Tax breaks on second homes: Your views

A government watchdog has warned that plans to give tax breaks on second homes could worsen the shortage of affordable housing in the countryside. Read a selection of your comments below.

Click here to return to return to the story to add your comments

---

The following comments reflect the balance of opinion we have received so far:

The countryside is where people live and work, it is not a theme park Dave, Oxon

As a professional living in a rural area I can only just afford a house, what about everybody else? Allowing property to be eligible for tax breaks will magnify the problem, especially holiday homes. The government are demonstrating how out-of-touch they are especially with rural issues. Remember the countryside is where people live and work, it is not a theme park.
Dave, Oxon

This is unfair and possibly immoral, as the low wages of rural people make it impossible to compete with richer city folk to live in their own village. Second homes mean the village has less active people in it; the school, bus services, the shop and the pub are vulnerable. Incomers are sometimes from a different culture. Whilst they complain about mud-on-roads, church bells and farm animals, the locals have to face noisy late night parties, aggressive drivers and rising crime. Second homes owners should pay the same taxes and rates as the rest of us, some of the monies raised used for affordable housing and retention of rural services.
Chris Reynell, Longstock, Hampshire

Absolutely not!!! For years many people (including our excellent Liberal MPs) in Cornwall have been campaigning for HIGHER taxes on second homes!!!! The average worker in West Cornwall will be lucky to get a salary in excess of £13k. My wife and myself have just moved into a semi detached, timber framed bungalow which cost us £151k. We had to move near to my mother in law, for care reasons; she lives in St Agnes, and a similar property there would cost £200k. No locals can actually afford to get on the housing ladder in this part of Cornwall anymore. It's utterly insane.
Michael, Truro, Cornwall

I live in a council house in the Yorkshire Dales, which we cannot afford to buy as it has been valued at approx 11 times my annual wage, so I'm left with a life of renting, yet somebody who already owns a home can get 40% paid for by the government for a second home! Fair? I don't think so! The government seem to be looking after themselves and money again! This country is great if you have money, if you don't then do not expect any help from the people that are supposed to be looking after your interests!!
Mark Rushby, Grassington, England

In short this is absolutely outrageous. Second homes have already helped destroy village communities and this will just take it one step further. When at Aldeburgh carnival last week I met more Londoners than Local people. It's a payout not a tax break!
Edmund Hawes, Suffolk

This is a crazy policy. It will not only mean that people in rural areas will be priced out of the housing market, but it will also lead to a drop in investment on the stock market, which will have an effect on businesses and jobs.
Anne, Haslemere, Surrey

There are serious housing problems for people living and working in rural areas Marion Davies, Somerset

No. They do not contribute to the local taxes as it is. There are serious housing problems for people living and working in rural areas. They cannot afford to buy and even the rents are above the level of salaries paid. Housing, town planning and development are now being controlled by financial gain for pension plans rather than the needs of the population. The rural economy is being destroyed and villages and towns are becoming bedroom communities.
Marion Davies, Somerset

Working as I do for a rural housing association, I despair of the government's ambiguity on affordable housing. Young people in the Forest of Dean will need to find more than 9 times their annual salary if they are fortunate enough to be on the average wage to be able to get on the property ladder. The reality is that rural wages are often lower than urban ones so this proportion tends to be higher anyway. The chances of a young person being able to access the social rented sector are, to say the least slim. Isn't it time the government stuck to a rural housing policy which didn't disadvantage people living and working in rural areas? Do we not deserve the same consideration as key workers in the South East?
Frank, Forest of Dean, Gloucestershire, UK

This isn't just a rural issue - the buy-to-let menace has sent property values in cities for years too. These people should be paying more tax, not less, and a Labour government should be more concerned about helping people get their own homes, not enabling the rich to get richer.
Bobby, South-East London

My parents cannot afford to buy a house in their local village as half the homes are now second homes for rich people from down south and they will never get one now.
Christopher Mcguire, Edinburgh

