#landlord & rental sector news

[ghelgheli]

hey—I'm fundraising on behalf of a friend ("N") who's in a sticky situation and prefers to stay anonymous

What’s the situation?

N is a young disabled trans woman living in the north of England, whose relationship with her long term partner has broken down, leaving her in an unsafe living situation which needs to change as soon as possible. N, who has lived with her partner for a number of years, recently decided to end the relationship in part due to her attempts to adjust to her disability as it continues to encroach on more of her life, but also due to the long term effects of transmisogyny and sexual violence which have occurred and continued to preside within the relationship, becoming increasingly impossible to live alongside.

N currently works part time and due to her disability is working as many hours already as she is capable of. This provides a fixed limited income which isn't currently enough to support herself on her own. Whilst N is in middle of a number of processes of applying for benefits (PIP and Universal Credit), these take time and labour to pursue, could take weeks to finalise, and would still be unlikely to provide the kind of resources for N to set herself up in a sustainable and safe living situation without the support of a number of upfront costs outside even these means. Until this situation changes, N remains economically dependent on her ex-partner, with no alternative means of support, living in an increasingly unsafe, stressful and emotionally difficult environment for everyone in which N is finding it difficult to survive.

What does she need?

N desperately needs the financial support of this fundraiser to get safely housed and settled into a new flat on her own in the private rental sector. Because of her problems with income, we are aiming to raise enough money to pay for a portion of the tenancy in advance, which would allow N to circumvent proof of income checks (which often facilitate ableist discrimination from landlords) and to give her a few months to sort out her benefits applications so she can provide for herself long-term.

We all know It’s a difficult time of year to find spare cash, but N is a valued and loved member of her community and we really need your help. Any support is really appreciated.

[posttexasstressdisorder]

How Trump's billionaires are hijacking affordable housing

Thom Hartmann

October 24, 2024 8:52AM ET

Republican presidential nominee and former U.S. President Donald Trump attends the 79th annual Alfred E. Smith Memorial Foundation Dinner in New York City, U.S., October 17, 2024. REUTERS/Brendan McDermid

America’s morbidly rich billionaires are at it again, this time screwing the average family’s ability to have decent, affordable housing in their never-ending quest for more, more, more. Canada, New Zealand, Singapore, and Denmark have had enough and done something about it: we should, too.

There are a few things that are essential to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” that should never be purely left to the marketplace; these are the most important sectors where government intervention, regulation, and even subsidy are not just appropriate but essential. Housing is at the top of that list.

A few days ago I noted how, since the Reagan Revolution, the cost of housing has exploded in America, relative to working class income.

When my dad bought his home in the 1950s, for example, the median price of a single-family house was around 2.2 times the median American family income. Today the St. Louis Fed says the median house sells for $417,700 while the median American income is $40,480—a ratio of more than 10 to 1 between housing costs and annual income.

ALSO READ: He’s mentally ill:' NY laughs ahead of Trump's Madison Square Garden rally

In other words, housing is about five times more expensive (relative to income) than it was in the 1950s.

And now we’ve surged past a new tipping point, causing the homelessness that’s plagued America’s cities since George W. Bush’s deregulation-driven housing- and stock-market crash in 2008, exacerbated by Trump’s bungling America’s pandemic response.

And the principal cause of both that crash and today’s crisis of homelessness and housing affordability has one, single, primary cause: billionaires treating housing as an investment commodity.

A new report from Popular Democracy and the Institute for Policy Studies reveals how billionaire investors have become a major driver of the nationwide housing crisis. They summarize in their own words:

— Billionaire-backed private equity firms worm their way into different segments of the housing market to extract ever-increasing rents and value from multi-family rental, single-family homes, and mobile home park communities. — Global billionaires purchase billions in U.S. real estate to diversify their asset holdings, driving the creation of luxury housing that functions as “safety deposit boxes in the sky.” Estimates of hidden wealth are as high as $36 trillion globally, with billions parked in U.S. land and housing markets. — Wealthy investors are acquiring property and holding units vacant, so that in many communities the number of vacant units greatly exceeds the number of unhoused people. Nationwide there are 16 million vacant homes: that is, 28 vacant homes for every unhoused person. — Billionaire investors are buying up a large segment of the short-term rental market, preventing local residents from living in these homes, in order to cash in on tourism. These are not small owners with one unit, but corporate owners with multiple properties. — Billionaire investors and corporate landlords are targeting communities of color and low-income residents, in particular, with rent increases, high rates of eviction, and unhealthy living conditions. What’s more, billionaire-owned private equity firms are investing in subsidized housing, enjoying tax breaks and public benefits, while raising rents and evicting low-income tenants from housing they are only required to keep affordable, temporarily. (Emphasis theirs.)

It seems that everywhere you look in America you see the tragedy of the homelessness these billionaires are causing. Rarely, though, do you hear about the role of Wall Street and its billionaires in causing it.

The math, however, is irrefutable.

Thirty-two percent is the magic threshold, according to research funded by the real estate listing company Zillow. When neighborhoods hit rent rates in excess of 32 percent of neighborhood income, homelessness explodes. And we’re seeing it play out right in front of us in cities across America because a handful of Wall Street billionaires are making a killing.

As the Zillow study notes:

“Across the country, the rent burden already exceeds the 32 percent [of median income] threshold in 100 of the 386 markets included in this analysis….”

And wherever housing prices become more than three times annual income, homelessness stalks like the grim reaper. That Zillow-funded study laid it out:

“This research demonstrates that the homeless population climbs faster when rent affordability — the share of income people spend on rent — crosses certain thresholds. In many areas beyond those thresholds, even modest rent increases can push thousands more Americans into homelessness.”

This trend is massive.

As noted in a Wall Street Journal article titled “Meet Your New Landlord: Wall Street,” in just one suburb (Spring Hill) of Nashville:

“In all of Spring Hill, four firms … own nearly 700 houses … [which] amounts to about 5% of all the houses in town.”

This is the tiniest tip of the iceberg.

