Minister says tax measures may be needed to keep landlords from exiting the rental market,

[Lockup]

Adding an owner-occupier reduces the number of people looking to rent and so the net effect is zero on the overall housing market.

open market rented properties (mom and pop) have higher occupancy. I saw a stat a few years ago on this so the stupid argument that the house doesnt dissappear and someone lives in it - is ridiculous.

Every house I ever rented was smaller that every house I owned. My friend rents his house by the room - if he sells there will be a percentage displacement. It might be 3 ppl in the house versus 5 now but multiply that over the whole market........

 

[Páid]

I know that there are a lot of issues around housing but this thread is about the tax measures that may be needed in order to keep landlords from exiting the rental market.

 

[T McGibney]

I know that there are a lot of issues around housing but this thread is about the tax measures that may be needed in order to keep landlords from exiting the rental market.

Yes, but claims were made that landlords from exiting the market made no difference to it. I think it's useful that they have since been debunked.

 

[Dermot]

An acquaintance of mine who died in the last 15 months owned a large house in a desirable part of Dublin which was divided into 6 Apartments/ bedsits and the family are selling it. It will most likely will be converted back into a luxury one-family unit due to its location. The two family members who are inheriting could not be bothered due to the tax regime together with the hassle of renting. That is their take on the situation and the advice that they have been given.

 

[Paul O Mahoney]

I know that there are a lot of issues around housing but this thread is about the tax measures that may be needed in order to keep landlords from exiting the rental market.

But this is really not the primary issue and if the Government decides to focus on tax alone it simply won't make a difference to the exodus.

The Government are bending and essentially implementing SF proposals as when a GE is held they'll argue that their housing policies are the same or better than eachother.

No solution is going to be found if only one aspect of the problem is addressed.

This is a highly complex issue and all aspects even the most obscure need to be understood and then hopefully a proper policy on all aspects will be created and perhaps solutions found.

 

[NoRegretsCoyote]

open market rented properties (mom and pop) have higher occupancy.

I highly doubt this.

I lived in a single-owner development years ago and voids were very rare. It was very actively managed to maximise cash flow.

 

[Lockup]

I highly doubt this.

I lived in a single-owner development years ago and voids were very rare. It was very actively managed to maximise cash flow.

there was some stats here or on boards a few years ago i.e. percentage of ppl displaced when properties move from rented to Owner occupied. It makes sense really. Wish I could find the report but to me it certainly mirrored my life/experience. I would have rented smaller properties then what I owned.

 

[Paul O Mahoney]

If (profit > hassle) then there will be more landlords trying to make all kinds of properties available to rent.

Profit isn't the issue its cashflow, capital/mortgage payments aren't tax deductible, LPT is not tax deductible, neither was its predecessor, do some upgrades in a property and its capital expenditure and can't be claimed in the year of expenditure, written off over 8 years, other expenses that are incurred and paid out immediately and then having to wait 12 months or longer to write against tax, the preliminary tax of 90% paid foward, and I have yet to get it right and I doubt many do.

Then tax in most cases at marginal rate.

That's just tax add in the other non financial issues it's a mess.

Profit is taxable income but I'll guarantee that those paying mortgage capital are probably cash negative every year.And are hoping that market prices will get them their entire investment back.

 

[Sconeandjam]

Don’t forget USC is now charged and that is a hard one to take. We have a Hap tenant and after all the taxes charges the council are getting a 2 bed for less than 360.
In all the years we have had to top up the mortgage pay for charges that are not allowable, property tax, nppr charges, and we kept the rents reasonable for people to afford. Dropping rents in the recession due to the housing minister dropping all rental allowance. We were one of the landlords that looked after our tenants.
We got stung with rpz and rental limits. The rent allowance limits were also low. We have one house we have given notice and the current rent is 950 and the going rate is now 1600.
The people wanted the big corporate landlords and not the one property or 2 property landlords. We will be selling below what we paid for it as it was in the Celtic tiger times.
The ones that benefited from our purchase are the government and the banks. We would have kept the house and tenant if there was so much pressure from certain political parties and the government. The threat of not getting the tenant out or having to selling with a sitting tenant and devaluing the property even more has made the decision for us.

