Extending National Insurance to landlords’ rental income would hit individuals, comprising 81% of market.
That’s the warning from the Intermediary Mortgage Lenders Association (IMLA) which says the move – suggested as a possible Budget policy to be announced next month – would have serious unintended consequences for smaller personal landlords operating in their own names.
The association says such a move would not apply to incorporated landlords, creating a two-tier system that would widen the gulf between individual and corporate property owners. For many smaller landlords, already squeezed by recent tax and regulatory changes, the impact could be devastating.
The proposal, floated as part of pre-Budget speculation, could push many landlords’ effective tax rates to unsustainable levels. IMLA’s research shows that 58% of higher-rate taxpayers letting properties in their own name would face total tax and NI bills exceeding their entire rental profit and would be paying more than 100% back to the Treasury.
Landlords have already been hit by the loss of mortgage interest relief, higher capital gains tax bills, a stamp duty surcharge and an increasingly demanding regulatory environment. Imposing NI on top could further reduce the number of buy-to-let properties, which has already fallen by more than 110,000 since 2022, and drive up rents as supply continues to contract.
IMLA’s analysis concludes that while extending NI to landlords might raise around £2.2 billion annually, the damage to rental supply, market confidence and tenant affordability would far outweigh the benefit.
At a time when the government is seeking growth and stability, IMLA argues that penalising smaller landlords risks undermining both, by reducing investment, shrinking housing choice and increasing upward pressure on rents.
Kate Davies, executive director of IMLA, says: “Extending National Insurance to landlords’ rental income may appear an easy way to raise money, but in practice it would hit exactly the wrong people. It would punish smaller, often part-time landlords who provide homes for more than four million UK households, while leaving larger incorporated operators untouched. That is both unfair and economically counterproductive.
“This would be a short-sighted and self-defeating move. Fewer rental homes mean higher rents, less mobility, and more pressure on public housing. At a time when the UK needs more investment in property, not less, this proposal risks driving it away.”
As MPs waved the Renters’ Rights Bill through Parliament this week, landlord compliance expert Des Taylor of Landlord Licensing & Defence has warned that the legislation is being mis-sold to the public as tenant protection when it is designed to increase local authority income and control over the private rented sector.
He said: “The Renters’ Rights Bill isn’t about protecting tenants – it’s about protecting council budgets.
“Behind the headlines of ‘fairness’ and ‘balance’ lies a different reality: More powers. More penalties. Longer voids. Less control.
“Landlords are being boxed in with restrictions that benefit only one group – and it’s not the renters. This Bill isn’t what they’re telling you.”
Taylor points to the abolition of Section 21 which will fundamentally change how landlords and tenants interact.
He says that with Section 21 evictions removed, landlords will be forced onto a much slower Section 8 process to regain possession.
That change, he argues, will push more landlords into lengthy legal battles while delaying property turnover for over a year in some cases.
He continued: “Landlords could be waiting 12 to 16 months to recover a property from a non-paying tenant.
“In that time, councils save money on emergency housing because tenants technically remain ‘housed’ – even if they’re months in arrears. It’s a cynical fix for a broken social housing system.”
Taylor points to another consequence hidden in plain sight: revenue generation.
He believes the Bill’s deeper purpose is to widen the enforcement net for local authorities, giving them broader discretion to levy civil penalties which rocket from £5,000 up to £25,000, for administrative mistakes and minor breaches.
Taylor commented: “Every new power comes with a price tag, and that price will be paid by landlords through fines and by tenants through higher rents.
“It’s being dressed up as tenant protection, but really it’s a mechanism for councils to collect income while claiming moral virtue.”
The Bill also risks increasing void periods and financial stress across the sector.
There will be longer possession timelines, more compliance demands and growing uncertainty over tenancy length which will make professional landlords think twice about investing further.
Taylor warns that this tightening web of regulation will have a ripple effect across the market.
He went on: “There will be less investment in local rental housing as smaller landlords exit, and the rising compliance costs will be passed on to tenants.
“There will also be worsening availability for vulnerable renters as councils rely on the PRS to plug social housing gaps.”
While the government insists the Bill will make renting fairer, Mr Taylor argues it will instead entrench inequality.
“Tenants in arrears may lose the most,” he said. “Once a landlord has to rely on Section 8, councils can claim the tenant made themselves intentionally homeless.
“That means no housing duty owed, no emergency accommodation and no help. It’s a quiet but devastating policy trick.”
Calling the Bill ‘politically driven’, Taylor urges agents, landlords and property professionals to stay vigilant.
He added: “This legislation changes the relationship between landlords, tenants and the state.
“We’re moving towards a system of revenue-focused enforcement, not fair regulation.
“Every landlord should read the fine print and prepare accordingly.”
Capital Gains Tax applied to profits made on main residences – a possible Budget measure next month – would make the vast majority of home owners less likely to put their properties on the market.
That’s the conclusion of a poll of 1,000 owners conducted for financial brokerage Boon Brokers.
Under the current UK tax system, main residences are exempt from Capital Gains Tax, which is instead only payable on profits from the sale of second homes, investment properties, shares, and other assets.
However, speculation ahead of the November 26 Budget suggests that the Treasury is considering CGT reform, with some analysts mooting the tax could even be applied to profits made from the sale of primary residences – although no details on thresholds, tax rates, and exemptions have been publicised.
In response to questions in the Boon Brokers study, 71% of respondents stated that the reforms would make them less likely to sell their main residence, indicating that, if implemented, a significant proportion of homeowners may choose to postpone selling in order to avoid additional taxation.