“On the first Tuesday of each month,” notes the Journal article about a similar phenomenon in Atlanta, investors “toted duffels stuffed with millions of dollars in cashier’s checks made out in various denominations so they wouldn’t have to interrupt their buying spree with trips to the bank…”

The same thing is happening in cities and suburbs all across America; agents for the billionaire investor goliaths use fine-tuned computer algorithms to sniff out houses they can turn into rental properties, making over-market and unbeatable cash bids often within minutes of a house hitting the market.

After stripping neighborhoods of homes young families can afford to buy, billionaires then begin raising rents to extract as much cash as they can from local working class communities.

In the Nashville suburb of Spring Hill, the vice-mayor, Bruce Hull, told the Journal you used to be able to rent “a three bedroom, two bath house for $1,000 a month.” Today, the Journal notes:

“The average rent for 148 single-family homes in Spring Hill owned by the big four [Wall Street billionaire investor] landlords was about $1,773 a month…”

As the Bank of International Settlements summarized in a 2014 retrospective study of the years since the Reagan/Gingrich changes in banking and finance:

“We describe a Pareto frontier along which different levels of risk-taking map into different levels of welfare for the two parties, pitting Main Street against Wall Street. … We also show that financial innovation, asymmetric compensation schemes, concentration in the banking system, and bailout expectations enable or encourage greater risk-taking and allocate greater surplus to Wall Street at the expense of Main Street.”

It’s a fancy way of saying that billionaire-owned big banks and hedge funds have made trillions on housing while you and your community are becoming destitute.

Ryan Dezember, in his book Underwater: How Our American Dream of Homeownership Became a Nightmare, describes the story of a family trying to buy a home in Phoenix. Every time they entered a bid, they were outbid instantly, the price rising over and over, until finally the family’s father threw in the towel.

“Jacobs was bewildered,” writes Dezember. “Who was this aggressive bidder?”

Turns out it was Blackstone Group, now the world’s largest real estate investor run by a major Trump supporter. At the time they were buying $150 million worth of American houses every week, trying to spend over $10 billion. And that’s just a drop in the overall bucket.

As that new study from Popular Democracy and the Institute for Policy Studies found:

“[Billionaire Stephen Schwarzman’s] Blackstone is the largest corporate landlord in the world, with a vast and diversified real estate portfolio. It owns more than 300,000 residential units across the U.S., has $1 trillion in global assets, and nearly doubled its profits in 2021. “Blackstone owns 149,000 multi-family apartment units; 63,000 single-family homes; 70 mobile home parks with 13,000 lots through their subsidiary Treehouse Communities; and student housing, through American Campus Communities (144,300 beds in 205 properties as of 2022). Blackstone recently acquired 95,000 units of subsidized housing.”

In 2018, corporations and the billionaires that own or run them bought 1 out of every 10 homes sold in America, according to Dezember, noting that:

“Between 2006 and 2016, when the homeownership rate fell to its lowest level in fifty years, the number of renters grew by about a quarter.”

And it’s gotten worse every year since then.

This all really took off around a decade ago following the Bush Crash, when Morgan Stanley published a 2011 report titled “The Rentership Society,” arguing that snapping up houses and renting them back to people who otherwise would have wanted to buy them could be the newest and hottest investment opportunity for Wall Street’s billionaires and their funds.

Turns out, Morgan Stanley was right. Warren Buffett, KKR, and The Carlyle Group have all jumped into residential real estate, along with hundreds of smaller investment groups, and the National Home Rental Council has emerged as the industry’s premiere lobbying group, working to block rent control legislation and other efforts to control the industry.

As John Husing, the owner of Economics and Politics Inc., told The Tennessean newspaper:

“What you have are neighborhoods that are essentially unregulated apartment houses. It could be disastrous for the city.”

As Zillow found:

“The areas that are most vulnerable to rising rents, unaffordability, and poverty hold 15 percent of the U.S. population — and 47 percent of people experiencing homelessness.”

The loss of affordable homes also locks otherwise middle class families out of the traditional way wealth is accumulated — through home ownership: over 61% of all American middle-income family wealth is their home’s equity.

And as families are priced out of ownership and forced to rent, they become more vulnerable to homelessness.

Housing is one of the primary essentials of life. Nobody in America should be without it, and for society to work, housing costs must track incomes in a way that makes housing both available and affordable.

Singapore, Denmark, New Zealand, and parts of Canada have all put limits on billionaire, corporate, and foreign investment in housing, recognizing families’ residences as essential to life rather than purely a commodity. Multiple other countries are having that debate or moving to take similar actions as you read these words.

America should, too.

ALSO READ: Not even ‘Fox and Friends’ can hide Trump’s dementia

[sortyourlifeoutmate]

It's mostly the idea that you can have any conversation about the private rental market and pretend that 'landlord' isn't a dirty word and that they're not a huge drain on society.

Landlords are leaving the sector because of fear of the new rules, are they? Aww, boo hoo! Maybe they can go get a real fucking job like everyone else!

Maybe they can try renting a house! See how that goes!

[workersolidarity]

Watch "How The Country's Largest Landlords Are Destroying Lives" on YouTube

Rents in America are completely insane, even as the Federal Minimum wage, which is still the only minimum wage in many states in the US South and Midwestern heartland, remains at historically low levels.

With the Minimum wage still set at $7.25 an hour, last raised in 2009, and rents at historic highs (the average renter is now paying $1'388 monthly), the Working Class is being squeezed more tightly than it has in more than a century. Working Class wealth is being sucked out of the system and shoveled into the pockets of endlessly consolidating and monopolizing Corporations controlled by the same small group of Billionaires and giant Corporate investors. Most of the largest and profitable corporations are all invested in and controlled by the very top 0.01% of the wealthiest billionaires, an increasing number of which aren't even necessarily American citizens, but rather are part of an International Capitalist Class with no National loyalties whatsoever.

To get an idea of just how squeezed the US Working Class is compared with the recent past, consider this: if the Minimum Wage had been tied to Rental inflation since 1968, than today's Minimum Wage would be roughly $22 today.

You can see this in the basic arithmetic yourself.

Average rent in the US in 1968 was close to $100 per month. Today it is $1'388 per month. That's an increase of 1'388%. And according to the Dept of Labor's online records, the Minimum Wage in 1968 for non-farm workers was $1.60 per hour. Multiply that by 1'388% and you get $22.20.

