Gen Z renters lack knowledge of credit scores and rent rules
admin 
Property118
Gen Z renters lack knowledge of credit scores and rent rules
More than seven in 10 of Gen Z renters felt overwhelmed, uncertain or anxious when first looking for a home to rent, research reveals.
Figures from Housing Hand’s Understanding Renters in 2025 report, highlight several gaps in knowledge about the basics of renting.
Gen Z is those aged between 12 and 29, and of the tenants surveyed, 85% said they did not receive enough financial education at school to prepare them for renting.
As a result, 36% said they turn to family members for advice and 31% rely on websites, while 16% seek guidance from friends.
The firm’s sales manager, Dani Smith, said: “Young people should feel excited about heading out into the world and renting their first home, but lack of knowledge is denting confidence and negatively impacting the experience from the start.
“The Renters’ Rights Act presents a huge opportunity to address a range of issues in the rental sector, including knowledge gaps among tenants.”
Unsure about financial checks
The findings also show uncertainty around financial checks used by landlords and letting agents.
While 82% of Gen Z renters said they know what a credit score is, 45% said they do not understand how it affects their ability to secure a home to rent.
Knowledge of standard tenancy requirements appears uneven with 35% of respondents admitting they did not know what a rent guarantor was.
Just 32% said they knew about depositless rent schemes, while half of respondents, said they were aware of tenancy deposit protection schemes.
Overwhelmed looking for a home
When asked how they felt when starting the search for a property, respondents aged 16 to 30 most often selected negative responses.
Around 26% said they felt overwhelmed, 20% uncertain, 19% anxious and 8% scared.
The survey also asked how younger tenants would respond if they encountered financial difficulty.
Among those surveyed, 59% said they would not know what to do if they could not pay their rent.
In that situation, 84% said they would turn to their parents for support.
And two-thirds of respondents, said they were uncertain about how the deposit return process works.
The post Gen Z renters lack knowledge of credit scores and rent rules appeared first on Property118.
View Full Article: Gen Z renters lack knowledge of credit scores and rent rules
Google searches for Making Tax Digital hit record high
Property118
Google searches for Making Tax Digital hit record high
Searches for Making Tax Digital have surged ahead of the April deadline, according to new research.
Under the controversial scheme, from April 2026, landlords earning more than £50,000 will be required to keep digital records and submit quarterly updates to HMRC using authorised MTD-compliant software.
Landlords earning between £30,000 and £50,000 will join the scheme in April 2027.
614% increase in search term
Analysis of Google Trends by Censuswide, commissioned by software platform Coconut, shows that interest in the term “Making Tax Digital” peaked on 10 February 2026, reaching an index score of 100, the highest level ever recorded in the UK, and a 614% increase compared with 10 December 2025.
In recent weeks, the government has ramped up its campaign for Making Tax Digital with the government publishing guidance to help landlords find the right software for MTD, including a list of approved software providers.
Alongside this, a new online search tool has been launched, which asks a series of questions tailored to sole traders and landlords, before generating a personalised list of compatible MTD software options.
However, as previously reported by Property118, despite the government claiming Making Tax Digital will help landlords, an accountant says this is not the case.
Simon Misiewicz previously told Property118: “There’s no real benefit beyond maybe streamlining some of the work you already do,” he says. “Does it help with tax returns and submissions? The truth is, I can’t see how.
“There’s no advantage for the individual in submitting quarterly returns, because HMRC doesn’t do anything with them until the end of the year. You don’t pay your taxes any earlier, and there is no real cash-flow benefit for the government”.
The government admitted in the Making Tax Digital impact assessment that landlords earning £50,000 could incur an average transitional cost of £285 and an average annual additional cost of £115.
The post Google searches for Making Tax Digital hit record high appeared first on Property118.
View Full Article: Google searches for Making Tax Digital hit record high
The Property118 Housing Research Panel
Property118
The Property118 Housing Research Panel
Property118 has spent more than a decade reporting on the private rented sector, helping landlords, journalists, lenders and policymakers understand the commercial and regulatory realities shaping housing supply.During that time, Property118 has also played a quieter but equally important role. We have helped academic researchers engage directly with landlords, supported university research projects, and ensured that findings reached practitioners rather than remaining confined to academic journals.
Now, Property118 is taking the next logical step. We are formalising that work into a structured research initiative designed to measure landlord sentiment, rental supply intentions, refinancing conditions and sector confidence on an ongoing basis.
Why better housing supply data matters now more than ever
Housing policy debates often proceed without reliable, real-time insight into landlord decision-making. Government statistics lag behind reality. Headlines focus on outcomes, rising rents, falling supply, and affordability pressures, but rarely capture the decisions driving those outcomes.
