🎯 Objective
To restore fairness, accountability, and functional land use in the UK planning system by ensuring land is developed responsibly, transparently, and in alignment with public need — not held speculatively or manipulated for private timing advantages.
⏱️ Policy P1 – Time-Bound Delivery Enforcement (with Financial Consequences)
What it does:
Mandates developers to begin and complete construction within defined timeframes post-permission. Non-compliance triggers:
- Financial penalties
- Potential revocation of permission
Why it’s needed:
To end speculative land banking and ensure planning approvals translate into housing supply.
International Analogy:
In Germany, planning approvals often expire if unused — forcing delivery or release.
🌍 Policy P2 – Progressive Land Tax or “Use-It-Or-Lose-It” Measures
What it does:
Applies escalating annual taxes to undeveloped land with planning permission.
Why it’s needed:
To disincentivise land hoarding and unlock land supply.
International Analogy:
France imposes a rising tax on idle, zoned land to push development forward.
📉 Policy P3 – Deliverability Penalty Points for Developers
What it does:
Implements a national points system where developers accumulate reputation penalties for:
- Delivery failure
- Repeated renegotiations
- Speculative withholding
Points affect access to future planning approvals and land release opportunities.
Why it’s needed:
To reward track records — not merely capacity — and deprioritise habitual manipulators.
International Analogy:
New South Wales (Australia) uses a performance-based weighting system for future bids.
🧾 Policy P4 – Mandatory Transparency: Land Ownership and Control Monitoring
What it does:
Requires developers to disclose:
- Full beneficial land ownership
- Offshore structures and related parties
- Changes in control post-permission
Why it’s needed:
To expose land speculation via shells and trusts, and stop ownership opacity being used to evade delivery duties.
International Analogy:
The UK’s Register of Overseas Entities (ROE) addresses similar opacity in real estate.
🏘️ Policy P5 – Front-Loading Affordable Housing & Infrastructure
What it does:
Mandates that a significant share of affordable housing and essential infrastructure be delivered in the first phases of large developments.
Why it’s needed:
To prevent deferral tactics and ensure communities see real benefit early.
International Analogy:
The Netherlands requires upfront provision of infrastructure and social housing in masterplan agreements.
🧮 Policy P6 – Raised Affordable Housing Requirement on Speculative or Tilted-Balance Sites
What it does:
Increases affordable housing quotas where applications are:
- Approved under reduced policy standards (e.g. due to 5YHLS shortfall)
- Made outside plan allocations or on appeal
Why it’s needed:
To ensure speculative gain is matched by elevated social return.
International Analogy:
Many U.S. cities use inclusionary zoning escalators in high-opportunity or speculative locations.
🏚️ Policy P7 – “Stay or Pay”: Primary Occupation Requirement for New Residential Properties
What it does:
Requires new homes to be occupied as primary residences within 12 months of legal completion. Failure to do so triggers a progressive annual vacancy tax. Applies to individuals and legal entities (e.g. developers, trusts, holding companies).
🔐 Anti-Circumvention Clauses:
- Rolling Occupancy Clock: Clock continues through ownership transfers — resale or shell transfers do not reset it.
- Portfolio Holding Limits: Entities may not retain >2 unoccupied units/phase beyond 12 months without triggering tax.
- Strict Exemptions: Only registered social landlords, Homes England-accredited affordable schemes, or key worker leasing models are exempt.
📊 Reporting Obligation: Vacancy-to-Delivery Ratio (VDR)
Developers must publish quarterly:
Vacancy-to-Delivery Ratio (VDR):
VDR is used to:
- Influence S106 negotiations
- Inform developer penalty scoring (P3)
- Guide permission eligibility
💸 Vacancy Tax Schedule:
| Vacancy Duration | Annual Tax (% of property value) |
|---|---|
| Year 1 (grace) | 0% |
| Year 2 | 2% |
| Year 3 | 4% |
| Year 4+ | 5% |
- Assessed on Land Registry sale price or banded council valuation (whichever is higher)
- Indexed annually to inflation or price indices
🧾 Enforcement & Public Transparency:
- LPAs must maintain a “Homes In Use” register
- Tax revenue ring-fenced for affordable housing and local infrastructure
- Randomised audits and occupancy declarations annually
⚖️ Strict Auditable Exemptions:
- Probate/delay due to owner death
- Hospitalisation or institutional care
- Active key worker tenancy
- Armed service deployment
International Analogies:
- Vancouver’s Empty Homes Tax: 3% vacancy tax → >$115M raised for housing funds
- Singapore’s ABSD: Up to 30% surcharge on unoccupied second properties
- Banking Analogy: Similar to capital charges on idle or underperforming assets
📘 Summary
The Planning Market Integrity Portfolio (PMI) dismantles the speculative logic embedded in the UK’s planning system. It ensures land is not only approved for use, but used for homes — with delivery, transparency, and occupancy enforced. PMI transforms speculative permissions into enforceable promises, and realigns private strategy with public need.