Headline inflation numbers released by Govts hide the true cost of inflation by factoring in things like the falling cost of certain technologies, most of which have little relevance to the average worker whose only concern is providing for their families a safe and happy environment in the midst of consistently rising prices and stagnant wages.

And that's just one example of how we are being squeezed as a Working Class like never before in the Post-WWII era.

We're also being squeezed from new directions and in other ways as well. Such as the consolidation of the food industry into a handful of private companies and giant corporations, predictably causing food costs to rise at an alarming rate. Add to that similar consolidation and rising prices with Banking Fees, Property Development and in the Energy sector and you get a disaster for the Working Class in the making.

We will all suffer greatly until we can close out the noise and division of the media and politicians, and unite as a Class against the Capitalists who long ago united against us.

We must put aside our differences in the culture wars, which are purposely being driven by the Corporate Media and the National Security State, and stand in solidarity with one another against the Capitalist machine, the giant Corporations, the Landlords, the Bosses, the Police State, and the corrupt Corporate State.

Our lives are being destroyed: Working Class lifespans, quality of life, addiction, alcoholism and other indicators are all tumbling downward at a rapid clip. Everything, especially rent, food, Energy and an education are all outlandishly expensive and getting more expensive, even as our wages have been stagnant for decades, Unions have been made powerless and corrupt, and Working Class Political action has died down to a trickle, or even just the rare droplet.

Until we come together and organize along Class Lines, our lives are only going to get worse and worse. And at the rate at which the Corporate State is consolidating its control over our information space, feeding us propaganda to promote their Capitalist Empire and divide Workers, we won't have long before the state of workers in the US is approaching the state of workers in some 3rd world countries under US Sanctions and Neocolonial economic blockade.

Get out there and Organize along Class lines Now! This IS Code Red for Workers!

When the task of the Working Class has been completed and our work as Socialists is done, the whole world will be a safer and better place for it.

It could be the dawn of new, fairer, Safer, more Progressive, Non-Imperialistic, Internationally collaborative, pro-Worker world with a Green future! It's up to all of us! 😊🌅🌱

[scope-dogg]

Just know we’re going to be flooded with calls from shittershattered landlords today

[samsinghtripler]

Sam Singh, Chief Executive of Tripler

Dubai, located in the United Arab Emirates (UAE), is known for its booming real estate market that has seen rapid development over the years. Dubai's real estate sector has been a significant contributor to the city's economic growth and has attracted investors and homebuyers from around the world. Apart from that Sam Singh, Chief Executive of Tripler. He is founder and chief executive of new lead generation estate agency platform Tripler.

Here are some key points about Dubai's real estate market:

Property Types: Dubai offers a wide range of real estate options, including residential properties such as apartments, villas, townhouses, and penthouses, as well as commercial properties like office spaces, retail spaces, and industrial properties.

High-rise Buildings: Dubai is famous for its iconic high-rise buildings, including the Burj Khalifa, the tallest building in the world, which has become a symbol of Dubai's skyline. Many other tall buildings and skyscrapers dot the city's landscape, offering luxury living and office spaces.

Master-Planned Communities: Dubai is known for its master-planned communities, which are carefully designed and developed residential areas that offer a mix of housing options, recreational facilities, and amenities such as schools, parks, shopping malls, and healthcare facilities. Some popular master-planned communities in Dubai include Palm Jumeirah, Dubai Marina, Jumeirah Lakes Towers (JLT), Downtown Dubai, and Emirates Hills.

Foreign Ownership: Dubai's real estate market allows foreign nationals to own properties in designated areas, known as freehold areas, which include many popular areas in the city. This has made Dubai an attractive destination for foreign investors and expatriates looking to invest in real estate or buy a home.

Off-Plan Properties: Off-plan properties, which are properties that are still under construction or not yet built, have been a popular investment option in Dubai's real estate market. Many developers offer attractive payment plans and incentives to attract buyers to invest in off-plan properties.

Real Estate Regulations: The real estate market in Dubai is regulated by the Dubai Land Department (DLD) and the Real Estate Regulatory Agency (RERA), which oversee various aspects of the real estate sector, including licensing, registration, and dispute resolution.

Market Trends: Dubai's real estate market has experienced fluctuations in recent years, with periods of high demand and price growth, followed by periods of stabilization and correction. Factors such as supply and demand dynamics, global economic conditions, and government policies can impact the performance of the real estate market in Dubai.

Real Estate Developers: Dubai is home to many renowned real estate developers who have played a significant role in shaping the city's skyline. Some of the prominent developers in Dubai include Emaar Properties, Nakheel, Dubai Properties, DAMAC Properties, and Meraas, among others.

Rental Market: Dubai's real estate market also has a thriving rental market, with a large expatriate population and a significant demand for rental properties. Rental yields and regulations for tenants and landlords are governed by the Dubai Rental Law, which provides guidelines and protections for both parties.

Future Outlook: Dubai's real estate market is expected to continue evolving in the coming years with ongoing development projects, government initiatives, and Expo 2020 Dubai, a global event that is expected to boost the city's real estate market and economy.

It's important to note that real estate markets can be subject to fluctuations and it's essential to conduct thorough research and seek professional advice before making any investment decisions in Dubai or any other market.

[clairebenblog]

Visa, Work & Housing: Essential Tips for Moving to USA

Moving to USA is a dream for many, offering boundless opportunities and a chance for a fresh start. However, planning such a significant transition requires careful research and organization. In this comprehensive guide, we’ll explore essential aspects of relocating, including visa requirements, navigating the job market, finding housing, managing finances, understanding healthcare, integrating into American culture, and knowing your legal rights. Whether you’re planning a temporary stay or a permanent move, these insights will help you prepare for a successful transition.

Before embarking on your journey, understanding the visa process is crucial. The USA offers a variety of visa options to accommodate different purposes of stay.

Navigating the visa application process can seem daunting, but breaking it down into manageable steps can simplify the journey:

Determine Your Visa Category: Identify the visa type that aligns with your purpose of moving to USA.

Prepare Your Documents: Gather necessary paperwork such as passports, financial records, educational certificates, and employment history.

Complete the Application: Fill out the appropriate visa application forms and pay the required fees.

Schedule an Interview: Most visa types require an interview at a U.S. embassy or consulate.

