17th June 2026
If you listen to UK politicians, you’d think the housing crisis is a natural disaster: unfortunate, inevitable, and largely beyond policy control. But look abroad and a different picture appears.
Plenty of countries face the same pressures—ageing populations, urban demand, investor interest, tourism—but have chosen very different rules about who can own what, how many homes they can sit on, and how much profit can be extracted from housing.
The UK is unusual not because it has a housing problem, but because it has so few brakes on treating homes as financial assets.
Here’s a quick tour of how other countries do it—and what that says about our own choices.
Germany: Renting as a normal, stable life
Key features:
Strong tenant protections (long leases, hard to evict without cause)
Regulated rent increases in many cities
Cultural norm of long‑term renting rather than “must own”
Less tax advantage for owner‑occupation than in the UK
Result:
House prices have historically been more stable (though they’ve risen recently).
Renting is not seen as failure.
Speculation is harder because tenants have rights and rent hikes are limited.
Lesson for the UK:
If you want less speculative pressure, you need serious tenant protections and limits on rent inflation, not just slogans about “generation rent”.
Switzerland: Ownership is expensive, renting is secure
Key features:
Low home‑ownership rate by design
Strict mortgage rules (high deposits, affordability tests)
Strong tenant rights and long‑term leases
Wealth tax that includes the value of property
Result:
Fewer people own, but those who do are financially solid.
Renting is stable and socially normal.
Property is less attractive as a speculative play.
Lesson for the UK:
If you make ownership harder for speculative buyers and safer for renters, you reduce the pressure to treat housing as a get‑rich‑quick scheme.
Norway: Taxing property and spreading government jobs
Key features:
Wealth tax on property (with exemptions/discounts for primary homes)
Higher tax on second homes and investment property
Active relocation of government jobs to rural regions
Strong municipal role in planning and housing
Result:
Second homes and investment properties are taxed more heavily.
Rural areas get anchor employment, not just “community funds”.
Housing is still expensive in Oslo, but the system recognises regional balance as a policy goal.
Lesson for the UK:
If you want people to live in rural areas, you don’t just build houses—you move jobs and tax speculative ownership differently.
New Zealand: Cracking down on overseas buyers and speculation
Key features:
Ban on most foreign buyers of existing homes
Tight rules on short‑term lets in some areas
“Bright‑line” test: tax on capital gains if you sell within a set period
Active debate on limiting investor ownership
Result:
Some cooling of speculative demand.
Still expensive, but the political system at least acknowledges housing as a social issue, not just an asset class.
Lesson for the UK:
You can choose to say: “Homes are for people who live here first, investors second.” The UK has largely chosen the opposite.
Canada (selected cities): Fighting back against empty homes
Key features (city‑level):
Vacancy taxes on empty homes (e.g., Vancouver)
Extra taxes on foreign buyers in some provinces
Short‑term let restrictions in pressured markets
Result:
Some empty homes brought back into use.
Revenue raised for housing programmes.
Clear signal that “buy and leave empty” is not acceptable.
Lesson for the UK:
If you don’t want homes sitting empty while people struggle to find somewhere to live, you can tax vacancy and restrict speculative ownership. It’s a choice.
The UK: Light‑touch regulation, heavy speculation
By comparison, the UK has:
Weak tenant protections (short tenancies, easy evictions)
No serious vacancy tax in most areas
Limited restrictions on second homes and holiday lets
Favourable tax treatment for property wealth over work
No meaningful limits on corporate or multiple ownership
Result:
Homes are attractive financial assets.
Multiple ownership is common.
Corporate landlords and investors can scale up easily.
Prices detach from local incomes.
Affordability becomes an illusion for many.
This isn’t an accident. It’s a policy environment.
What could the UK copy—if it wanted to?
From this quick comparison, a menu of options appears:
From Germany:
Stronger tenant rights
Limits on rent increases
From Switzerland:
Tougher mortgage rules for investors
Treating property as part of taxable wealth
From Norway:
Higher taxes on second homes
Relocating government jobs to rural areas
From New Zealand:
Restrictions on non‑resident and speculative buyers
Capital‑gains style rules on quick flips
From Canada:
Vacancy taxes on empty homes
Tight rules on short‑term lets in pressured markets
None of these are radical internationally.
They only look radical from inside a UK system that has spent 30 years telling people that ever‑rising house prices are a sign of success.
The blunt conclusion
Other countries treat housing as:
infrastructure
a social good
a basic foundation for community life
The UK increasingly treats it as:
an investment product
a pension substitute
a tax‑advantaged wealth store
So when we say “there’s a housing crisis”, what we really mean is:
We chose a model where homes are financial assets first and places to live second—and now we’re shocked that people can’t afford them.
Looking abroad doesn’t give us a ready‑made fix.
But it does remove the excuse that “nothing can be done”.
Plenty can be done.
Other countries are already doing it.
The question is not what’s possible.
It’s what the UK is willing to choose.
Are We Starting to Do the Right Things? A Reality Check
The UK has introduced two important changes:
new tenants’ rights
higher council tax on second homes
These are meaningful — but they are nowhere near the scale of reforms seen in other countries.
Let’s break it down.
Stronger Tenant Rights: A Step Forward, But Still Weak by International Standards
The UK’s new tenant protections include:
ending “no‑fault” evictions (Section 21)
longer notice periods
stronger rules on rent increases
better enforcement against rogue landlords
These changes matter. They give renters more stability and reduce the power imbalance between landlords and tenants.
But compared to Germany, Switzerland, or the Netherlands, the UK is still far behind:
UK tenancies remain short
rent controls are limited
eviction protections are weaker
corporate landlords face few restrictions
So yes — progress.
But not transformation.
Higher Council Tax on Second Homes: Useful, But Not a Game‑Changer
Councils can now charge:
100% premium on second homes
up to 300% on long‑term empty homes
This is a good start. It discourages:
speculative ownership
holiday‑let hoarding
homes sitting empty in rural areas
But again, compared to Norway, New Zealand, or Canada, the UK’s approach is mild:
no national vacancy tax
no restrictions on buying multiple homes
no limits on corporate ownership
no capital‑gains penalties for flipping
no priority for local buyers in rural areas
So yes — we’re moving in the right direction.
But we’re still far behind.
What the UK Still Isn’t Doing (and Other Countries Already Do)
Here’s where the gap becomes obvious:
Germany: strict rent controls, long leases
Switzerland: high deposits, wealth tax on property
Norway: heavy tax on second homes, relocation of government jobs
New Zealand: ban on most foreign buyers
Canada: vacancy taxes, limits on short‑term lets
The UK still allows:
unlimited second‑home ownership
unlimited corporate ownership
unlimited holiday‑let conversion
weak regulation of private landlords
property treated as a tax‑advantaged investment
So while the UK is starting to act, it hasn’t yet tackled the root causes of unaffordability.
Why These UK Reforms Won’t Fix the Housing Crisis Alone
Because the crisis isn’t caused by one thing. It’s caused by:
too few homes
too many investors
ageing population locking up supply
corporate landlords scaling up
weak tenant protections
tax incentives that reward speculation
lack of government job relocation to rural areas
planning systems that favour developers over communities
New tenant rights and higher council tax on second homes help — but they don’t change the underlying structure.
The Honest Conclusion
Yes — the UK is finally starting to do some of the things other countries have done for years.
But these are baby steps, not a new direction.
If the UK wants to match international best practice, it would need to consider:
vacancy taxes
limits on second homes in rural areas
restrictions on corporate ownership
priority for local buyers
relocating government jobs to rural regions
stronger rent controls
Until then, affordability will remain an illusion for many.