The private rented sector is shaped by thousands of individual commercial decisions made by landlords every day. Whether to refinance, hold, sell, invest or exit altogether. Until now, there has been no structured, independent mechanism to measure those decisions as they happen.
Property118 is uniquely positioned to help fill that gap. Our articles now appear in more than 3,000,000 Google Search impressions each month, reflecting a substantial specialist readership drawn from across the housing ecosystem.
Building on established academic collaboration
This initiative builds on Property118’s established role supporting academic housing research. Over the years, Property118 has assisted projects led by institutions including the University of York and the University of Sheffield, helping researchers engage directly with landlords and disseminate findings to practitioners.
Those collaborations demonstrated something important. When landlords are given the opportunity to contribute to structured research, the result is a clearer and more accurate understanding of housing supply dynamics.
Property118 is now expanding that capability by developing a recurring research framework designed to produce transparent, repeatable indicators that improve public understanding of housing supply.
Opening discussions with research and journalism organisations
As part of this initiative, Property118 has opened discussions with several respected organisations and institutions whose work aligns with strengthening independent journalism, academic research, and housing transparency.
These discussions reflect a shared recognition that reliable, practitioner-informed data is essential to improving understanding of housing supply and policy outcomes.
Property118’s objective is straightforward. To ensure that landlord decision-making, the engine that ultimately determines rental supply, is properly understood and represented within housing research and public debate.
Introducing the Property118 Inner Circle Research Panel
To support this work, Property118 is inviting landlords to join the Property118 Inner Circle Research Panel.
This panel will form the foundation of an ongoing research programme designed to measure real-world sentiment and supply intentions across the private rented sector.
Panel members will periodically be invited to participate in structured surveys covering areas such as:
- Portfolio expansion or reduction intentions
- Refinancing expectations and constraints
- Confidence in the future of the sector
- Regulatory and commercial pressures influencing decision-making
- Investment, divestment, and exit planning
Participation will be entirely voluntary, and individual responses will remain confidential. Findings will be published only in aggregated form.
Why landlord participation matters
Reliable housing policy depends on reliable data. Without direct insight into landlord behaviour, policymakers and commentators are left to infer causes from outcomes.
The Property118 Inner Circle Research Panel will help ensure that landlord decision-making is properly understood, improving the accuracy of housing research, journalism, and public debate.
For landlords, participation offers the opportunity to contribute to a clearer, evidence-based understanding of the sector at a time when policy decisions increasingly shape commercial outcomes.
A long-term commitment to housing transparency
This initiative reflects Property118’s long-standing commitment to improving understanding of the private rented sector through independent, commercially grounded reporting.
By formalising its research capability and engaging directly with landlords, Property118 aims to create a lasting evidence base that supports informed decision-making across the housing ecosystem.
The private rented sector will continue to evolve. Ensuring that evolution is properly understood benefits landlords, tenants, researchers, and policymakers alike.
Landlords who wish to participate in the Property118 Inner Circle Research Panel are invited to register interest below.
Register your interest
