It could be easily calibrated to make it less of a burden on average. It also makes the tax treatment neutral with respect to the source of finance used - the tax system shouldn't encourage debt over equity.
Not if it's a flat rate.
It makes no sense, when there's a shortage of investment, to discourage new and predominantly leveraged investment.
Nonsense on both counts. (The 12.5% flat Corporation Tax has been an absolute bonanza for employment of accountants and accounts staff generally.)Finally it has the huge advantage of simplicity which means less work for accountants
"on average" - most tax changes have winners and losers
A tax rate of 25% on all cash received from your tenant is remarkably simple to calculate compared to the current system.
Yes, of course there's no way of calibrating it to ensure you won't have winners and losers.
The issue isn't doing the calculations in a relatively simple P&L account. Anyone with a half an hour and a calculator can do those.
I think the flat rate makes some sense. Though one of the issues right now is that there is no reward for socially beneficial behaviour like keeping rents low. An alternative could be a sliding scale that depends on the individual rent charged - so someone renting out a single property at 2k per month is charged a higher rate of tax than another landlord renting out 2x properties at 1k per month each.
I understand what you're trying to achieve, but it's too difficult. Wouldn't take into account location, finish or any number of other variables why one house is worth 1k and another is worth 2k, even if they're both 3 bed semi-d's.
Once the flat rate would be on profits less capital allowances and not on rents received/turnover I'd be all for it, and for the eligibility for pension contributions. I'd also add abolishing the ludicrous close company surcharge for "unearned" investment income that (ironically) only applies to mom & pop corporate landlords, not to the big guns.
The problem is that rental income is taxed as trading income when it is largely passive income.
With respect that's utter nonsense. A professional landlord who devotes time and energy to their rentals and who has strong skills in both negotiation and in screening timewasters and troublemakers will make far more money longterm than an amateur who lacks those skills and who doesn't bother working on it.
Any income stream including a secure job or pension is a form of wealth.
Simplicity has nothing to do with logic, fairness or efficacy. Killing every first-born would be a very simple way to quell a housing shortage but nobody sane would argue for it.
It is not. Rental Income is taxed as Unearned Income, and that is part of the problem.
Continuing legacy of 1970s socialism. In Ireland we never learn from past mistakes.
All property is a form of wealth. I'd tax all property (more specifically the site value of the property). In fact there's an argument for lower taxed on properties that are rented out since they provide a social good and the income generated from them is taxed anyway.
The minister should do a landlord sentiment and ask reason why landlords are leaving the market. Messages here show the many reasons and not because of increase in house prices. They should include landlords that have exited the market.