Wait for Approval: Visa processing times can vary, so it’s important to apply well in advance of your planned move.

Staying informed about the latest updates in immigration policies is essential, as changes can impact eligibility and processing times.

One of the biggest challenges when moving to USA is finding employment. With the right preparation, you can tap into the vast opportunities available across various sectors.

Research High-Demand Sectors: Industries such as technology, healthcare, finance, and engineering frequently seek skilled workers from around the globe. Look for sectors that match your expertise and qualifications.

Utilize Job Portals and Networks: Websites like LinkedIn, Indeed, and Glassdoor can be invaluable in finding job listings and networking with professionals in your field.

Consider Regional Opportunities: Job markets can vary greatly by region. Metropolitan areas like New York, San Francisco, and Austin offer dynamic opportunities, while smaller cities may provide a lower cost of living and a tighter community network.

Before starting a job, ensure that you have the correct work authorization. Many employment-based visas, such as the H-1B, require sponsorship by an employer. Be proactive in discussing sponsorship options during your job search.

Understanding workplace culture can enhance your professional integration. Common practices include punctuality, clear communication, and a focus on results. Embracing these cultural norms can lead to smoother interactions with colleagues and supervisors.

Finding the right place to live is a vital component of your relocation plan. Whether you choose to rent or buy, being well-informed will help you avoid common pitfalls.

Research Neighborhoods: Start by researching neighborhoods that align with your lifestyle, work location, and budget. Consider factors such as safety, access to public transportation, and proximity to amenities.

Understand Rental Agreements: Familiarize yourself with lease terms, tenant rights, and the responsibilities of both landlords and tenants. It’s essential to read the rental contract thoroughly before signing.

Budgeting for Rent: The cost of renting can vary widely. Create a budget that accounts for monthly rent, utilities, and other living expenses to ensure financial stability.

If you’re arriving without a permanent address, short-term housing options like serviced apartments, extended-stay hotels, or temporary rentals can provide a comfortable stopgap. These arrangements offer flexibility while you search for long-term accommodation.

A well-planned financial strategy is crucial for a smooth transition to life in the USA.

The US tax system can be complex, especially for new residents. Familiarize yourself with both federal and state tax regulations. It’s often wise to consult with a tax professional who specializes in expatriate or immigrant tax matters to ensure compliance and optimize your tax situation.

Healthcare is a critical consideration when moving to USA, where the system differs significantly from other countries.

Moving to USA is not just about logistics — it’s also about embracing a new culture and building a supportive community.

Being aware of your legal rights and responsibilities is vital for protecting yourself and ensuring a smooth transition.

If you encounter any legal challenges or have questions about your rights, don’t hesitate to seek professional advice. Numerous organizations offer legal assistance to immigrants, helping you navigate any complexities that arise during your transition.

Moving to USA is a life-changing decision that offers countless opportunities. With careful planning and the right information, you can navigate the visa application process, secure employment, find the perfect home, and integrate into American society with ease. Remember, thorough preparation — from understanding visa requirements and building a professional network to managing finances and embracing new cultural norms — will pave the way for a successful transition.

By following these essential tips, you’ll be better equipped to handle the challenges and seize the opportunities that come with moving to USA. Whether you’re starting a new career, pursuing further education, or seeking a fresh start, this guide aims to empower you with the knowledge and confidence needed to embark on your American journey.

Taking the time to research and plan each step not only minimizes stress but also maximizes your potential for success. Embrace the adventure, stay informed, and remember that every step you take brings you closer to making your American dream a reality.

[bentley-hurst-estate-agents]

Key lettings market insights every landlord and tenant needs for 2025

The UK rental market in 2025 is set to experience significant shifts, providing challenges and opportunities for both landlords and tenants. Understanding these trends will help landlords attract reliable tenants while tenants benefit from improved housing quality, financial stability, and sustainable living. 

Improved housing standards 

The Renters’ Rights Bill (RRB) is transforming the rental landscape with reforms like mandatory landlord registration, the removal of Section 21 evictions, and oversight by an ombudsman. These changes aim to ensure fairer practices and better living conditions for tenants. 

For tenants, these reforms mean higher-quality homes and greater accountability. For landlords, maintaining high standards will attract long-term tenants who value well-maintained properties. By aligning with these regulations, landlords can enhance their reputation while tenants enjoy safer, more transparent rental experiences. 

Greater tenant stability 

New regulations promote greater financial stability for tenants. Rent increases are limited to once per year, and the elimination of bidding wars for tenancies reduces financial stress. Tenants gain predictability in their housing costs, fostering security and peace of mind. 

For landlords, this stability minimises void periods and ensures reliable income. By offering secure, long-term agreements, landlords can build trust with tenants, improving retention rates while boosting profitability. 

Sustainability is key 

Sustainability is now a priority for both tenants and landlords. Tenants increasingly seek properties with modern insulation, renewable energy features, and efficient heating systems to reduce energy costs and live more sustainably. 

For landlords, meeting EPC rating ‘C’ requirements by 2030 not only complies with regulations but also enhances property value and tenant satisfaction. Government incentives and grants make it easier to invest in energy-efficient upgrades. This shared focus on sustainability creates a win-win situation for both parties. 

Steady rental yields 

The demand for rental properties remains robust, which is good news for landlords. While tenants may face competition for quality housing, well-maintained properties offer security and long-term value. 

Zoopla forecasts a 17% rise in average rents by 2029, ensuring steady yields for landlords who prioritise high-quality living spaces. Tenants, on the other hand, can benefit from competitive markets driving better housing standards. Both sides thrive when properties are well-cared for and desirable. 

Market resilience 

The private rental sector continues to support tenants who aren’t ready to buy homes, while landlords benefit from stable income streams. Lower mortgage rates are making buy-to-let investments more feasible, meaning more choice for tenants in the future. 

For tenants, this resilience provides a range of housing options to meet diverse needs. For landlords, adapting to market demands ensures long-term financial success. 

Technology integration 

Technology is reshaping the rental market for landlords and tenants alike. Features like high-quality online listings, virtual tours, and digital communication tools are no longer optional—they’re essential. 

For tenants, these tools make searching for and securing a property more efficient. For landlords, they simplify management and attract tech-savvy tenants. Partnering with a tech-forward letting agent can further enhance this experience for both parties. 

Actionable takeaways 

To thrive in 2025, landlords should align with trends like compliance, sustainability, and tenant satisfaction, while tenants should seek landlords who embrace these priorities. By focusing on collaboration and mutual benefits, the rental experience can be improved for all. 

Book a valuation today to discover how market trends can benefit both landlords and tenants. Or Contact Estate Agents in Manchester

[vitodragone]

Choosing the Right Location for Your Multifamily Apartment Investment

Choosing the right location for a multifamily apartment investment requires careful deliberation. This process involves a thorough analysis of several interrelated factors that can affect the long-term success and profitability of the investment, such as the region's economic health.

Economic health, such as low unemployment and a varied economy, affects population growth and housing demand. Multifamily investments thrive in cities with growing tech, healthcare, and manufacturing sectors, which attract renters.

Demographic trends determine the composition and growth trajectory of the population and can offer valuable insights into the sustainability of rental demand. Locations with a growing population of young professionals, families, or retirees may offer distinct opportunities. Understanding the income levels, education, and lifestyle preferences of potential tenants ensures that the property aligns well with market expectations, which can improve occupancy rates and tenant satisfaction.

The availability and quality of infrastructure also play pivotal roles in determining a location's suitability. Prospective tenants prefer properties close to well-kept roads, public transit systems, and basic facilities, including stores, hospitals, and schools. Parks, cultural events, and leisure activities nearby enhance the attraction even further and help explain better occupancy rates and possible long-term value appreciation.

Safety remains a crucial factor for any real estate investment. Areas with low crime rates are more attractive to tenants and help secure consistent rental income and property appreciation over time. Investors should research crime statistics and trends to ensure a secure neighborhood environment. A safer area reduces tenant turnover and strengthens the property's reputation.

The regulatory environment of the location also warrants careful attention. Local laws and policies regarding property taxes, zoning, rent control, and tenant rights can significantly impact an investment's profitability and manageability. For example, landlord-friendly regulations provide greater operational flexibility, while stringent rent control measures limit revenue potential. Familiarity with these factors can help investors avoid unexpected challenges.

Environmental considerations, such as vulnerability to natural disasters, can have substantial implications. Properties in regions prone to floods, hurricanes, or earthquakes may carry higher insurance premiums and maintenance costs. Understanding these risks and implementing mitigation strategies can protect investments against unexpected financial burdens while ensuring tenant safety.

Market dynamics, such as rental trends, vacancy rates, and housing supply and demand balance, will also provide insights into communities. An area with high occupancy levels and strong rental price growth indicates robust tenant demand, which bodes well for consistent returns. On the other hand, oversupplied markets may result in prolonged vacancies and reduced profitability.

Investors should also consider the potential for future development in the area. New projects like commercial centers, transportation hubs, or urban redevelopment can considerably raise property values. On the other hand, massive new rental house construction could put downward pressure on rents, creating more competition. Knowing local development plans helps investors predict changes that might influence their approach to investing.

While many factors revolve around present conditions, a location's long-term adaptability is equally important. Investing in regions that exhibit resilience to economic shifts and demographic changes ensures that properties remain relevant and profitable over time. This perspective encourages investors to think beyond immediate gains and consider how the location will perform in an evolving landscape.

Job markets, demographics, and infrastructure start the analysis of a community's viability for housing investments. Multifamily apartment investments depend on community vitality and stability. Investors may prosper in volatile markets and maintain value by considering location selection as part of a larger strategy.

[subhashgoelpune]

Budget 2025: Subhash Goel Pune and Real Estate Leaders Advocate for Affordable Housing Reforms

“Budget 2025 lays the foundation for a resilient real estate sector, balancing affordability, investment, and infrastructure growth to drive long-term economic momentum.” — Mayank Agrawal

Union Budget 2025 introduces transformative measures for India’s real estate sector, focusing on tax relief, rental reforms, and infrastructure development. These reforms aim to enhance affordability, reduce compliance burdens, and revive stalled projects, creating a robust ecosystem for homebuyers and investors. Here are some of the key reforms from the budget:

Real estate leaders, including Subhash Goel Pune, emphasize that these initiatives will not only boost housing demand but also improve liquidity, ensuring timely project completion and economic stability. Here are some of the key reforms from the budget:

Tax Reforms Boosting Affordability

No income tax on earnings up to ₹12 lakh: Individuals earning up to ₹12 lakh annually (₹12.75 lakh for salaried employees) are now exempt from income tax under the new regime. This is expected to boost disposable income, driving demand for affordable housing while enabling higher EMI savings.

A simplified tax structure: Experts, including Subhash Goel Pune, believe that the revised tax regime will strengthen purchasing power while encouraging investments in the equity and real estate markets.

Rental Housing Reforms

Two self-occupied properties exempt from tax: Homebuyers can now claim a ‘nil annual value’ for two self-occupied properties, eliminating tax on notional rental income. For example, a person owning homes in both Delhi and Mumbai will save thousands annually.

Higher TDS threshold on rent: The TDS deduction threshold on rent has increased from ₹2.4 lakh to ₹6 lakh per annum. This aims to reduce compliance burdens for landlords while improving cash flow, benefiting both tenants and property owners.

SWAMIH Fund 2: Reviving Stalled Housing Projects

₹15,000 crore allocation: The SWAMIH Fund 2 (Special Window for Affordable and Mid-Income Housing) aims to complete 1 lakh stalled housing units, building on the success of the first fund, which delivered 50,000 homes.

Impact: This fund will provide relief to homebuyers stuck paying EMIs for delayed projects while also covering rental costs. An additional 40,000 units are slated for completion in FY25.

Blended finance model: The fund combines government support, private investments, and bank contributions to expedite project delivery.

Infrastructure and Urban Development

₹1 Lakh Crore Urban Challenge Fund: Designed to transform cities into growth hubs, this fund will finance 25% of urban projects (such as redevelopment and sanitation), with the remaining funding sourced from bonds, loans, and PPPs.

Expected outcome: Improved infrastructure in Tier 2/3 cities, higher property values, and enhanced livability.

