Published 13th October, 2025
More landlords than ever are holding property through limited companies in 2025. This shift is driven partly by the impact of Section 24 restrictions on mortgage interest relief, and partly by longer-term planning for succession and refinancing flexibility. While limited company borrowing is now mainstream, the way lenders assess applications differs in several important ways compared with personal names. Understanding these differences can help you avoid surprises and choose the right structure for your portfolio.
Although tax is often mentioned, there are multiple commercial reasons why landlords may prefer a company structure:
That said, company borrowing is not automatically better for everyone. Costs and criteria differ, so the decision must be commercial, not just tax-driven.
Most limited company buy-to-let mortgages are available only to Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs), which are companies set up solely to hold and let property. Lenders typically require:
Trading companies that engage in other activities are often excluded, although some specialist lenders will consider them.
In 2025, the product range for limited company BTL is broader than ever. Key differences compared with personal borrowing include:
Despite higher costs, many landlords accept these trade-offs because the overall structure suits their long-term plans.
A major advantage of limited company borrowing is the lower stress test hurdle. While personal borrowing is often tested at 145% of interest at a stressed rate, companies are typically tested at 125%. This can make a material difference to how much you can borrow.
Example:
For marginal cases, the limited company route may be the only way the deal stacks up.
Before switching to a company structure, landlords should be aware of the added responsibilities and risks:
Scenario: A landlord with three properties in personal names wanted to expand further but could not pass affordability on two refinances due to the 145% stress test.
Solution: They incorporated into an SPV and refinanced using lenders who applied a 125% coverage ratio. Although the rates were 0.5% higher, the structure allowed sufficient borrowing to release equity and buy two further properties.
Outcome: Portfolio value and rental income grew significantly, outweighing the slightly higher finance costs.
Limited company buy-to-let mortgages are no longer niche. They are a mainstream option with their own rules, advantages and drawbacks. By understanding how lenders assess applications and what makes them attractive, you can decide if this structure supports your wider portfolio goals in 2025 and beyond.
Our sponsor works daily with landlords using limited company structures. They can review your plans, match you with lenders comfortable with SPVs, and ensure your application highlights both your company and personal strengths.
Dubai Silicon Oasis
Building A1 Dubai
United Arab Emirates
© 2024 VALUE INVEST ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
© 2024 VALUE INVEST
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED