Forum Topic

51% of all Freehold property should be owned by English People

What is the drawback if all Freehold Property and even Businesses are owned by the Native and Established Population.Foreign ownership should be Leasehold only ..

Os A Whittle ● 4910d26 Comments

'no, it was the more upmarket areas  in central London, where the  prices are in the millions, hence I am sure the question of money laundering  arose.'I've already explained this point but will do so again. The nature of money laundering is such that the most important thing to do is avoid the attention of the authorities. Therefore typically money is laundered in smaller batches. A million pound property would not be used for these purposes. Also it is extremely unlikely that a criminal enterprise would pass up on the opportunity to make 10s of thousands per annum on rent on these properties. Some superwealthy Arabs and Russians may be able to afford to leave them vacant for much of the year but the number that do so would be tiny. We are talking about a very, very small number of properties so there will not be any appreciable impact on the property market as a whole.

Andy Jones ● 4905d

Re  is probably places like this that the Telegraph is referring to.            xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx  no, it was the more upmarket areas  in central London, where the  prices are in the millions, hence I am sure the question of money laundering  arose. But it was felt, I think , that those purchases have the drag up effect on all properties of lower value. What you say re Brentford and elsewhere may well also be true.

Tony Price ● 4905d

You have probably misremembered or misunderstood the article. Anybody wanting a long term safe investment in property will also want a yield on their investment and therefore will look to put a tenant in. It is only people looking for a quick return who leave flats unoccupied. This does result in some areas particularly new build flats being unoccupied if they are marketed initially to speculative investors or sold off plan. If you have ever driven past some of the new developments in Brentford at night you can see that there is a very low occupancy. Very few of these flats will have been bought by overseas investors. The high vacancy rate is often due to developers continuing to chase people who have paid a deposit in the hope that they can force them to pay the balance later. This allows them to claim to new buyers that there are relative few units left for sale. It is probably places like this that the Telegraph is referring to.

Andy Jones ● 4905d

Re  as many UK citizens doing it as foreigners.        xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx      well the article I read, Telegraph I think, said foreigners  buy London properties in particular as they are regarded as safe investment, but hardly ever if at all visit the places but leave them unoccupied, making for areas of "ghost houses ". I would have thought anyone of and in the UK  would at least put in appearances now and again?

Tony Price ● 4905d

There are as many UK citizens doing it as foreigners. Corporations do it. It's another way of losing profit to reduce tax and then transferring assets, same as avoiding corporation tax with loss making offshore branches.It makes the greedy beds in sheds landlords look like kids with dolls houses but both are morally wrong and realy ought to be controlled as should most ventures which veer into greed rather than capitalism per say.

Michael Brandt ● 4905d

'I doubt  people in  and of this country would buy an expensive place and leave it empty.'Well, you'd be wrong. People buy properties and leave them empty because it is easier to sell on with out a tenant so they would be looking to move it on for a quick profit. The vast majority of people doing this would be UK nationals.'Did we not read recently that the higher end properties in London are used by foreigners as means of money laundering?'No, we probably didn't. Property is a poor vehicle for laundering money because of the high volume of each individual transaction. You can't actually buy a property with cash these days - nobody would accept it. Money launderers both domestic and foreign may acquire property with successfully laundered money but it is unlikely that as an asset class it plays any significant role in the process except at the end of the chain of transactions.

Andy Jones ● 4906d

Re  It's not really who or where they come from that's the issue          xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx  well it does Michael  as I doubt  people in  and of this country would buy an expensive place and leave it empty. I agree it should not be but the only way to stop it would be to impose laws that a place be occupied a min  amount per year. Then who would check up?. Did we not read recently that the higher end properties in London are used by foreigners as means of money laundering?

Tony Price ● 4906d

It's not really who or where they come from that's the issue.It the huge amount of dwellings, be they apartments or houses that are being bought and retained empty. In some parts of central London it's nearly 40% which is a huge figure.It's not just the super high value places, the same thing is going even in Brentford where many new riverside places are the same.And yet there is a huge demand for proper homes. Councils keep giving planning permission to developments which will never be proper homes.If they stopped this nonsense and insisted on giving permission for proper homes with proper space and that they must be owner or leaseholder occupied for any sort of mortgage then that would make a huge seachange.I suspect that they kind of like this ghost town stuff. It means they don't have to increase amenities and services.

Michael Brandt ● 4906d

Re  What is responsible is unconstrained global capitalism,           xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx  but who imports that into the Uk Tony?. None other than foreigners, who we read are largely responsible for the ever increasing prices here, starting at the top but dragging up everything else. The current big spenders as we all know are the Ruskies, Arabs probably still at it. The UK is regarded as a safe place in which to invest in property. Did we not read this week a house in Ealing has sold for £3.15 million. Wasn't all that long ago  when the headlines were a £1 million house in Ealing. I would hazard a guess and say not too many indigs could afford those prices?

Tony Price ● 4906d

Re  so if I'm Irish or German then I cannot own my home here?          xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx  I would have thought all three " countries " being in the EU, you would have no problem, but  even France  puts difficulties in  the way for foreigners having houses there. Has Hollande not put some extra  costs or taxes for foreigners, and there are complications  when the " Estate" sorting out stage is reached.

Tony Price ● 4906d

You've just managed to add a racial tilt to buy-to-let.Yes, there are foreign landlords. I am not sure why you think their effect on the market is any worse or more illegitimate than indigenous landlords.The very first place I lived in when in 1971 I moved to W.Ken from my parents home in S.London was owned by a Polish woman. She owned 20 houses. None of her tenants had rent books, she insisted on payment in cash, the places were all slums, she never did any maintenance and probably never paid any tax.  She was a greedy, exploitative disgrace of a human being. It never occurred to me that the significant problem with all this was her country of origin.Of course, if you were to say that too much immigration has led to shortages of all kinds of resources including housing, I would have to agree. But Governments have allowed it in order to promote a fluid labour market with downward pressure on wages and to enhance UK competitiveness. A further consequence is the escalating inequality of income distribution. In 1977 7% of the population owned 84% of UK assets according to the Economist. When they repeated the same study in 1995 5% owned 95%. This has continued to polarise ever further since. Great if you are one of the elite, a big problem if you're at the bottom of the heap trying to compete. IE the young, the unskilled, the vast majority of immigrants, and a very large proportion of pensioners.There are many reasons why demand exceeds supply, but that is why prices and rents outstrip locals ability to pay. It's a national problem. Go to any pleasant rural village almost anywhere in the country and you'll find prices have been elevated by incoming retirees who've cashed in their urban properties, and wealthy people buying second homes. Local youngsters have no chance of staying where they grew up and where their families are.The belief that it's foreigners who are responsible for all this is just ignorant scapegoating. What is responsible is unconstrained global capitalism, which has got completely out of control - a tail wagging the dog and beating its brains out, as vividly demonstrated in 2008. Even if you sent every immigrant back to their country or origin and turned UK into a White Anglo-Saxon version of Zimbabwe, this would continue. And would work out just as unsuccessfully.

Tony Sleep ● 4906d

Foreigners can buy property in Austria. The economic consequencies of not allowing foreigh purchases of property in the UK would be crippling for the economy as has been pointed out in this thread previously. I'm unclear as to precisely what benefit it would bring to justify the negative impact. Countries that do restrict property ownership on a nationalistic basis (general second and third world countries) ultimately struggle to stop people circumventing these regulations.

Andy Jones ● 4906d

so if I'm Irish or German then I cannot own my home here?

Michael Brandt ● 4906d

This is what happens in other countries eg. Austria . Foreigners should only be allowed to rent or lease property. Many have multiple properties some even having sheds which they rent out !! England belongs to the English.....

Marie Anne OConnell ● 4906d

This sounds like a good idea but why limit it to non-resident foreigners?

Andy Jones ● 4907d

'Foreigners are pushing our own young adults off the housing ladder. They buy a house fill it with lots of people who all contribute to the mortgage etc so can afford to buy more properties...... 'This seems to me unlikely. Since 2008 the rules on mortgages have been tightened up and a non-resident would find it very hard to fund the purchase of a British property. You now generally need to provide two year's tax returns from HMRC. Using the equity on one property as security for another is no longer possible.Property prices are stagnant everywhere in the UK except London even in cities where there are lots of 'foreigners'. In London prices have stayed high because there is a growing population and a slower growth in housing stock. This is a caused by a relatively strong economy. Within London absolute prices and relative price rises tend to be lower where there are high levels of immigration so there is no evidence at all to support any of your assertions.If

Andy Jones ● 4907d

Assuming that was meant to mean non resident foreigners. Then this would be a better deterrent:If they buy a property or long lease as an investment to leave empty, then they by law have to make the property available for sub lease to a local authority or housing association for free. If not they must prove that the property is in full occupation every quarter with spot checks at any time.

