Yes or No: Should we bring back tax relief on mortgage interest for homeowners?

The tax on mortgage interest currently burdens small buy-to-let landlords and individuals of modest means, aggravating their already strained financial circumstances.

By resurrecting mortgage interest relief, this government has the opportunity to provide much-needed respite, preempting the spectre of repossession and instilling stability in an increasingly volatile housing market. Critics invariably assert that this measure would disproportionately favour the affluent, yet prudent implementation of targeted mechanisms, such as means-testing and relief caps, can effectively address such concerns.

Supporting beleaguered homeowners transcends notions of fairness - it encompasses a broader tapestry of social and economic implications. Bolstering the foundations of homeownership engenders resilient communities, catalyzes economic growth, and secures a brighter future for subsequent generations. After all, that is what this Conservative government claims to be all about, so why hesitate?

Adding further complication to an already overcomplicated tax system with rebates targeting the higher end of the wealth spectrum seems slightly counterintuitive. It would also have the opposite intended effect. Buy-to-let landlords would flood back into the market, causing house prices to increase as huge demand pressures are placed on an already under-supplied market. New entrants to the market would be priced out more than they already, further exacerbating a key issue the UK faces.

This would also be ripe for abuse, with the ultra-wealthy able to take mortgages out to offset their large tax bills and use the capital to either accrue interest that would replace their interest payment (when you account for the uplift from the tax), or invest in other assets. The rich get even richer at the expense of the taxpayer, while no help is given to the poorest.

Would a simpler solution not be to simply deregulate the planning sector, and allow builders to build? Let supply meet demand.

Unless the Government is going to spread the largesse to renters, then I think this is a bad idea. Whilst I have every sympathy with struggling homeowners, why is there not the same consideration given to tenants paying through the nose for often poorly maintained rental property? We also need to get away from this 'bail-out' mentality and address the underlying problems instead.

Just like all the other band-aid 'solutions' such as Help to Buy, the stamp duty holiday and so on, all this will do is underpin house prices at excessively high levels. When, in fact, we need property values to continue falling so they become more affordable for everyone.

Then we need policies, to keep them affordable., such as social housing built at scale, and re-including house prices in the 2% inflation target. The current situation is completely unsustainable, and slowly strangling our economy.

As a homeowner with mortgage who's fixed rate has gone from 1.2% to 6.1% variable I'd say yes. However what about the millions who rent. Their rents are increasing too and they won't get tax relief.
If it is brought in needs to be a housing allowance relief for rental or mortgages capped at say £2k at 20%

The idea is interesting, but, how would the mechanics of it work? The employer is responsible for calculating deductions from salary so I would imagine there would be significant opposition to shoulder that administrative burden. When MIRAS was in place there were frequent errors and it was difficult to manage and that was a financial institution processing it. Imagine a small business having to pick up this burden. Also, the employee would need to disclose details of the financial commitments, which they may not wish to do. How would a self-employed borrower access the benefit? I can see it fraught with problems and it doesn't deal with the underlying issue that property inflation has been allowed to spiral out of control, meaning ever larger mortgages to enable homeownership.

Well, I haven't heard MIRAS or Mortgage Interest Relief At Source for what seems like decades, and then I remember it was and I feel old. What we need to remember is we were living in totally different times in the 1980s when this was in its heyday - prior to August 1988 it was relief for the first £30,000 of loan for both husband and wife. Then they reduced it to just one applicant, and then labour removed it altogether in 2000 stating it only helped the rich - I couldn't work out at the time how that assumption was worked out, £30,000 was easily at the time a low working class mortgage amount, but that was the press release at the time. So are we suggesting that relief at £30,000 would mean anything today, I think not, so then comes the discussion on what amount would have be raised to make it effective, and then there is a huge difference in mortgage sizes across the whole of the UK - how would that work. I remember having to manually do awkward calculations for borrowers back then.

Yes, salary sacrifice might work because reinstating mortgage interest relief at source could make a difference -- so long as it's done with care. Finding a way to help homeowners without pushing quality landlords out of the market is a big conversation and there are no easy answers. People's financial wellbeing isn't a fairytale... it's real. So, discussions need to be based on whether bringing back tax relief really would help homeowners struggling with higher repayments.

But we must find a balance that works for landlords too.

To strike that balance, regulations and safeguards need to be factored in for everyone. In the end, we've got to find the 'Goldilocks' sweet spot, because what's important is to create an environment where both homeowners and renters can thrive.

For - In theory, the headline sounds promising and straightforward, almost too good to be true. However, the practical implementation of such a scheme raises important questions regarding the responsibility for administering it during processes like buying, selling, and remortgaging houses.

Whereas previously the base rate was under the control of the Treasury, this was passed to the Monetary Policy Committee of the Bank of England in 1998. This means that the Government can no longer seek to manipulate the economy through the publics debt repayments as it has before then, which hasn't caused an issue in the economic environment since. However, with rising interest rates, inflation and the cost of living increases all hitting us at the same time, the Government may now need to look at ways to help support homeowners and simply lowering the base rate is no longer within their power; so maybe the reintroduction of a form of MIRAS (Mortgage Interest Relief At Source, a tax advantage that was on mortgages until about 1999) is required? Although this may not be popular with non-homeowning taxpayers.

Any tax relief on mortgage payments would be pulling in the opposite direction to the Bank of England who, by increasing base rate, are attempting to cut demand for goods and services in the economy and therefore curb inflation. For the government to literally do the exact opposite by offering a tax break on mortgage payments. At a time when markets need clarity and certainty, most importantly, to believe in the competence of UK authorities to control inflation, such a move could prove hugely damaging and counterproductive.