/* “function”==typeof InitializeEditor,callIfLoaded:function(o){return!(!gform.domLoaded||!gform.scriptsLoaded||!gform.themeScriptsLoaded&&!gform.isFormEditor()||(gform.isFormEditor()&&console.warn(“The use of gform.initializeOnLoaded() is deprecated in the form editor context and will be removed in Gravity Forms 3.1.”),o(),0))},initializeOnLoaded:function(o){gform.callIfLoaded(o)||(document.addEventListener(“gform_main_scripts_loaded”,()=>{gform.scriptsLoaded=!0,gform.callIfLoaded(o)}),document.addEventListener(“gform/theme/scripts_loaded”,()=>{gform.themeScriptsLoaded=!0,gform.callIfLoaded(o)}),window.addEventListener(“DOMContentLoaded”,()=>{gform.domLoaded=!0,gform.callIfLoaded(o)}))},hooks:{action:{},filter:{}},addAction:function(o,r,e,t){gform.addHook(“action”,o,r,e,t)},addFilter:function(o,r,e,t){gform.addHook(“filter”,o,r,e,t)},doAction:function(o){gform.doHook(“action”,o,arguments)},applyFilters:function(o){return gform.doHook(“filter”,o,arguments)},removeAction:function(o,r){gform.removeHook(“action”,o,r)},removeFilter:function(o,r,e){gform.removeHook(“filter”,o,r,e)},addHook:function(o,r,e,t,n){null==gform.hooks[o][r]&&(gform.hooks[o][r]=[]);var d=gform.hooks[o][r];null==n&&(n=r+”_”+d.length),gform.hooks[o][r].push({tag:n,callable:e,priority:t=null==t?10:t})},doHook:function(r,o,e){var t;if(e=Array.prototype.slice.call(e,1),null!=gform.hooks[r][o]&&((o=gform.hooks[r][o]).sort(function(o,r){return o.priority-r.priority}),o.forEach(function(o){“function”!=typeof(t=o.callable)&&(t=window[t]),”action”==r?t.apply(null,e):e[0]=t.apply(null,e)})),”filter”==r)return e[0]},removeHook:function(o,r,t,n){var e;null!=gform.hooks[o][r]&&(e=(e=gform.hooks[o][r]).filter(function(o,r,e){return!!(null!=n&&n!=o.tag||null!=t&&t!=o.priority)}),gform.hooks[o][r]=e)}});
/* ]]> */
INNER CIRCLE RESEARCH PANEL REGISTRATION
/* = 0;if(!is_postback){return;}var form_content = jQuery(this).contents().find(‘#gform_wrapper_584′);var is_confirmation = jQuery(this).contents().find(‘#gform_confirmation_wrapper_584′).length > 0;var is_redirect = contents.indexOf(‘gformRedirect(){‘) >= 0;var is_form = form_content.length > 0 && ! is_redirect && ! is_confirmation;var mt = parseInt(jQuery(‘html’).css(‘margin-top’), 10) + parseInt(jQuery(‘body’).css(‘margin-top’), 10) + 100;if(is_form){jQuery(‘#gform_wrapper_584′).html(form_content.html());if(form_content.hasClass(‘gform_validation_error’)){jQuery(‘#gform_wrapper_584′).addClass(‘gform_validation_error’);} else {jQuery(‘#gform_wrapper_584′).removeClass(‘gform_validation_error’);}setTimeout( function() { /* delay the scroll by 50 milliseconds to fix a bug in chrome */ }, 50 );if(window[‘gformInitDatepicker’]) {gformInitDatepicker();}if(window[‘gformInitPriceFields’]) {gformInitPriceFields();}var current_page = jQuery(‘#gform_source_page_number_584′).val();gformInitSpinner( 584, ‘https://www.property118.com/wp-content/plugins/gravityforms/images/spinner.svg’, true );jQuery(document).trigger(‘gform_page_loaded’, [584, current_page]);window[‘gf_submitting_584′] = false;}else if(!is_redirect){var confirmation_content = jQuery(this).contents().find(‘.GF_AJAX_POSTBACK’).html();if(!confirmation_content){confirmation_content = contents;}jQuery(‘#gform_wrapper_584′).replaceWith(confirmation_content);jQuery(document).trigger(‘gform_confirmation_loaded’, [584]);window[‘gf_submitting_584′] = false;wp.a11y.speak(jQuery(‘#gform_confirmation_message_584′).text());}else{jQuery(‘#gform_584′).append(contents);if(window[‘gformRedirect’]) {gformRedirect();}}jQuery(document).trigger(“gform_pre_post_render”, [{ formId: “584”, currentPage: “current_page”, abort: function() { this.preventDefault(); } }]); if (event && event.defaultPrevented) { return; } const gformWrapperDiv = document.getElementById( “gform_wrapper_584″ ); if ( gformWrapperDiv ) { const visibilitySpan = document.createElement( “span” ); visibilitySpan.id = “gform_visibility_test_584″; gformWrapperDiv.insertAdjacentElement( “afterend”, visibilitySpan ); } const visibilityTestDiv = document.getElementById( “gform_visibility_test_584″ ); let postRenderFired = false; function triggerPostRender() { if ( postRenderFired ) { return; } postRenderFired = true; gform.core.triggerPostRenderEvents( 584, current_page ); if ( visibilityTestDiv ) { visibilityTestDiv.parentNode.removeChild( visibilityTestDiv ); } } function debounce( func, wait, immediate ) { var timeout; return function() { var context = this, args = arguments; var later = function() { timeout = null; if ( !immediate ) func.apply( context, args ); }; var callNow = immediate && !timeout; clearTimeout( timeout ); timeout = setTimeout( later, wait ); if ( callNow ) func.apply( context, args ); }; } const debouncedTriggerPostRender = debounce( function() { triggerPostRender(); }, 200 ); if ( visibilityTestDiv && visibilityTestDiv.offsetParent === null ) { const observer = new MutationObserver( ( mutations ) => { mutations.forEach( ( mutation ) => { if ( mutation.type === ‘attributes’ && visibilityTestDiv.offsetParent !== null ) { debouncedTriggerPostRender(); observer.disconnect(); } }); }); observer.observe( document.body, { attributes: true, childList: false, subtree: true, attributeFilter: [ ‘style’, ‘class’ ], }); } else { triggerPostRender(); } } );} );
/* ]]> */
The post The Property118 Housing Research Panel appeared first on Property118.
View Full Article: The Property118 Housing Research Panel
Are tenants beginning to see the problem of landlords leaving?
Property118
Are tenants beginning to see the problem of landlords leaving?
