
Why the worst of the landlord exodus may be over
For years, the rental market has been battered by an exodus of landlords as successive governments' crackdowns have made it ever tougher to turn a profit.
The number of UK properties available to let hit an all-time low of 284,000 in March, tumbling 18pc in a year, according to analytics firm TwentyCi. The figure is 23pc lower than before the pandemic.
The market has been saturated by the huge number of ex-rental properties that have been put up for sale. In the first quarter of this year, 15.6pc of properties newly for sale had been rented at some point during the past three years, up from just 9.3pc at the start of 2023, according to TwentyCi.
The supply shock has driven up rents, which were 4.5pc higher on average in the first quarter of 2025 compared to the same period the year before, according to Rightmove data.
But the worst of the landlord exodus may have passed – and pressure on tenants may begin to finally ease.
Smaller landlords squeezed out
It has been a tough period for landlords. Tax credits on mortgage interest for landlords were gradually slashed between 2017 and 2020, down from 40pc for higher-rate taxpayers to a flat rate of 20pc.
Interest rates leapt, with buy-to-let mortgages at the sharper end of the increases, squeezing landlord profits even as rents rose. And thanks to Chancellor Rachel Reeves's maiden Budget, landlords now pay an extra 5pc stamp duty surcharge on additional property purchases.
A major sweep of reforms designed to protect tenants was introduced to Parliament in 2023, and is set to take effect in July, which will ban no-fault evictions, fixed-term tenancies, bidding wars and mid-contract price hikes.
Rental properties that fall short of energy efficiency standards are also set to be banned by 2030, with landlords facing an average bill of £10,000 to make sure their homes are compliant.
The tax changes that began taking effect in 2017 arrested the growth of the private rental sector, which has been split between landlords who can afford to operate in a much tougher environment, and those that cannot.
This has caused it to undergo a major restructuring in recent years, explains Richard Donnell of Zoopla. Smaller landlords have struggled and sold up while larger ones have actually grown.
'The number of landlords with one or two properties has fallen, as the smaller landlords have been more likely to leave. They didn't buy a property to have as a business… Almost 40pc of landlords bought their first property to live in, so there are a lot of accidental landlords in the business.'
In 2016, over 60pc of landlords owned just one property, and under 10pc of landlords owned five or more – today, just 45pc of landlords own a single rental property, while 17pc own five or more.
More significantly, single-property landlords are responsible for just 21pc of tenancies, while the minority of landlords with five or more properties provide nearly half. This change in the make-up of the rental sector has made it more resilient, and it has adapted to the challenges it faces today, argues Donnell.
'We're coming up to a decade since the private rental sector's growth began to stall,' he adds. 'I think we're through the worst of it now.'
Many landlords who only owned one or two properties may have initially purchased them for the potential for house price growth. But that has stalled in recent years – the average UK house price jumped 10.4pc in 2021 according to Nationwide, but was 4.7pc last year.
As mortgage rates have risen, smaller landlords with higher debt ratios have seen their margins plummet. Today, just 30pc of landlords have mortgages with a loan-to-value of over 50pc, according to Zoopla.
Donnell adds: 'Back in the day, house prices were roaring away, and [landlords] didn't need to think about cash flow. Now, you need to have low levels of debt to make it work.
'Those who bought properties to live in and ended up renting them out [have been forced out of the market by] tax changes, rising running costs, and mortgage rate changes.'
Threats are not existential for remaining landlords
The larger, wealthier landlords that remain in the sector are more equipped to deal with the challenges, says Lucian Cook, of estate agent Savills.
'Wealthier landlords can deal with higher levels of regulation – they can spread risk with some tenants who do not perform across a wide number of properties. It is much more painful if you have bad tenants and just one or two properties.' Landlords with larger portfolios can also deal better with higher energy standards, he adds.
'If you're a landlord without lots of debt and leverage, the Renters' Rights Bill [due to come in later this year] shouldn't scare you too much,' adds Richard Donnell.
The shift towards a more professional sector can also be seen by the rise in the number of landlords setting up limited companies to make their businesses more profitable, which is at a record high, according to data from estate agent Hamptons. Around 61,000 limited companies were created in 2024 for buy-to-let purposes, up from just 50,000 the year prior.
'[To shift into this company structure] is really expensive because of stamp duty and capital gains tax,' explains Hamptons' Aneisha Beveridge. 'Landlords wouldn't do that unless they were planning on staying in buy-to-let for a few years. They are adapting and taking shelter in these limited companies instead of offloading entirely.'
Gross annual yields from residential rental properties are on the rise – in Manchester, they sit at 6.9pc, up from 6pc in 2022, according to Zoopla's rental index. In London, yields remain relatively weak at 4.9pc, but have risen from under 4pc in 2021.
'The undersupply of private rented stock has been entrenched,' adds Cook. 'The landlords who have remained in the sector have benefited from some rental growth along the way. Even the more indebted ones, with mortgage rates falling slightly, combined with rental growth, have strengthened their resolve somewhat.'