Real Estate Financing Initiatives

Extended deadline for sovereign funds: Sovereign wealth and pension funds can invest in Indian infrastructure and real estate until March 2030. This will attract global capital for large-scale projects.

SWAMIH’s blended finance approach: This combines public and private investments to open liquidity and stabilize the market.

Conclusion

Budget 2025 addresses critical pain points in the real estate sector through tax relief, rental reforms, and targeted funding. By boosting disposable income & streamlining compliance Budget 2025 paves the way for sustainable growth in affordable housing and urban development. These measures are poised to benefit home buyers, investors, and developers alike, reinforcing real estate as a cornerstone of India’s economic progress.

[christianlanden]

 Place-Based Impact Investing: defining additionality in affordable housing

Place-Based Impact Investing: defining additionality in affordable housing

Nicole von Westenholz, partner at Cheyne Capital, examines the standards an affordable housing investment needs to meet in order to deliver additionality.

It is generally accepted that ‘additionality’ – enabling positive outcomes that would not otherwise have occurred – lies at the heart of impact investing.  Within Place-Based Impact Investing (PBII), the creation of additional homes – and, in particular, additional affordable homes – may be cited as a measurement of additionality.  But are they always additional?

Any affordable housing that is mandated by planning consent under a Section 106 agreement is not additional as this will be delivered anyway.  By extension, buying existing portfolios of Section 106 housing is certainly not additional.  Note also that affordable housing mandated under planning regulations is seen by developers as a penalty on their returns and therefore usually built with cheaper materials and to a lower specification than homes made available at market rate.

We would argue that using Homes England grant funding to subsidise the delivery of housing by the private sector is also not additional as this grant funding has already been earmarked for housing creation and could be used elsewhere if not taken by private sector housing providers.

Tangentially, it should be borne in mind that, in most cases, Homes England grant funding can only be given to a Registered Provider (RP) – which has led to a flurry of new RPs being set up in order to be eligible to receive it.  However, when the grant-funded properties come to be sold, they can only be sold to another RP.  Given the relatively small pool of other RPs who will be able to buy and the downside scenario risk of a ‘rush for the exit’ in unfavourable market conditions, the exit risk from grant-funded schemes needs to be considered carefully.

By contrast, consider a model where the private sector landlord makes a proportion of its homes available at meaningfully discounted rents on a voluntary basis and still makes a healthy return on its investment.  This is pure additionality and leaves government grant available for the creation of further affordable housing elsewhere, especially in places where it would otherwise be unviable.

One such example is Cheyne Impact Real Estate’s award-winning Poplin development in Manchester.

The scheme comprises 144 one-, two- and three-bed homes at the intersection of New Cross, New Islington and the vibrant Northern Quarter.  All of the homes are ‘tenure blind’, meaning that they are identical in specification and service levels.  However, 51 of the homes (35%, which is above the Local Plan target of 20%) are allocated to local key workers at significantly discounted rents whereby their rental payments account for no more than 30% of their net disposable income.  In some cases, these discounts exceed the 20% discount that would be achieved under capital ‘A’ Affordable housing.

Yet, all of these affordable homes are provided by Cheyne on a voluntary basis as there is no planning-stipulated provision for affordable housing within the scheme.

The result for residents is a diverse, cohesive and, above all, inclusive community in a development which is ranked third out of 63 places to live in Manchester on Homeviews with comments such as “You literally become a part of a community that cares for all, environmentally, socially when you become a resident.”

The result for investors is a yield which would not look out of place amongst those of Build-to-Rent (BTR) schemes with 100% market-rate rent.  The ability to achieve this lies in the entry level at which you buy into the scheme, a tight control of development costs (helped in Cheyne’s case by an in-house development team) and low tenant turnover thanks not only to the discounted rents but also to capped rental increases for all tenants, regardless of tenure type.

Following the success of Poplin, Cheyne is now taking its thesis to Leeds where it plans to deliver up to 50% affordable housing (of which 20% is mandated and 30% voluntary) across 302 homes in a best-in-class, multi-family scheme called Mabgate Yard. Being a larger scheme, Mabgate Yard will include extensive amenities, such as a cinema and gym. It will target an EPC rating of A and Home Quality Mark of 4.5, making it one of the most sustainable BTR developments in the UK.

[lindaboggers]

 Place-Based Impact Investing: defining additionality in affordable housing

Place-Based Impact Investing: defining additionality in affordable housing

Nicole von Westenholz, partner at Cheyne Capital, examines the standards an affordable housing investment needs to meet in order to deliver additionality.

It is generally accepted that ‘additionality’ – enabling positive outcomes that would not otherwise have occurred – lies at the heart of impact investing.  Within Place-Based Impact Investing (PBII), the creation of additional homes – and, in particular, additional affordable homes – may be cited as a measurement of additionality.  But are they always additional?

Any affordable housing that is mandated by planning consent under a Section 106 agreement is not additional as this will be delivered anyway.  By extension, buying existing portfolios of Section 106 housing is certainly not additional.  Note also that affordable housing mandated under planning regulations is seen by developers as a penalty on their returns and therefore usually built with cheaper materials and to a lower specification than homes made available at market rate.

We would argue that using Homes England grant funding to subsidise the delivery of housing by the private sector is also not additional as this grant funding has already been earmarked for housing creation and could be used elsewhere if not taken by private sector housing providers.

Tangentially, it should be borne in mind that, in most cases, Homes England grant funding can only be given to a Registered Provider (RP) – which has led to a flurry of new RPs being set up in order to be eligible to receive it.  However, when the grant-funded properties come to be sold, they can only be sold to another RP.  Given the relatively small pool of other RPs who will be able to buy and the downside scenario risk of a ‘rush for the exit’ in unfavourable market conditions, the exit risk from grant-funded schemes needs to be considered carefully.

By contrast, consider a model where the private sector landlord makes a proportion of its homes available at meaningfully discounted rents on a voluntary basis and still makes a healthy return on its investment.  This is pure additionality and leaves government grant available for the creation of further affordable housing elsewhere, especially in places where it would otherwise be unviable.

One such example is Cheyne Impact Real Estate’s award-winning Poplin development in Manchester.

