of years, it seems most of the people involved have completely ignored all the advice they were given by the large-chested one and have by-and-large only made a little extra on top of what the rising market would have given them anyway.

I'm waiting to see this program in a falling property prices market - that will sort the men from the boys :-)

Rumor has it, that they 'can' the ones who follow the advice offered.

So am I, I was expecting it to be this series, Will have to wait for the next one now.

Tim

In article , Nick Pitfield writes

I think you will find it has been scrapped by then - it wont make good TV in a falling market, and it is unlikely that the victims would be willing to be filmed, and there wont be many, if any, of them doing it.

The best time to buy property to make real money is at the bottom of the cycle, or near it. The people who feature on these TV shows wont have the guts to do this deliberately, and those who have the guts to do it, wont want to be filmed.

It would be interesting to see what the price earnings ratio has been at the bottom of each cycle over the past 30 years, perhaps building in an interest rate relationship.

waffle...waffle....waffle

That, and the cheek of some who get friends and relatives to help them out. I wonder what answer they'd get if they did the same but for work? "Hey, I need to make some extra money, could you turn up at my place of work for a few days, then I'd get paid more"?

I think it will make a wonderful program :-)

But they will have been people who started in the boom, like about now. There are still lots of people who seem to think that the 20+% gains of the last 3 years are sustainable for the next 3 and are still keen to get into the market. Whether or not you think that there will be a crash or not most people with any sense should be able to see that they are at 'full value', but the people on PL are obviouls not from this set.

Problem is that you may have to wait some time. The houses that I have made my money on in the last 4 years were stagnant for the previous 5 (having crashed the year before that).

doesn't everybody want to be filmed :-)

Tim

"Tumbleweed" wrote

Tee hee hee!!

formatting link
I presume everyone's got fixed pitch font ! -

DETR Average Average Interest House Price Base EarningsPrice / as a % of (All) IncreaseRates Amount EarningsEarnings £ % %

1956 2,230 697 3.2 1957 2,280 2.2 731 3.1 1958 2,360 3.5 756 3.1 1959 2,360 0.0 793 3.0 1960 2,480 5.1 849 2.9 1961 2,710 9.3 896 3.0 1962 2,890 6.6 922 3.1 1963 3,100 7.3 935 3.3 1964 3,390 9.4 1004 3.4 1965 3,740 10.3 1075 3.5 1966 4,040 8.0 1146 3.5 1967 4,270 5.7 1186 3.6 1968 4,650 8.9 1280 3.6 1969 4,850 4.3 1380 3.5 1970 5,190 7.0 7.0000 1550 3.3 23 1971 6,130 18.1 5.0000 1722 3.6 18 1972 8,420 37.4 7.5000 1964 4.3 32 1973 11,120 32.1 13.0000 2205 5.0 66 1974 11,300 1.6 11.5000 2600 4.3 50 1975 12,119 7.2 11.5000 3287 3.7 42 1976 12,999 7.3 14.7500 3817 3.4 50 1977 13,922 7.1 7.0000 4163 3.3 23 1978 16,297 17.1 12.5000 4704 3.5 43 1979 21,047 29.1 17.0000 5427 3.9 66 1980 24,307 15.5 14.0000 6553 3.7 52 1981 24,810 2.1 14.5625 7399 3.4 49 1982 25,553 3.0 10.0000 8092 3.2 32 1983 28,592 11.9 9.0625 8761 3.3 30 1984 30,811 7.8 9.5000 9291 3.3 32 1985 33,187 7.7 11.3750 10068 3.3 37 1986 38,121 14.9 10.8750 10870 3.5 38 1987 44,220 16.0 8.8750 11713 3.8 34 1988 58,200 31.6 12.8750 12739 4.6 59 1989 70,400 21.0 14.8750 13900 5.1 75 1990 69,500 -1.3 13.8750 15252 4.6 63 1991 68,600 -1.3 10.3750 16441 4.2 43 1992 66,000 -3.8 6.8750 17426 3.8 26 1993 64,300 -2.6 5.3750 17968 3.6 19 1994 66,300 3.1 5.6250 18618 3.6 20 1995 66,700 0.6 6.6250 19202 3.5 23 1996 69,000 3.4 5.9375 19886 3.5 21 1997 75,500 9.4 7.2500 20736 3.6 26 1998 83,700 10.9 6.7500 21801 3.8 26 1999 93,300 11.5 5.5000 22847 4.1 22 2000 106,700 14.4 6.0000 23895 4.5 27 2001 115,700 8.4 4.0000 24928 4.6 19 2002 135,300 16.9 4.0000 25841 5.2 21

took some sorting

I note that every time the earnings multiplier got to 5 it then started to go down until it reached about 3.3.

Though Interest rates were a lot higher

tim

In article , tim writes

So, if people buy on price related to earnings, we are at the peak. But, if people buy based on mortgage cost as a percentage of salary, prices could more than double

I could guess that it may be a combination of the 2 although, as interest rates are potentially volatile, whereas earnings are fairly steady, (if you've got a job), it may be that "we" will build in an interest rate rise.

Join the Discussion

Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.

Didn't find your answer?

Ask the community — no account required