Michael Brandt ● 4907d

Do you really think shows like "on the buses" reflects reality.... It was a spoof and made fun of people who live like that ....DUHH

Marie Anne OConnell ● 4907d

We used to though didn't we, you know stay with the in laws for quite a few years before we could buy our own property. (Remember 'On the Buses'), In fact I don't think it is such a bad idea, buying somewhere with your children. Could have a Granny flat on the side, be a live in Baby sitter etc. I think it is a great idea. But only when they have sowed their wild oats first and they can rent to do that, then come back and we can all buy a bit bigger property for all. No worries about being put into an old peoples's home cause you have the family to look after you.  I have always admired my Asian friends whose families really support them.

Jaz Brown ● 4907d

Totally agree.Foreigners are pushing our own young adults off the housing ladder .... They buy a house fill it with lots of people who all contribute to the mortgage etc so can afford to buy more properties.....Gradually taking over the property market and pushing up the price of a house. That's not the way we work and our own young couples can't compete ... yet another cost to pay for immigration..where will it end....

Marie Anne OConnell ● 4907d

Re  Reciprocal Agreements with Nations who play by the same rules.       xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx I am not aware Os of there being any restrictions  operating in the UK on foreigners buying property here ( apart from the " sensitive " variety ) whereas there are tremendous  restrictions in many countries  stopping  others from buying even residential property there.

Tony Price ● 4908d

"What is the drawback if all Freehold Property and even Businesses are owned by the Native and Established Population."A breach of the Offensive Capitalisation Of Irrelevant Words Act?

Thomas Barry ● 4909d

Globalised capital flows wherever there is a perception of profit, and leaves just as readily. It seems far too late to try and limit this, and why draw the line at property, which is just one form of asset? Great swathes of UK are now owned or part owned by overseas investors. The UK car industry is the obvious example but not even vital infrastructure is nationally funded. EG China now owns 10% of Thames Water, and the next generation of nuclear power stations will be basically a mega-PFI deal owned by the French and Chinese.

Tony Sleep ● 4909d

I don't know what the situation is with Middle Eastern Countries as regards reciprocity but I doubt there is much British buying of property there because there isn't really that much real estate. Middle Eastern buying of property has been one way in which the massive deficit we run with these countries due to purchases of oil is moved closer to balance. It has been happening since the seventies and is without it we would have serious problems with our national accounts. I'm not aware that anybody believes that this is a problem as the purchases are very concentrated in particular areas usually the most expensive. Arabs were net sellers of UK property when the oil price is low so it provides a handy equalising mechanism for our economy. Cutting off this source of capital inflows would be a seriously bad error at the best of times but particularly now when the UK and world economy is so fragile.

Andy Jones ● 4910d

Thankyou Andy for your views on the subject. Surely The UK Governmemnt could include Reciprocal Agreements with Nations who play by the same rules. MiddleEastern countries could buy up huge tracts of Land and Buildings and never blink an eye if they encountered any disadvantage. They could play only for their own advantage.. You have however given me some thoughts on the subject.

Os A Whittle ● 4910d

I don't really understand what the benefit of this idea would be but it is very easy to see what the disadvantages would be.Initially it would create a serious hole in our balance of payments which would probably lead to a weakening of the currency and a possible rise in interest rates. Foreign buying of UK property assets is huge (although as a nation we own much more property abroad than foreigners own here.)It would mean that there would be an immediate squeeze of foreign capital for property development. In the current environment with the Government anxious about how slow this sector is this would be a big setback and probably put the economy back into recession.Although the short term impact would be very negative particularly if you intended to apply the rules retrospectively, in the long term the policy would probably not have much effect. Some countries, usually second and third world nations, do operate land ownership restriction policies for nationalist reasons but they are usually very difficult to enforce. Front companies are set up by foreign entities to own property.Those are the drawbacks I can think of off the top of my head but there are bound to be dozens more if you were to give this suggestion any close scrutiny. It is a non-starter particularly as it is hard to see any benefit of actually doing it. Bear in mind the proportion of freehold property owned by foreigners in this country is very small and overwhelmingly in London.

Andy Jones ● 4910d