Template Lobbying Letter: Polluter Pays Building Safety Levy

Introduction

The Building Safety Levy (BLS) will come into effect from the Autumn of 2026 and its remit will target almost all developers, raising serious concerns about its impact on SMEs. It will levy (tax) on average between 0.5% and 1% of a homes sale price, based on the m2 floorspace of a home.

The levy will be payable before cashflow has been realised and no other industries are in scope.

Developments under 10 homes (minor sized sites) and affordable housing will be excluded, alongside some communal spacers and commercial buildings.

The NFB has produced a letter template you can use to write to your local MP asking them to support the ‘polluter pays’ principle (outlined below) and oppose the unfair and perverse BSL proposal,

1. Polluter pays, with ‘orphaned buildings’ funded through the levy.
2. Extend RPDT to all accountable industries highlighted in the Grenfell report.
3. No BSL is introduced until all accountable Option 2. parties are legislated for. All RPDT industries will then be included in the BSL.
   A 10% BSL surcharge (based on the levy amount paid) will be introduced for those identified in Option 1 as ‘polluters’

Instructions

There are two ways you can do this.

You can contact your local MP through the WriteToThem website. This way does require you to write the letter in your own words, drawing on your own beliefs and experiences, however you are able to use our policy call to actions from the below letter.

1. Go to the WriteToThem website here: https://www.writetothem.com/ 
2. Enter your postcode
3. Choose your local representative (Member of Parliament)
4. Write your letter
5. Fill out your details and click ‘review and send’

Alternatively you can send an exact copy of the below letter. To do this you will need to use your own email.

1. Find your local MP and their contact details here: https://members.parliament.uk/FindYourMP 
2. Copy and paste the entire letter into an email
3. Send from your own email address

Letter Text

Dear

As representatives of the construction industry and your constituent, we are appalled that the Government is expected to announce another blanket levy on all developers, who have never delivered unsafe buildings and have only ever delivered housing.

It is correct that the Government ensures buildings are remediated; however, doing so on the backs of developers and housebuilders that have never built a high rise, and future housebuilding companies who are yet to exist is immoral, fails the Government’s growth test, directly reduces investment in local communities and ignores how the taxpayer will be impacted.

The Residential Property Developers Tax (RPDT) – which since April 2021 has applied a 4% levy on development company profits above £25m – is already one blanket tax on housebuilders but does not target any other industries that the Grenfell Report cites as accountable, such as material manufacturers, architects, independent Building Control and Tenant Management Organisations, As we understand it, neither will the Building Safety Levy (BSL).

This is not right, fair or proper and we therefore urge you to tell the Government to rethink their approach and champion the below accountability hierarchy as an alternative.

1. Polluter pays, with ‘orphaned buildings’ funded through the levy.
2. Extend RPDT to all accountable industries highlighted in the Grenfell report.
3. No BSL is introduced until all accountable Option 2. parties are legislated for. All RPDT industries will then be included in the BSL.
   A 10% BSL surcharge (based on the levy amount paid) will also be introduced for those identified in Option 1 as ‘polluters’

As taxpayers, we will foot the bill for the failure of others. This will reduce affordable housing numbers in your constituency, and our ability to grow or operate, employ people locally and invest in our communities.

As proposed, the BSL risks further decimating the housebuilding and construction industry as a whole; while putting another nail in coffin of the 1.5million new home promise.

We understand how emotive this topic is but shifting costs from one set of innocent parties (leaseholders) to another (ALL present and future developers), is not a fair, serious or proportionate solution.

Yours sincerely,