Housing Benefit: Fill & Download for Free

I was working with an investment group to buy a 4-building portfolio in Manhattan. That's what they came to the table with. They were foreign. So, they didn't understand that it was full of housing assistance tenants.The average rent was something like $1,100/month.And that’s in Manhattan. Where rents on a decent 1-bedroom start around $3,000/month. On the lower-ish end. If you can call the premises “decent” (it's reeeeeeal hit or miss).By law, the absolute maximum you could charge on one of these units was something like $1,300/month. I think it was actually $1,187/month. It’s always some weird number.The tenant turn-over rate was very high, and the vacancy rate was something like 40%. To a landlord, that means a lower utilization rate. The time friction of tenant changes means lost money. The landlord simply could not keep tenants in the property… for reasons.And the property taxes? Well, like you’d expect. Something above $17,000. Per month.The buyers didn't understand the owner/seller was desperately trying to sell because his buildings were costing him money. He needed to update and repair the buildings. But the buildings didn’t generate enough in rents to do it.We crunched all the numbers and the current owner would have made more money if all the buildings burned down and he just never rebuilt, sold the land, and walked away. (If he were even allowed not to rebuild…)Suffice it to say, the set up was a very poor investment. (Could it have been made profitable? Of course… different story.) They were better off putting their money elsewhere. So, they did.So why?The “full rent” of government benefits is almost always significantly lower than market rent.The tenants are often much more difficult to deal with. Related to the above but separately: they are often much more litigious.As a general rule, any relationship is more difficult the more people you put into it. To be eligible to accept housing benefits, you have to perpetually subject yourself to petty, constantly changing rules. Which can include making extremely expensive property upgrades to satisfy some code provision that has nothing to do with property habitability or safety, but some bureaucrat's opinion about what a property should have. This is okay if it’s your full-time job. It’s not so great for someone who owns a few rental properties.Spending more time and more money to receive less money and more risk?That is generally unwise.

Do you want a bunch of combat-trained Da’esh militants wandering around the streets of Stockholm hungry and unemployed? Does that sound like a good idea to you?The Nordic countries place a huge emphasis on rehabilitation in their penal system. It works. Their crime rates are low and their recidivism rates are low, because they teach people how to be productive members of society, breaking the revolving-door cycle of crime and punishment that we have in the USA.

No, it is not enough to live in London.As a non-EEA national probably with a temporary work permit, you won’t be entitled to various in-work benefits from the state, including tax credits, housing benefit and child benefit[1][1][1][1] .As a result, your income would be £1,837 a month[2][2][2][2] , compared to a permanent resident family on the same pay who would take home about £2,500, with the difference being primarily Housing Benefit and Child Benefit.The amount you would receive is, bluntly, not enough to live in London. I suggest you find a plausible rental price for somewhere you could consider living on a website such as Rightmove.co.uk , and then put the information into the Minimum Income Calculator provided by the a poverty charity in the UK.Footnotes[1] Benefits for non-UK nationals[1] Benefits for non-UK nationals[1] Benefits for non-UK nationals[1] Benefits for non-UK nationals[2] Income tax calculator: Find out your take-home pay[2] Income tax calculator: Find out your take-home pay[2] Income tax calculator: Find out your take-home pay[2] Income tax calculator: Find out your take-home pay