 

[Clamball]

With the increase in property prices in general, a risk that the government may prevent a landlord from removing a sitting tenant if they wish to sell, and many small 1/2 property landlords unable to make a profit on rental income due to taxes and charges many landlords are choosing to sell now.
This puts increased pressure on the rental system, more demand, less stock. And the population keeps growing so even more demand. Much more housing stock is needed. And housing stock that is suitable for people to live in as tenants for their lifetime. So basic space, storage, facilities, safety etc. not the co-living spaces.
Tenants would like security of tenure as is common in many other countries, they would also like rental stock at various price points, to suit their life stage, students, young professionals, young families etc. and thirdly they need some protection against market changes. Most can just about afford 50% of their income on rent.

Airbnb was a market change, the government selling off much of its housing stock in the 70&80s and having many of their current social welfare house under utilised by not moving people on as their life circumstances change.
Ireland does not have a mature rental market so many young people choose to buy when they can afford to and remove more stock from the rental market.
Both tenants and landlords have rights and responsibilities. There are a complexity of issues in terms of housing. And this is why there is so much government tinkering.

All individual landlords can do is react to the current situation and it is a good time to sell. Trying to change the government policies to encourage more landlords to stay renting is probably fruitless as there is too much pushback from people looking for housing.

I am sure SF will move to the mantra that housing is a basic human right and that this should be given to people free by the government. Very few people are born homeless, but many do not remain in the housing they lived in from birth (for a multitude of reasons) even if they cannot afford to live in a new housing unit and suddenly this is the governments fault. Maybe in 10 years we will have enough housing units to give people choices and options but not currently.

 

[Paul O Mahoney]

With the increase in property prices in general, a risk that the government may prevent a landlord from removing a sitting tenant if they wish to sell, and many small 1/2 property landlords unable to make a profit on rental income due to taxes and charges many landlords are choosing to sell now.
This puts increased pressure on the rental system, more demand, less stock. And the population keeps growing so even more demand. Much more housing stock is needed. And housing stock that is suitable for people to live in as tenants for their lifetime. So basic space, storage, facilities, safety etc. not the co-living spaces.
Tenants would like security of tenure as is common in many other countries, they would also like rental stock at various price points, to suit their life stage, students, young professionals, young families etc. and thirdly they need some protection against market changes. Most can just about afford 50% of their income on rent.

Airbnb was a market change, the government selling off much of its housing stock in the 70&80s and having many of their current social welfare house under utilised by not moving people on as their life circumstances change.
Ireland does not have a mature rental market so many young people choose to buy when they can afford to and remove more stock from the rental market.
Both tenants and landlords have rights and responsibilities. There are a complexity of issues in terms of housing. And this is why there is so much government tinkering.

All individual landlords can do is react to the current situation and it is a good time to sell. Trying to change the government policies to encourage more landlords to stay renting is probably fruitless as there is too much pushback from people looking for housing.

I am sure SF will move to the mantra that housing is a basic human right and that this should be given to people free by the government. Very few people are born homeless, but many do not remain in the housing they lived in from birth (for a multitude of reasons) even if they cannot afford to live in a new housing unit and suddenly this is the governments fault. Maybe in 10 years we will have enough housing units to give people choices and options but not currently.

Your last sentence has been the wish for over 40years , in 2006 we built just short of 96000 units this year it will 25% of that.

There is no Irish panacea for this , Irish panacea is to build more and more and more..., the entire property rights in the constitution needs addressing and then we would have a surplus of property to house Irelands citizens.

 

[T McGibney]

the entire property rights in the constitution needs addressing and then we would have a surplus of property to house Irelands citizens.

So you'd weaken property ownership rights while expecting people to invest more in property ownership. I don't think you've thought that one fully through.

 

[Paul O Mahoney]

So you'd weaken property ownership rights while expecting people to invest more in property ownership. I don't think you've thought that one fully through.