There is little aid for the first time buyer who is essential to the housing economy Raymond Grant Wood, Harwich, Essex, England

I have two children in their early twenties and my biggest worry in life is, will they be able to afford to get on the property ladder? They both have degrees and the large student loans that go with it. There is little aid for the first time buyer who is essential to the housing economy. For a Labour government to be considering tax breaks for high earners on second properties seems outrageous to me and flies in the face of their fairness for all policy. Until now I have considered Gordon Brown to be a very good chancellor. If this plan is implemented, I will never support Labour again.
Raymond Grant Wood, Harwich, Essex, England

Why do people always assume that people who own second homes are wealthy? There are a significant number of 2nd home owners who have such a property because they life in tithed accommodation. They have to own a second property to be sure of having somewhere to live when they have retired. Such people need not be well off of all - after all the clergy come into this category!
Mike Bossingham, Upwell, Norfolk

No. Whilst I can see the attraction of this policy as an investor, the policy can only serve to increase the price of housing further, particularly at the lower end of the market. To me this is contrary to other key government policies in respect of housing. Investors in property do not need further encouragement of this nature (I know, I've been one)
David Goodman, Tring, Hertfordshire

Absolutely not. Many people cannot afford to buy or rent one home or room to live in. Why should we low income workers in the north and rural areas subsidise/be more disadvantaged by those 'fat cats' AND why are people allowed two homes? Where is the democracy and equality the government has promised? Also there is a knock on effect for all the services - medical, retail etc etc etc.
Nicky Bisset, Appleby, Cumbria

Surely people who have second homes should be penalised with extra council tax Stephen Sumner, Bosham, Chichester

This does not sound like a very true Labour policy, it seems to be helping the rich again and forgetting the poor. Where I live about 75% of the housing is not used most of the time, it is second homes for the people of London. Meanwhile the young in the area will struggle to get on the property ladder. Surely people who have second homes should be penalised with extra council tax, this money could be then channelled in to creating starter homes, instead of giving the tax incentives to help them secure more of the property. I am going to write to my MP about this as I am sickened by it.
Stephen Sumner, Bosham, Chichester

Definitely not. Prices here are already astronomically high, with most houses empty for a large part of the year, while at the same time, those who work here are forced to pay inflated rents for poor quality accommodation. At the same time, year round residents are saddled with high council tax and water rates to pay for this load on the infrastructure.
Alistair Brown, St Ives Cornwall, England

I come from a small town in the West Country and the house prices are ridiculous. The wages in the area do not reflect the house prices at all, resulting in many people my age (late twenties) being unable to afford to buy homes in the town they grew up in which is close to their families, friends and place of work. To add further problems to the area, many houses are being built which will be bought as holiday homes/houses for commuters in a town which cannot support this number of new people (it is a very old and small town with no way to expand in terms of shops/amenities). So the town has now gone from a small, friendly community to one with no community at all.
Paula, UK

This will send house prices through the roof Richard, Stafford, UK

I don't understand the new proposals. Does this mean that my £25,000 I have in a pension could be released and invested in my first house? Where does the line between pension and simply buying property lie? This will send house prices through the roof.
Richard, Stafford, UK

Surely who owns a rural property matters far less than the rent they charge? If the pension plan breaks are limited to people who use their second properties for affordable housing, their investment suits both their pension needs and housing needs of local people. Get the rules right and the scheme works well.
Paul Reid, Stockport, England

What a disastrous idea. It is ludicrous to give even more incentives for wealthy retired people, who have already benefited from high property prices, to price first-time buyers and families out of the homes they need.
David James, Surrey, UK

Second homes are a luxury. If people can afford a second home, perhaps they should put their money into a bigger/more expensive house, rather than a second house. When they retire, they could then sell it and downsize to a smaller property. The profit realised would provide them with a pension. Why should the rest of us subsidise people rich enough to buy two homes?
A Caldwell, Chester Le Street, Co Durham