Like Thelma and Louise hurtling towards the cliff edge, more people are beginning to see the problems coming with the Renters’ Rights Act.
Thankfully, tenants are now asking why landlords are leaving and why rents are rising.
I say that after reading the comments under a BBC story this week about rents topping £1,000 a month across more than half of Britain’s neighbourhoods.
The story appeared on Property118 too, but the Beeb’s version didn’t just attract the predictable landlord-bashing.
But sadly, much like Thelma and Louise, I suspect we are already too close to the edge to slam on the brakes and save the private rented sector in its current form.
Zoopla’s research shows the average rent for a new tenancy is now more than £1,000 a month in 52% of British neighbourhoods, up from just 23% in 2020.
Rents have risen 36% over five years. Wages have increased too, though nowhere near enough to keep pace.
Rental supply shrinking
Predictably, the commentators said this was bad because landlords are simply charging more.
However, instead of a pile on of others agreeing that landlords are raking in cash for doing nothing (!), I was struck by a new narrative.
It is probably being driven by growing numbers of tenants discovering the basic economics of supply and demand as they try to find somewhere to live.
Several pointed to something landlords have warned about for years: thousands are selling up.
When supply shrinks but demand stays strong, rents rise. That is not ideology; it is arithmetic.
There was even a nod to the rising costs for landlords, from mortgages to tax and regulation, which inevitably land with the tenant at the end of the line paying more.
For years this argument was dismissed as special pleading from landlords protecting their interests.
But now renters themselves are beginning to feel the consequences.
Who replaces selling landlords?
One tenant explained that their landlord had increased the rent by £150 a month after being forced to pay for professional compliance advice.
Others raised the longer-term structural problem: if smaller landlords exit, who replaces them?
In many cases the answer is not first-time buyers.
It is increasingly likely that institutional investors, property companies or cash buyers expanding portfolios will be stepping in.
And more tenants appear to be appreciating what small landlords offer, rather than faceless corporations.
No one defends rogue landlords or poor housing standards, but government policy often has unintended consequences, particularly when it collides with economic reality.
Young people are struggling
Young people are being hit from all sides: high rents, high house prices and large student debts.
For many of them, renting privately is not a lifestyle choice since it has become the only viable housing option.
If the market continues to shrink, the consequences extend far beyond landlords and tenants.
Labour mobility suffers and graduates cannot easily move cities for work.
Their disposable income drains away into housing costs rather than the wider economy.
And yet much of the political conversation continues to treat landlords as a problem to be eliminated rather than being part of the housing system.
What replaces the small landlord?
The irony is brutal and the very people the Act was meant to protect are about to discover that ‘corporate’ and ‘institutional’ landlords are remote and slower to fix things.
Councils and housing associations leave some properties dangerous for years, yet the narrative is that every private landlord is a pantomime villain.
The Act will see more landlords heading for the exit, rents will keep climbing but tenants are starting to speak.
They can see what is happening now, and that’s without the struggles facing landlords after May’s implementation of the Act.
All tenants need to understand that this crisis was made in Westminster, not by the people who actually provide the homes.
Demonise productive capital and watch it vanish.
The unintended consequence is staring us in the face: fewer homes, higher rents and a generation locked out.
And like Thelma and Louise discovering gravity at the edge of the canyon, the laws of supply and demand have a habit of asserting themselves whether politicians believe in them or not.
Until next time,
The Landlord Crusader
The post Are tenants beginning to see the problem of landlords leaving? appeared first on Property118.
View Full Article: Are tenants beginning to see the problem of landlords leaving?
Councils collect just 25% of landlord fines
Property118
Councils collect just 25% of landlord fines
Councils in England have collected only a quarter of the civil penalties issued to landlords for housing offences over the past two years, research reveals.
The National Residential Landlords Association says its data was obtained through Freedom of Information requests to English councils responsible for PRS enforcement.
Across 2023/24 and 2024/25, 285 councils imposed almost £30 million in civil penalties on private landlords.
Just under £7.5 million of that total was actually recovered.
Fed-up responsible landlords
The NRLA’s chief executive, Ben Beadle, said: “Tenants and the vast majority of responsible landlords will rightly be fed up with our findings.
“For too long a minority of rogue and criminal operators have allowed to act with impunity, bringing the sector into disrepute.
“It is galling then to see that those breaking the law are still failing to pay the price – leaving good landlords to pick up the tab in licensing fees.”
He added: “This also raises serious questions about how ready councils are to enforce the Renters’ Rights Act, and about the adequacy of the upfront funding provided to them to support enforcement action.”
RRA implemented in May
The NRLA says that the same records show that nearly 3,700 civil penalties were issued to landlords during the two-year period.
Its research has been published ahead of the Renters’ Rights Act coming into force on 1 May.
Under the legislation, the maximum civil penalty available to councils will increase from £7,000 to £40,000.