A boost for first-time buyers
While landlords that remain in the rental sector are unlikely to be forced out of it, the growing barriers to entry are putting off new ones, Beveridge explains.
'The hurdles to invest in buy-to-let are much higher; you have to know what you're doing now more than ever before. Just 10pc of homes are being bought by landlords.' This is a record low, down from 16pc in 2015.
Donnell adds: 'Consumers are waking up to the running costs of property. Higher mortgage rates, gas bills, council tax, maintenance… Everything is going up.'
A sluggish sales market has been made worse by a hike in stamp duty, including for thousands of first-time buyers, some of whom face an additional £6,250 in taxes. This has meant that some landlords have only held on to their properties as they have not been able to fetch a price they are happy with.
But this may be about to change as the Bank of England relaxes stress-testing, with lenders set to allow borrowers to take out mortgages of up to £40,000 more than previously allowed. This will give first-time buyers at the top of the rental market a boost, many of whom will be looking at purchasing previously rented homes, as they tend to be cheaper.
'A relaxation of mortgage regulations, which gives first-time buyers more buying power to step into the shoes of buy-to-let landlords, means you could have a second wave of the less committed landlords looking to sell,' adds Cook.
Beveridge points out that there may be a number of landlords who are yet to refinance on to more expensive mortgages.
'It won't be until 2027 that that will be fully bedded in, due to five-year fixed rate mortgages [which began in 2022]. We might see some people choose to sell as a result of that, but for the majority of people it's already happened.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Independent
29 minutes ago
- The Independent
HMRC failure to notify MPs sooner about £47m phishing scam ‘unacceptable'
HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) has been warned by a committee of MPs that its failure to report details of a breach affecting around 100,000 taxpayers is 'unacceptable'. The Treasury Committee said it was only alerted to the information when a notification was published on the HMRC website on the same day as a live session. On June 4, it emerged that HMRC had lost £47 million after a phishing scam breached tens of thousands of tax accounts. Senior civil servants at HMRC told the Treasury Committee that 100,000 people have been contacted, or are in the process of being contacted, after their accounts were locked down in what they said was an 'organised crime' incident which started last year. On Tuesday, the committee published a letter from the Association of Chartered Certified Accountants (ACCA) stipulating that it had not discussed the phishing incident with HMRC and was not aware of it prior to the hearing on June 4. The committee also published a letter sent via email from its chairwoman Dame Meg Hillier to John-Paul Marks, chief executive, HMRC. The letter said: 'I am alarmed that it was never deemed necessary to inform Parliament about an issue which affected such a vast number of taxpayers and led to the loss of £47 million of public money. 'To discover this information during a session from press reports and without adequate time for the committee to review the information in detail is unacceptable.' The letter said the committee is seeking responses from HMRC as to 'why was Parliament not notified earlier about the loss of £47 million of taxpayers' money, whether through a written ministerial statement and/or public or confidential letters to the Treasury Committee and the Public Accounts Committee?' The committee is also seeking responses over why the update was published on the day of the committee hearing on the work of HMRC and who else in Government was told about the incident and when. It also wants to receive a timeline of how the incident unfolded and find out what measures HMRC has put in place to ensure that such incidents do not happen in future. The letter asked for a reply by June 24 2025. Meanwhile, the letter from Glenn Collins, head of technical and strategic engagement, ACCA, to Dame Meg, dated June 5, said: 'While we regularly engage with HMRC, including earlier in the year about issues relating to agent account access, we have not received any communication from HMRC on the issue of taxpayer account breaches until yesterday. 'We have highlighted to HMRC our frustration that HMRC has not been transparent or timely in its communication over this important issue.'