Second homes should not receive tax breaks. There are alternative ways to prop up pension funds and property investments are no more or less of a gamble. Currently I can afford neither a pension nor the deposit to buy a property of my own since like many people I'm paying someone else's mortgage and propping up their pension investment by renting. This situation is not sustainable in the long term.
Rebecca, Ipswich, UK

Absolutely not. It's hard enough for first time buyers to even get on the property ladder without the added pressure of people buying second homes pushing up prices even more. A first time buyer in a rural area, where prices have already been pushed higher, has no chance of buying in their home town.
Emma, Bristol

They should surely be taxing second homes Gordon Robertson, London

This government's sick assertion that it is more important for speculators and investors to make money than it is for people to have somewhere to live is now beyond a joke. They should surely be taxing second homes, rather than giving them breaks. No-one who is looking for property to actually live in can compete with those who get kick-backs for buying up multiple properties.
Gordon Robertson, London

I no longer trust company pension schemes, neither do I have confidence in the national pension or the concept of free education and healthcare for all. Consequently, I have bought a second house, not to make short term profits, neither is it to deprive rural workers of the opportunity to own a property, but as my own personal insurance policy which may assist in my child's education and towards our retirement. As such, it should receive the same consideration for tax breaks as any other pension investment.
Vincent Hammersley, Coventry, England

This is madness! Far from tax breaks, second home owners should be heavily taxed on their investments. Promoting investment buying will only drive up prices in an already over-inflated housing market preventing first time buyers stepping onto the ladder. My partner and I both earn respectable wages, but can only get a mortgage for 50% of the cheapest house price. As a result we are paying rent to an 'investment buyer' and paying their mortgage for them!
Andrew, Cambridge

We both work hard to provide for our family, where is the justice? NT, Southend, Essex

In 1997 we had great hopes for a fairer society for ordinary working people. Since then, as a working couple who were unfortunately not already on the property ladder, we have been priced out of the housing market, not just locally but across the majority of the UK. This government has done nothing to help people like us and keeps introducing policies which prop up these unrealistic prices. We can't even hope for the security of tenure afforded by council housing as demand far outstrips supply and we never seem to move up the waiting list. We don't have the luxury of investing in a second home to provide our pension. If something doesn't change soon then we will be enjoying a retirement at the mercy of private landlords. We both work hard to provide for our family, where is the justice?
NT, Southend, Essex

I am looking to buy property to rent out as an investment because I cannot be sure a company pension will be secure or there will even be a state pension when I retire in 30 years time. There are also concerns that private pensions will not pay out enough, hence the opportunity to invest in residential housing for me is a welcome one. The issue concerning availability of housing for all people is about supply and demand of housing stock and not about tax issues. Reclaim more land and derelict buildings, release what other land we can spare and build more housing! There will then be opportunities for both investors and private buyers.
Jon Sayles, Maidstone, Kent

The same people that whinge about second-homers are the ones opposing every planning application to build new houses in the green belt or national parks or indeed anywhere outside conurbations. They sustain the very shortage they bemoan.
Don, London

Absolutely not, young people brought up in this area have no chance of buying property, whilst a lot of properties are only occupied for a few weeks of the year and owned by wealthy people from the South of England. To qualify for this tax break, owners should have to rent them out to local people, not holiday makers
Doug Miller, Newport, Pembrokeshire

I live in a small village that is "now" on a designated flood plain. Instead of giving money back to the more well-off, they would be better taxing second homes at a higher, not lower rate and using that revenue to help those of us in areas of high risk of flooding, poor public transport and few public facilities. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
Joe Farr, Huntingdon, UK

Absolutely not! Second home owners are doing enough damage to rural communities as it is. Why give them tax incentives which only serves to fuel the problem still further? Second home owners should be charged a premium on all their 'second home costs'. That would start to free up houses for those who would be happy if they could just buy one!
Roger, Merseyside, UK

Click here to return to return to the story to add your comments