According to the NRLA, the figures indicate that councils are not collecting funds that could otherwise be used to support enforcement activity in the private rented sector.
Examine council enforcement funding
The organisation says the issue raises questions about how local authorities will enforce the new regime once the higher civil penalties become available.
Alongside the research, the NRLA is calling for the creation of a new Chief Environmental Health Officer post with a national remit for improving enforcement standards.
It is also urging the government to undertake a full assessment of the resources currently available to local authority enforcement teams.
It says an analysis of the funding they will require to enforce the Renters’ Rights Act is needed.
The organisation also says councils should be required to publish an annual report setting out enforcement activity relating to the PRS in their area.
The post Councils collect just 25% of landlord fines appeared first on Property118.
View Full Article: Councils collect just 25% of landlord fines
Landlords told not to wait until Decent Homes Standard to fix rental homes
Property118
Landlords told not to wait until Decent Homes Standard to fix rental homes
The government insists private landlords must not wait until the Decent Homes Standard 2035 deadline to improve rental properties.
Under the Decent Homes Standard, landlords will need to meet certain criteria, including that homes must be in a reasonable state of repair and provide core facilities and services, including a kitchen with adequate space and layout, an appropriately located bathroom and WC, and adequate protection from external noise.
A government document says homes must also be equipped with child-resistant window restrictors and provide a reasonable degree of thermal comfort.
Should not wait until 2035 deadline
In a written question, Labour MP Vicky Foxcroft asked the government: “Whether it has an assessment of the potential merits of expediting implementation of the Decent Homes Standard to improve maintenance practices in privately rented properties.”
In response, Housing Minister Matthew Pennycook claimed landlords must improve rental properties before the 2035 deadline.
He said: “Private rented sector landlords should address non-decency wherever it exists. While we are giving landlords until 2035 to implement our new Decent Homes Standard, we have made clear they should not wait until 2035 to improve their properties.
“We are also acting in other ways to ensure private tenants have safe, warm, and decent homes, including introducing new Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards for the sector; strengthening local authority enforcement in respect of unremedied hazards; and applying Awaab’s Law Act to the private rented sector through the relevant provisions in the Renters’ Rights Act.”
The government have previously claimed “too many tenants are living in poor quality housing”, with 21% of homes in the Private Rented Sector (PRS) and 10% of homes in the social rented sector failing to meet the Decent Homes Standard.
The post Landlords told not to wait until Decent Homes Standard to fix rental homes appeared first on Property118.
View Full Article: Landlords told not to wait until Decent Homes Standard to fix rental homes
Why Many Investors Stay Busy But Do Not Build Real Wealth
Property118
Why Many Investors Stay Busy But Do Not Build Real Wealth
Many investors never ask themselves an important question. What if this year ends up looking exactly like the last one financially?
Not terrible. Not amazing. Just the same.
You worked hard, stayed busy and maybe even made investments. Yet when you step back and look at the results, progress often feels slower than it should.
One common reason is relying on a single strategy to do everything.
The investors who build lasting wealth usually take a different approach. They understand that different assets serve different roles.
The Three Roles Behind Wealth Building
Successful investors tend to focus on three key areas.
Income
Assets that generate regular cash flow provide stability and support your lifestyle.
Growth
Other assets increase in value over time, building long term wealth.
Compounding capital
Protecting and multiplying the capital you already have allows wealth to grow faster over time.
When these three elements work together, progress begins to accelerate.
Where Most People Get Stuck
Most people become reasonably good at making money.
Some learn how to keep more of it.
But far fewer understand how to multiply what they keep.
Without that third step, investors often find themselves working harder each year while their financial progress remains slow.
Working Hard Is Not Always Enough
Many investors stay extremely busy with deals, calls and opportunities.
But activity does not always equal progress.
The real shift happens when investors focus not just on earning more, but on building systems that grow their wealth over time.
When income, growth and compounding are aligned, wealth building stops feeling random and starts gaining momentum.
Want to learn how this works in practice?
Simon Zutshi will be explaining this in more detail during a live online webinar on Wednesday 11th March.
During the session, he will break down the three assets that build real wealth, how they work together, and how investors can position themselves to grow their wealth more effectively.
Book your place on the webinar here.
The post Why Many Investors Stay Busy But Do Not Build Real Wealth appeared first on Property118.
View Full Article: Why Many Investors Stay Busy But Do Not Build Real Wealth
Section 24 timeline of how the debate unfolded
Property118
Section 24 timeline of how the debate unfolded
In 2015, months before Section 24 became law, Property118 founder Mark Alexander met officials at HM Treasury responsible for the policy and raised concerns about how landlords might restructure their businesses if the new tax rules made existing models commercially unviable.