The scheme comprises 144 one-, two- and three-bed homes at the intersection of New Cross, New Islington and the vibrant Northern Quarter.  All of the homes are ‘tenure blind’, meaning that they are identical in specification and service levels.  However, 51 of the homes (35%, which is above the Local Plan target of 20%) are allocated to local key workers at significantly discounted rents whereby their rental payments account for no more than 30% of their net disposable income.  In some cases, these discounts exceed the 20% discount that would be achieved under capital ‘A’ Affordable housing.

Yet, all of these affordable homes are provided by Cheyne on a voluntary basis as there is no planning-stipulated provision for affordable housing within the scheme.

The result for residents is a diverse, cohesive and, above all, inclusive community in a development which is ranked third out of 63 places to live in Manchester on Homeviews with comments such as “You literally become a part of a community that cares for all, environmentally, socially when you become a resident.”

The result for investors is a yield which would not look out of place amongst those of Build-to-Rent (BTR) schemes with 100% market-rate rent.  The ability to achieve this lies in the entry level at which you buy into the scheme, a tight control of development costs (helped in Cheyne’s case by an in-house development team) and low tenant turnover thanks not only to the discounted rents but also to capped rental increases for all tenants, regardless of tenure type.

Following the success of Poplin, Cheyne is now taking its thesis to Leeds where it plans to deliver up to 50% affordable housing (of which 20% is mandated and 30% voluntary) across 302 homes in a best-in-class, multi-family scheme called Mabgate Yard. Being a larger scheme, Mabgate Yard will include extensive amenities, such as a cinema and gym. It will target an EPC rating of A and Home Quality Mark of 4.5, making it one of the most sustainable BTR developments in the UK.

[georgeschuylerfinance]

 Place-Based Impact Investing: defining additionality in affordable housing

Place-Based Impact Investing: defining additionality in affordable housing

Nicole von Westenholz, partner at Cheyne Capital, examines the standards an affordable housing investment needs to meet in order to deliver additionality.

It is generally accepted that ‘additionality’ – enabling positive outcomes that would not otherwise have occurred – lies at the heart of impact investing.  Within Place-Based Impact Investing (PBII), the creation of additional homes – and, in particular, additional affordable homes – may be cited as a measurement of additionality.  But are they always additional?

Any affordable housing that is mandated by planning consent under a Section 106 agreement is not additional as this will be delivered anyway.  By extension, buying existing portfolios of Section 106 housing is certainly not additional.  Note also that affordable housing mandated under planning regulations is seen by developers as a penalty on their returns and therefore usually built with cheaper materials and to a lower specification than homes made available at market rate.

We would argue that using Homes England grant funding to subsidise the delivery of housing by the private sector is also not additional as this grant funding has already been earmarked for housing creation and could be used elsewhere if not taken by private sector housing providers.

Tangentially, it should be borne in mind that, in most cases, Homes England grant funding can only be given to a Registered Provider (RP) – which has led to a flurry of new RPs being set up in order to be eligible to receive it.  However, when the grant-funded properties come to be sold, they can only be sold to another RP.  Given the relatively small pool of other RPs who will be able to buy and the downside scenario risk of a ‘rush for the exit’ in unfavourable market conditions, the exit risk from grant-funded schemes needs to be considered carefully.

By contrast, consider a model where the private sector landlord makes a proportion of its homes available at meaningfully discounted rents on a voluntary basis and still makes a healthy return on its investment.  This is pure additionality and leaves government grant available for the creation of further affordable housing elsewhere, especially in places where it would otherwise be unviable.

One such example is Cheyne Impact Real Estate’s award-winning Poplin development in Manchester.

The scheme comprises 144 one-, two- and three-bed homes at the intersection of New Cross, New Islington and the vibrant Northern Quarter.  All of the homes are ‘tenure blind’, meaning that they are identical in specification and service levels.  However, 51 of the homes (35%, which is above the Local Plan target of 20%) are allocated to local key workers at significantly discounted rents whereby their rental payments account for no more than 30% of their net disposable income.  In some cases, these discounts exceed the 20% discount that would be achieved under capital ‘A’ Affordable housing.

Yet, all of these affordable homes are provided by Cheyne on a voluntary basis as there is no planning-stipulated provision for affordable housing within the scheme.

The result for residents is a diverse, cohesive and, above all, inclusive community in a development which is ranked third out of 63 places to live in Manchester on Homeviews with comments such as “You literally become a part of a community that cares for all, environmentally, socially when you become a resident.”

The result for investors is a yield which would not look out of place amongst those of Build-to-Rent (BTR) schemes with 100% market-rate rent.  The ability to achieve this lies in the entry level at which you buy into the scheme, a tight control of development costs (helped in Cheyne’s case by an in-house development team) and low tenant turnover thanks not only to the discounted rents but also to capped rental increases for all tenants, regardless of tenure type.

Following the success of Poplin, Cheyne is now taking its thesis to Leeds where it plans to deliver up to 50% affordable housing (of which 20% is mandated and 30% voluntary) across 302 homes in a best-in-class, multi-family scheme called Mabgate Yard. Being a larger scheme, Mabgate Yard will include extensive amenities, such as a cinema and gym. It will target an EPC rating of A and Home Quality Mark of 4.5, making it one of the most sustainable BTR developments in the UK.

[saltygardenerlove]

 Place-Based Impact Investing: defining additionality in affordable housing

Place-Based Impact Investing: defining additionality in affordable housing

Nicole von Westenholz, partner at Cheyne Capital, examines the standards an affordable housing investment needs to meet in order to deliver additionality.

It is generally accepted that ‘additionality’ – enabling positive outcomes that would not otherwise have occurred – lies at the heart of impact investing.  Within Place-Based Impact Investing (PBII), the creation of additional homes – and, in particular, additional affordable homes – may be cited as a measurement of additionality.  But are they always additional?

Any affordable housing that is mandated by planning consent under a Section 106 agreement is not additional as this will be delivered anyway.  By extension, buying existing portfolios of Section 106 housing is certainly not additional.  Note also that affordable housing mandated under planning regulations is seen by developers as a penalty on their returns and therefore usually built with cheaper materials and to a lower specification than homes made available at market rate.

We would argue that using Homes England grant funding to subsidise the delivery of housing by the private sector is also not additional as this grant funding has already been earmarked for housing creation and could be used elsewhere if not taken by private sector housing providers.

Tangentially, it should be borne in mind that, in most cases, Homes England grant funding can only be given to a Registered Provider (RP) – which has led to a flurry of new RPs being set up in order to be eligible to receive it.  However, when the grant-funded properties come to be sold, they can only be sold to another RP.  Given the relatively small pool of other RPs who will be able to buy and the downside scenario risk of a ‘rush for the exit’ in unfavourable market conditions, the exit risk from grant-funded schemes needs to be considered carefully.

By contrast, consider a model where the private sector landlord makes a proportion of its homes available at meaningfully discounted rents on a voluntary basis and still makes a healthy return on its investment.  This is pure additionality and leaves government grant available for the creation of further affordable housing elsewhere, especially in places where it would otherwise be unviable.

One such example is Cheyne Impact Real Estate’s award-winning Poplin development in Manchester.

The scheme comprises 144 one-, two- and three-bed homes at the intersection of New Cross, New Islington and the vibrant Northern Quarter.  All of the homes are ‘tenure blind’, meaning that they are identical in specification and service levels.  However, 51 of the homes (35%, which is above the Local Plan target of 20%) are allocated to local key workers at significantly discounted rents whereby their rental payments account for no more than 30% of their net disposable income.  In some cases, these discounts exceed the 20% discount that would be achieved under capital ‘A’ Affordable housing.

Yet, all of these affordable homes are provided by Cheyne on a voluntary basis as there is no planning-stipulated provision for affordable housing within the scheme.

The result for residents is a diverse, cohesive and, above all, inclusive community in a development which is ranked third out of 63 places to live in Manchester on Homeviews with comments such as “You literally become a part of a community that cares for all, environmentally, socially when you become a resident.”

The result for investors is a yield which would not look out of place amongst those of Build-to-Rent (BTR) schemes with 100% market-rate rent.  The ability to achieve this lies in the entry level at which you buy into the scheme, a tight control of development costs (helped in Cheyne’s case by an in-house development team) and low tenant turnover thanks not only to the discounted rents but also to capped rental increases for all tenants, regardless of tenure type.

Following the success of Poplin, Cheyne is now taking its thesis to Leeds where it plans to deliver up to 50% affordable housing (of which 20% is mandated and 30% voluntary) across 302 homes in a best-in-class, multi-family scheme called Mabgate Yard. Being a larger scheme, Mabgate Yard will include extensive amenities, such as a cinema and gym. It will target an EPC rating of A and Home Quality Mark of 4.5, making it one of the most sustainable BTR developments in the UK.

[bertrhert]

 Place-Based Impact Investing: defining additionality in affordable housing

Place-Based Impact Investing: defining additionality in affordable housing

Nicole von Westenholz, partner at Cheyne Capital, examines the standards an affordable housing investment needs to meet in order to deliver additionality.

It is generally accepted that ‘additionality’ – enabling positive outcomes that would not otherwise have occurred – lies at the heart of impact investing.  Within Place-Based Impact Investing (PBII), the creation of additional homes – and, in particular, additional affordable homes – may be cited as a measurement of additionality.  But are they always additional?

Any affordable housing that is mandated by planning consent under a Section 106 agreement is not additional as this will be delivered anyway.  By extension, buying existing portfolios of Section 106 housing is certainly not additional.  Note also that affordable housing mandated under planning regulations is seen by developers as a penalty on their returns and therefore usually built with cheaper materials and to a lower specification than homes made available at market rate.

We would argue that using Homes England grant funding to subsidise the delivery of housing by the private sector is also not additional as this grant funding has already been earmarked for housing creation and could be used elsewhere if not taken by private sector housing providers.

Tangentially, it should be borne in mind that, in most cases, Homes England grant funding can only be given to a Registered Provider (RP) – which has led to a flurry of new RPs being set up in order to be eligible to receive it.  However, when the grant-funded properties come to be sold, they can only be sold to another RP.  Given the relatively small pool of other RPs who will be able to buy and the downside scenario risk of a ‘rush for the exit’ in unfavourable market conditions, the exit risk from grant-funded schemes needs to be considered carefully.

By contrast, consider a model where the private sector landlord makes a proportion of its homes available at meaningfully discounted rents on a voluntary basis and still makes a healthy return on its investment.  This is pure additionality and leaves government grant available for the creation of further affordable housing elsewhere, especially in places where it would otherwise be unviable.

One such example is Cheyne Impact Real Estate’s award-winning Poplin development in Manchester.

The scheme comprises 144 one-, two- and three-bed homes at the intersection of New Cross, New Islington and the vibrant Northern Quarter.  All of the homes are ‘tenure blind’, meaning that they are identical in specification and service levels.  However, 51 of the homes (35%, which is above the Local Plan target of 20%) are allocated to local key workers at significantly discounted rents whereby their rental payments account for no more than 30% of their net disposable income.  In some cases, these discounts exceed the 20% discount that would be achieved under capital ‘A’ Affordable housing.

Yet, all of these affordable homes are provided by Cheyne on a voluntary basis as there is no planning-stipulated provision for affordable housing within the scheme.

The result for residents is a diverse, cohesive and, above all, inclusive community in a development which is ranked third out of 63 places to live in Manchester on Homeviews with comments such as “You literally become a part of a community that cares for all, environmentally, socially when you become a resident.”

The result for investors is a yield which would not look out of place amongst those of Build-to-Rent (BTR) schemes with 100% market-rate rent.  The ability to achieve this lies in the entry level at which you buy into the scheme, a tight control of development costs (helped in Cheyne’s case by an in-house development team) and low tenant turnover thanks not only to the discounted rents but also to capped rental increases for all tenants, regardless of tenure type.

Following the success of Poplin, Cheyne is now taking its thesis to Leeds where it plans to deliver up to 50% affordable housing (of which 20% is mandated and 30% voluntary) across 302 homes in a best-in-class, multi-family scheme called Mabgate Yard. Being a larger scheme, Mabgate Yard will include extensive amenities, such as a cinema and gym. It will target an EPC rating of A and Home Quality Mark of 4.5, making it one of the most sustainable BTR developments in the UK.