No I was referring to the concept of ownership after death, we all know that there are thousands of properties up and down the country that are lying idle waiting for all the legal stuff to be carried out.
Surely this process needs speeding up and if the property isn't used within a certain period it should be sold.

 

[T McGibney]

No I was referring to the concept of ownership after death, we all know that there are thousands of properties up and down the country that are lying idle waiting for all the legal stuff to be carried out.
Surely this process needs speeding up and if the property isn't used within a certain period it should be sold.

Wow, a lot to unpack here.

we all know that there are thousands of properties up and down the country that are lying idle waiting for all the legal stuff to be carried out.

Do we?

Surely this process needs speeding up

How exactly do you propose that this be done?

and if the property isn't used within a certain period...

How long? Bear in mind that some people are sufficiently unfortunate to spend decades in nursing homes or similar care facilities.

...it should be sold.

to benefit whom exactly?

 

[Paul O Mahoney]

A simple Google search will show that the figure of unoccupied houses to be between 112,000 and 181,000 the later per 2016 census the first from geo data.

I don't have the skill base to untangle the myriad of issues but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be done.

Edit the latest figures are just over 90k from January 2022

 

[T McGibney]

A simple Google search will show that the figure of unoccupied houses to be between 112,000 and 181,000 the later per 2016 census the first from geo data.

I don't have the skill base to untangle the myriad of issues but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be done.

It's a massive (and untrue) assumption though that they're all waiting for legal work to be done. In many cases, the houses are unoccupied because they have reached the end of their useful life. In other cases, the owners either simply don't have the resources to renovate them or recognise that doing so would not be worth the cost and effort.

 

[Paul O Mahoney]

It's a massive (and untrue) assumption though that they're all waiting for legal work to be done. In many cases, the houses are unoccupied because they have reached the end of their useful life. In other cases, the owners either simply don't have the resources to renovate them or recognise that doing so would not be worth the cost and effort.

That maybe the case but it is still a fact that there are these housing units unoccupied even if 50% of them were habitable with some renovation it would solve certain issues that exist in our economy right now.

Rents that are consuming over 50% of wages isn't good for anyone.

Just to clear I'm not advocating the compulsory buying of these properties or indeed buying at below market prices but they are a resource that is in many cases rotting away and there could be incentives brought in to assist in renovations.

We certainly aren't going to build our way out of the situation and even if we were able to it would take years, meanwhile prices for rents and buying continue to increase. Today saw prices now being almost at Feb 2007 peak....with regional variations.

There is no silver bullet to this therefore the entire issue and all its facets and nuances need to be examined and a proper equitable solution found.

 

[dereko1969]

Perhaps not the best county to use as an example given the number of long standing holiday lets but someone pointed out on twitter that there were only 31 properties in Kerry to rent on DAFT whilst there were 1,959 available on Airbnb.

 

[T McGibney]

I know where you're coming from but think it's still worth noting:

even if 50% of them were habitable with some renovation it would solve certain issues that exist in our economy right now.

There's no way that anything near 50% are easily reinhabitable. It appears a bigger problem than it is because the planning system incentivises their retention even in a derelict state. It's much easier to get planning for a new build if there is an existing building on the site.

Rents that are consuming over 50% of wages isn't good for anyone.

Agreed.

Just to clear I'm not advocating the compulsory buying of these properties or indeed buying at below market prices

You kinda did though.

but they are a resource that is in many cases rotting away and there could be incentives brought in to assist in renovations.

Agreed. A very generous Section 23-type tax relief such as applied in the Rural Renewal Scheme area during the Celtic Tiger era would do the trick, but there seems to be little appetite for this.

We certainly aren't going to build our way out of the situation

Sooner or later we are going to have to build our way out of this.

 

[T McGibney]

Perhaps not the best county to use as an example given the number of long standing holiday lets but someone pointed out on twitter that there were only 31 properties in Kerry to rent on DAFT whilst there were 1,959 available on Airbnb.

How many of the 1,959 were private rooms in people's homes?

In my experience, many Kerry B&Bs are listed on Airbnb.