The discussion included reference to the Elizabeth Moyne Ramsay case and the potential relevance of Section 162 incorporation relief, a statutory provision allowing a genuine business to transfer its assets to a company without an immediate capital gains tax charge.
The point is not that policymakers endorsed any particular restructuring approach. The point is that the structural consequences of Section 24 were being raised openly with officials while the legislation was still moving through Parliament.
The timeline below sets out how the debate unfolded.
July 2015: the Summer Budget announcement
On 8 July 2015 the government announced a major change to the tax treatment of finance costs for individual landlords. The policy replaced the deduction of mortgage interest with a basic rate tax credit.
For landlords with higher borrowing levels, the immediate concern was clear. Tax could be calculated on income before interest costs were fully deducted.
The parliamentary record of the announcement can be read in Hansard: Summer Budget 2015 – Hansard record
Summer 2015: the sector begins analysing the consequences
The announcement triggered immediate debate across the property industry. Landlords, accountants and advisers began examining how the policy would interact with existing tax legislation.
Property118 quickly became one of the platforms where landlords were openly discussing the implications of the policy and analysing possible responses.
Those discussions included the Elizabeth Moyne Ramsay case and the question of whether property letting activity could constitute a business for tax purposes, an issue closely linked to the availability of Section 162 incorporation relief.
Examples of those early discussions can still be seen in the comment threads responding to the Summer Budget announcement: Summer Budget 2015: landlord reactions on Property118
September 2015: meeting with Treasury officials responsible for the policy
By September 2015 the debate had moved beyond commentary. Mark Alexander attended a meeting at HM Treasury to discuss the practical implications of Section 24.
The meeting involved two officials working on the policy affecting residential landlords:
Megan Shaw, an HMRC policy lead responsible for the residential property finance cost changes introduced through the Finance (No.2) Act 2015.
Sean Rath, a tax policy official involved in the development of legislation during that period.
Alexander says the discussion included the Elizabeth Moyne Ramsay case and the relevance of Section 162 incorporation relief for landlords who might need to reorganise their businesses if the economics of operating personally changed.
A contemporaneous reference to the meeting can still be found in the Property118 comment archive: Property118 comment referencing the Treasury meeting with Sean Rath and Megan Shaw
Independent context for Megan Shaw’s role can also be seen in a professional tax body publication describing her as HMRC policy lead for the Finance (No.2) Act 2015 residential property finance cost changes: ATT Property Tax Voice – December 2015
October 2015: meeting with George Freeman MP
On 2 October 2015 Alexander met George Freeman MP and later published a summary of the discussion.
In that article he also recorded that he had already met Megan Shaw and Sean Rath at the Treasury while preparing briefings on the policy implications.
My meeting with George Freeman MP – Property118
2015: landlord evidence submitted to Parliament
During scrutiny of the Finance Bill introducing Section 24, written evidence submitted to the Public Bill Committee included contributions linked to Property118 participants.
The evidence included examples based on information said to have been received by Megan Shaw at HMRC, illustrating how the policy might affect landlords in practice.
Finance Bill Committee written evidence (FB04)
2015–2016: HMRC policy papers acknowledge potential incorporation
When the government introduced the finance cost restriction for landlords, HMRC also published a Tax Information and Impact Note explaining how the policy might affect behaviour within the private rented sector. Such documents are designed to assess how taxpayers may respond to new legislation.
In this case HMRC acknowledged that some landlords might change the structure of their property businesses, including the possibility of operating through companies rather than personally.
This observation appeared in the official policy paper accompanying the legislation:
Income Tax: restriction of finance cost relief for landlords – HMRC policy paper
The significance of this document is straightforward. It demonstrates that the potential for structural changes within the landlord sector was recognised by HMRC itself during the introduction of Section 24. In other words, the possibility that landlords might reorganise their businesses, including through incorporation, was not an unforeseen development. It was part of the policy context from the beginning.
2017 to 2020: Section 24 phased into full effect
The mortgage interest restriction was implemented gradually over four tax years. The first stage took effect in April 2017, with further reductions in allowable finance cost deductions each year.
By April 2020 the new system was fully in place, with finance costs replaced entirely by a basic rate tax credit.
2017: Office of Tax Simplification examines landlord incorporation
As the impact of Section 24 began to emerge, the Office of Tax Simplification (OTS) examined the taxation of property income and the behavioural responses landlords were considering.
In its review the OTS noted that the restriction on finance cost relief had created a significant incentive for some landlords to consider operating through companies rather than personally.
The report recognised that incorporation was becoming an increasingly discussed structural response within the sector.
Office of Tax Simplification – Review of the taxation of property income
The OTS analysis confirmed that the restructuring implications of Section 24 were not theoretical. They were already influencing how landlords were thinking about the future structure of their businesses.
HMRC GAAR guidance: choosing between statutory tax structures
UK tax law also recognises that taxpayers may legitimately organise their affairs using the framework created by Parliament.