Details of the findings show that a reluctance to sell would be consistent across all age groups.
Among respondents aged 18-24, 76% said they would be less likely to sell their main residence if CGT were applied, compared with 63% of those aged 25-44, 68% of those aged 45-54, and more than 80% of respondents aged 55 and over.
Gerard Boon, managing director, comments: “Introducing Capital Gains Tax on main residences could have serious consequences for the housing market. When fewer homeowners are willing to sell, supply will naturally constrict, driving up competition and prices. This imbalance between supply and demand doesn’t just impact affordability, it would risk stagnating the market and placing greater pressure across all levels of the housing market.”
A further finding of the research was that, in response to the question “Do you believe it is fair for the government to apply Capital Gains Tax to main residences that were previously exempt?”, some 73% of respondents stated that applying CGT to main residences would be unfair. And 97% of respondents disagreed that applying CGT to primary homes is the fairest way to balance public spending, revealing a strong opposition across all demographics.
The commissioned survey also explored public opinion on how the proposed CGT changes might influence support for the current government. Respondents were asked: “How do you think this tax change will impact Labour’s chances of re-election in the next general election?”
The results found that the proposed CGT reform could also carry political repercussions, with 78% of respondents believing it would reduce Labour’s chances of re-election. Of these, 45% stated it would significantly reduce Labour’s chances, while 33% said it would slightly reduce the party’s chances at the next general election.
The government has just announced late-stage amendments to its flagship Planning and Infrastructure Bill, aimed at increasing housing delivery and speeding up infrastructure projects.
If approved, the changes would give ministers new powers to prevent local councils from rejecting planning applications while the government considers whether to ‘call in’ decisions.
It is understood that prime minister Sir Kier Starmer ordered a ‘last-minute rewrite’ of the Planning and Infrastructure Bill, which was launched in March. The legislation seeks to help the government reach its target of 1.5 million new homes and, in doing so, raise an extra £3bn in tax revenue.
Currently at the report stage in the House of Lords, the bill’s passage into law was planned for November, a target which major changes may now risk delaying.
According to ministers, nearly 900 major housing developments were blocked by local authorities in the past year, contributing to delays in housing delivery.
The proposed amendments would also streamline the approval process for new reservoirs – the first in over 30 years – with the goal of boosting water supply and supporting future housing growth.
Other changes include provisions to support clean energy infrastructure such as onshore wind farms, which the government says could attract investment, limit energy bill increases, and create new jobs in local areas.
The government also plans to change the remit of Natural England, allowing the agency to prioritise advice on higher-impact planning applications and environmental recovery efforts. Officials argue this would help free up resources and accelerate decisions on housing and infrastructure.
Additional proposals include measures to prevent planning permissions from expiring while projects are tied up in legal proceedings. The aim is to reduce delays and avoid restarting planning processes on stalled developments.
The government maintains that these amendments will support its broader goals of building 1.5 million homes, achieving clean energy targets by 2030, and stimulating local economic growth.
Housing secretary Steve Reed said: “Britain’s potential has been shackled by governments unwilling to overhaul the stubborn planning system that has erected barriers to building at every turn. It is simply not true that nature has to lose for economic growth to succeed.
“Sluggish planning has real world consequences. Every new house blocked deprives a family of a home. Every infrastructure project that gets delayed blocks someone from a much-needed job. This will now end.
“The changes we are making today will strengthen the seismic shift already underway through our landmark Bill. We will ‘Build, baby, build’ with 1.5 million new homes and communities that working people desperately want and need.”
The government says key changes include:
+ Ministers will be able to issue ‘holding directions’ to stop councils refusing planning permission whilst they consider using their ‘call-in’ powers. Under existing rules, they can only issue these holds when council are set to approve applications. This will ensure ministers can properly use their call-in powers where necessary to boost growth and build more homes.
+ Speeding up the approvals for large reservoirs by enabling non-water sector companies to build reservoirs that are automatically considered as nationally significant infrastructure projects.
+ Unlocking more onshore windfarms, securing around 3GW of onshore wind and up to £2bn extra investment for UK-based businesses, whilst safeguarding UK defence and nuclear safety capabilities.
+ Stopping planning permissions from being timed out for approved major housing schemes facing lengthy judicial reviews, building on existing measures to cut back meritless legal challenges for major infrastructure projects from three to one and slashing a year off the statutory pre-consultation period.
+ Allowing the Nature Restoration Fund to support the delivery of marine development, securing better environmental outcomes for marine habitats whilst accelerating the construction of coastal projects.
+ Streamlining Natural England’s role will speed up approvals for new homes and infrastructure by reducing duplication and allowing greater discretion to focus on applications that pose higher risks or present stronger opportunities for nature recovery, with standard guidance provided to local authorities for straightforward cases.
+ The new pro-growth reforms means the government remains firmly on track to make 150 planning decisions on major infrastructure projects, with a record breaking 21 decisions in the first year of any Parliament, and has already greenlit projects including hot-off-the-wheels Gatwick airport expansion and the long-awaited Lower Thames Crossing.
Chancellor Rachel Reeves commented: “The outdated planning system has been gummed up by burdensome bureaucracy and held to ransom by blockers for too long.
“Our pro-growth planning bill shows we are serious about cutting red tape to get Britain building again, backing the builders not the blockers to speed up projects and show investors that we are a country that gets spades in the ground and our economy growing.”