Scotsman
31 minutes ago
- Scotsman
Acorn carbon capture project funding to finally be announced in Rachel Reeves spending review
Details of funding for the Acorn project are set to be announced by Chancellor Rachel Reeves as part of Wednesday's Spending Review. Sign up to our Politics newsletter Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... Funding for the Acorn project in Aberdeenshire is finally expected to be announced in the UK government's spending review. The carbon capture project, based in St Fergus, would take greenhouse gas emissions and store them under the North Sea, in a process known as carbon capture and storage (CCS). Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad The planned Acorn carbon capture site. Last month UK energy minister Michael Shanks stressed his department was lobbying the Chancellor to sign off funding for the crucial project, which is now set to be announced in Wednesday's spending review. In the House of Commons on Tuesday, ministers were asked several times about funding for the project. UK energy minister Sarah Jones told MPs they did not have long to wait long for more information. She said: "We have always been clear that we support the Acorn project. We know what an important proposal it is. The decision is a matter for a spending review but we are very close to having those decisions". Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad The Acorn project, which would be based near Peterhead, has been in the pipeline for years and would allow fossil fuels to continue to be burnt without, in theory, releasing harmful carbon emissions. The project is seen as key to scaling up the low-carbon hydrogen sector in Scotland and future plans for Grangemouth, but the technology has not yet been demonstrated at commercial scale. With the project based in his the Aberdeenshire North and Moray East constituency, local SNP Seamus Logan welcomed the announcement. He said: 'As the local MP for the Acorn project, I cautiously welcome this long-overdue commitment that funding and full details will finally be announced for Scottish carbon capture at the spending review tomorrow, after years of campaigning by the SNP and the Scottish energy sector. England has been allocated £22billion for carbon capture, so I would expect investment in Scotland to be at a commensurate level. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad 'After decades of broken promises, funding snubs and delays from Westminster - including over the past year - it is essential that adequate funding, full details and a concrete commitment to the project is now delivered by the UK government at pace - and the devil will be in the detail of the announcement, which we will study carefully. 'Scotland has repeatedly been treated as an afterthought by the Labour government, with money being ploughed into projects in the south of England instead, and thousands of Scottish energy jobs lost in the north east of Scotland as a result of Keir Starmer's damaging policies. That must now change - and funding for Scottish carbon capture must mark the beginning of a substantial programme of investment in Scotland's energy sector to create jobs, lower energy bills and boost economic growth.' Business leaders and organisations including the Scottish Chambers of Commerce had signed a letter in March urging the chancellor to back the project. It argued that the project had faced two decades of setbacks, and that it is needed to help Scottish industry decarbonise. The project missed out on support in 2021, and Acorn was placed on a reserve list for future backing.


BBC News
32 minutes ago
- BBC News
Family visa income threshold should be lower, review says
The minimum income threshold for family visas should be relaxed, a government-commissioned review has recommended.A report by the Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) has suggested a reduction from the current level of £29, warned against previous proposals to raise the threshold to the same level as for skilled workers - £38,700 a year - saying it could breach the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).The Conservatives said that the UK should leave the ECHR if it "stops us from setting our own visa rules". Article 8 of the ECHR enshrines the right to family threshold is the minimum income a British citizen or settled resident must earn to bring their partner to join them in the UK. If the partner is already in the UK on a valid visa, their income also counts towards the minimum applications are made by people not already living in the UK. The MAC suggested a range of possible new thresholds. It said a level between £23,000 to £25,000 would enable families to support themselves.A threshold of between £24,000 to £28,000 meanwhile would put more emphasis on economic wellbeing - both of the families themselves and for said it did "not understand the rationale" for setting the family visa threshold at the £38,700 level for skilled workers, as the two visas have "completely different objective[s]".A £38,700 level would be the "most likely to conflict with international law and obligations".It is the government's decision whether to accept any of the MAC's recommendations. Prof Brian Bell, chairman of the MAC, said that balancing family life and economic wellbeing was a "real trade-off"."There is a cost to the UK economy and UK taxpayers of having this route, and we should just be honest about that and say there is a trade-off," he said."But similarly, on the other side, people who say 'we should set it at very high numbers to make sure that we don't lose any money' ignore the massive impact that has on families and the destruction of some relationships and the harm it causes to children." A higher threshold would also have a "negative impact on the family life of a larger number of people", the MAC said. It noted many families with lower incomes still earn enough to support themselves even if they do not make a net positive fiscal impact on the said an adult would need to earn £27,800 to have a neutral impact on the public finances - and £40,400 for a couple to have no impact in the first year a spouse arrived in the MAC did not recommend a higher threshold for families with children, saying the impacts on family life for them would be "particularly significant". In 2023 the previous Conservative government announced plans to raise the salary threshold to £38,700, as part of plans to cut the level of they backed down following criticism that this would keep families apart, settling on a £29,000 threshold with plans to gradually increase it did not implement those further rises when the party came into government and asked the MAC to review the committee said the threshold of £29,000 was already high compared to other high-income countries it had looked at. The MAC said it "was not possible to predict with any confidence" the impact different thresholds would have on the level of net migration - the difference between those entering and leaving the did suggest lowering the threshold from £29,000 to roughly £24,000 may increase net migration by up to 8,000 migration in 2024 was an estimated 431,000 people, down almost 50% on the previous followed record high levels in recent years, with the government under political pressure to get numbers down further. The MAC also criticised the Home Office for its data collection, saying insufficient data "greatly hindered" their review.A Home Office spokesperson said the government was considering the review's findings and would respond in due course. Conservative shadow home secretary Chris Philp said migration figures remain too high and that the government "must urgently re-instate the Conservative plan to further increase the salary threshold"."If the ECHR stops us from setting our own visa rules, from deporting foreign criminals or from putting Britain's interests first, then we should leave the ECHR," he ECHR, which was established in 1950, sets out the rights and freedoms people are entitled to in the 46 signatory countries and is a central part of UK human rights month, the government said it would bring forward legislation to clarify how aspects of the ECHR should apply in immigration cases.