HMRC’s own General Anti-Abuse Rule guidance explains that choosing between different statutory tax treatments is not, in itself, abusive.
Part D 2.2 of the GAAR guidance describes this principle as “Legislative Choice”, explaining that taxpayers are entitled to choose between alternative tax outcomes created by legislation.
HMRC GAAR guidance – Part D2.2 Legislative Choice
This principle reflects a simple point. Where Parliament provides a statutory framework, including reliefs such as incorporation relief, taxpayers are entitled to operate within that framework when organising genuine commercial activities.
2022: the OTS reviews residential landlords, and the incorporation trend is part of the context
By 2022, the incorporation question had moved from industry debate into mainstream policy review.
On 1 November 2022 the Office of Tax Simplification published its Property income review: Simplifying income tax for residential landlords, a wide-ranging review of how residential property income is structured and taxed, including sections on ownership and financing.
The report does not present incorporation as a loophole. It treats the difference between personal and corporate ownership as part of the landscape landlords have to navigate, including the fact that companies and individuals are taxed under different rules for finance costs following the introduction of Section 24.
OTS Property income review (HTML on GOV.UK)
OTS Property income review (PDF)
Professional commentary published shortly after the report made the point explicitly, noting that the tax rules have led to increasing numbers of corporate owners. That matters because it supports the obvious conclusion that incorporation became a recognised behavioural response to the post-Section 24 tax framework, not a later invention.
Why this timeline matters
This chronology shows that the restructuring implications of Section 24 were foreseeable and were being discussed from the moment the policy was announced.
Those discussions were not hidden. They took place in public commentary, in parliamentary evidence and in meetings with policymakers while the legislation was still being developed.
The purpose of setting out the timeline is not to claim that policymakers endorsed any particular approach. It is simply to show that the structural consequences of Section 24 were raised openly and transparently from the beginning.
The post Section 24 timeline of how the debate unfolded appeared first on Property118.
View Full Article: Section 24 timeline of how the debate unfolded
Government defends EPC standards claiming they help landlords and tenants
Property118
Government defends EPC standards claiming they help landlords and tenants
The government claims energy performance certificate (EPC) standards are “proportional” to landlords and tenants.
In a written question, Plaid Cymru MP Llinos Medi, asked whether the government would consider the impact of proposed changes to the landlord cost cap and exemptions for Welsh private renters
The news comes as the government announced all private landlords in England and Wales will need to meet EPC C targets by 2030.
Manage the burden placed on landlords
Plaid Cymru MP Llinos Medi asked: “To ask the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, what assessment his Department has made of the potential impact of lowering the landlord cost cap and introducing low property value exemptions for minimum energy efficiency standards on private renters in Wales.”
In response, Martin McCluskey, minister for energy consumers, claimed the government’s energy-efficiency standards were fair to landlords and tenants.
He said: “The government’s response to the consultation on increasing the minimum energy efficiency standard for private rented homes was accompanied by the Department’s Impact Assessment. The assessment provides an estimated impact of the final policy based on a range of data available, including HM Land Registry and property price data available for Wales.
“The measures included in the final policy are intended to be proportional to help manage the burden placed on landlords and the impact on the rental market, whilst still delivering improved, warmer, cheaper to heat homes for private rented sector tenants.”
Under government plans, landlords will be able to choose between the smart or heat metrics, and the cap on the amount they are expected to invest to meet the new standards will be reduced from £15,000 to £10,000.
The cost cap will be lower where £10,000 would represent 10% or more of a property’s value.
Any spending on energy-efficiency works carried out since October last year will also count towards the planned cap, and the government will deliver a range of finance options, including Boiler Upgrade Scheme (BUS) grants.
The post Government defends EPC standards claiming they help landlords and tenants appeared first on Property118.
View Full Article: Government defends EPC standards claiming they help landlords and tenants
Rent arrears and claim values fall despite rise in cases
Property118
Rent arrears and claim values fall despite rise in cases
The average value of rent arrears fell to £1,980 in 2025, down from £2,143 in 2024, according to new data from Reposit.
It also says that claim values also declined over the same period, dropping from £1,207 to £1,178, a reduction of just over 2%.
However, while the monetary value of arrears and claims fell, the frequency of cases increased across the year.
Also, more tenants fell into financial difficulty last year, but the debt recorded in each case was lower than in 2024.
Arrears value falls
The ‘no deposit’ platform’s chief executive, Ben Grech, said: “It’s encouraging to see the average value of arrears and claims falling.
“However, the marginal rise in case volumes shows that financial pressure across the sector remains.
“At the same time, the Renters’ Rights Act is creating a more complex operating environment for landlords, fundamentally changing how arrears and repossessions are managed.”
He added: “With the abolition of Section 21, many landlords are understandably becoming more cautious in their approach to rent arrears.”
Tenant deposit not enough
Mr Grech went on to say that the average cash deposit is now £1,296, which is £629 below the average arrears value.
That shortfall, he warns, highlights the limitations of traditional five-week deposits which don’t provide adequate protection when arrears escalate.
He said: “As a result, we’re seeing growing demand for deposit solutions that offer greater financial protection for landlords and are FCA-regulated, while also reducing compliance risk for agents in light of the new regulations.”
UK rents rose
The firm is pointing to Office for National Statistics (ONS) figures which show average UK monthly rents rose by 4% to £1,368 in the 12 months to December 2025.
That compares with annual growth of 4.4% in the year to November.
UK Finance also reported 9,520 buy to let mortgages were in arrears of 2.5% or more in Q4 2025, 9% fewer than in the previous quarter.
During the same period, 770 BTL properties were taken into possession, down 14%.
The post Rent arrears and claim values fall despite rise in cases appeared first on Property118.
View Full Article: Rent arrears and claim values fall despite rise in cases
Categories
- Landlords (19)
- Real Estate (9)
- Renewables & Green Issues (1)
- Rental Property Investment (1)
- Tenants (21)
- Uncategorized (12,583)
Archives
- April 2026 (8)
- March 2026 (72)
- February 2026 (55)
- January 2026 (52)
- December 2025 (62)
- August 2025 (51)
- July 2025 (51)
- June 2025 (49)
- May 2025 (50)
- April 2025 (48)
- March 2025 (54)
- February 2025 (51)
- January 2025 (52)
- December 2024 (55)
- November 2024 (64)
- October 2024 (82)
- September 2024 (69)
- August 2024 (55)
- July 2024 (64)
- June 2024 (54)
- May 2024 (73)
- April 2024 (59)
- March 2024 (49)
- February 2024 (57)
- January 2024 (58)
- December 2023 (56)
- November 2023 (59)
- October 2023 (67)
- September 2023 (136)
- August 2023 (131)
- July 2023 (129)
- June 2023 (128)
- May 2023 (140)
- April 2023 (121)
- March 2023 (168)
- February 2023 (155)
- January 2023 (152)
- December 2022 (136)
- November 2022 (158)
- October 2022 (146)
- September 2022 (148)
- August 2022 (169)
- July 2022 (124)
- June 2022 (124)
- May 2022 (130)
- April 2022 (116)
- March 2022 (155)
- February 2022 (124)
- January 2022 (120)
- December 2021 (117)
- November 2021 (139)
- October 2021 (130)
- September 2021 (138)
- August 2021 (110)
- July 2021 (110)
- June 2021 (60)
- May 2021 (127)
- April 2021 (122)
- March 2021 (156)
- February 2021 (154)
- January 2021 (133)
- December 2020 (126)
- November 2020 (159)
- October 2020 (169)
- September 2020 (181)
- August 2020 (147)
- July 2020 (172)
- June 2020 (158)
- May 2020 (177)
- April 2020 (188)
- March 2020 (234)
- February 2020 (212)
- January 2020 (164)
- December 2019 (107)
- November 2019 (131)
- October 2019 (145)
- September 2019 (123)
- August 2019 (112)
- July 2019 (93)
- June 2019 (82)
- May 2019 (94)
- April 2019 (88)
- March 2019 (78)
- February 2019 (77)
- January 2019 (71)
- December 2018 (37)
- November 2018 (85)
- October 2018 (108)
- September 2018 (110)
- August 2018 (135)
- July 2018 (140)
- June 2018 (118)
- May 2018 (113)
- April 2018 (64)
- March 2018 (96)
- February 2018 (82)
- January 2018 (92)
- December 2017 (62)
- November 2017 (100)
- October 2017 (105)
- September 2017 (97)
- August 2017 (101)
- July 2017 (104)
- June 2017 (155)
- May 2017 (135)
- April 2017 (113)
- March 2017 (138)
- February 2017 (150)
- January 2017 (127)
- December 2016 (90)
- November 2016 (135)
- October 2016 (149)
- September 2016 (135)
- August 2016 (48)
- July 2016 (52)
- June 2016 (54)
- May 2016 (52)
- April 2016 (24)
- October 2014 (8)
- April 2012 (2)
- December 2011 (2)
- November 2011 (10)
- October 2011 (9)
- September 2011 (9)
- August 2011 (3)
Calendar
Recent Posts
- RESULTS of the Property118 Landlord Sentiment Survey (Q1 2026)
- Landlords to tighten tenant checks before Renters’ Rights Act
- Landlords turn to incorporation as Renters’ Rights Act approaches
- Financial penalties won’t solve empty homes crisis – Propertymark
- Charity calls for action to support older private renters as LHA rates remain frozen
