Could these private landlords create a company to receive the rental income and pay 12.5% corporation tax it? Or is this too onerous a solution? Would the mortgage have to be in the company's name?
I ran a calculation to see what the cost is to a private individual of providing a rental house in Ireland and the results were eye opening, and shocking. No wonder landlords are leaving the market and rents are spiralling.
.... SNIP ....
Conclusion - one of the main reasons, if not the main reason, why the rental market is in such a dire state is the high level of taxes that private landlords are required to pay and the Govt tax take generally from house transactions and rentals.
Once again on TV3 the 'Tonight' show with Charlie Bird served to demonise the landlord. One guest (Peter McVerry?) compared landlords of 2016 to those during the famine. I would have expected more insight from someone who has been championing the homeless cause for many years.I find it strange that media commentators rarely draw the link between the rapacious level of taxation on rental income and the current rental/homelessness crisis. It really should be obvious when you work through the figures.
Not really a win/win situation. Tenants have the option of an assignment or (rarely) sub-letting the property. Thus, a tenant may get out of a lease agreement without much difficulty whereas the landlord does not have that (or any) option. The landlord's only way out of a lease agreement is if the tenant is in breach of his obligations.Absolutely - long leases should be a "win/win" for both landlord and tenant for exactly those reasons.
Karl Deeter made these exact points on his blog recently -
[broken link removed]
I've no doubt that most residential landlords would be thrilled if tenants agreed to multi-year tenancies with regular rent-reviews, etc. However, there is no point offering a product or service if your customers don't have any appetite for that product or service.
It's a shame really.
As far as my memory recollects, if a landlord refuses consent then the tenant may walk away with, I think, 1 month's notice and not that set out according to how long the tenant has lived there.Leases invariably prohibit a tenant from assigning or sub-letting a property without landlord consent.
Also, leases invariably allow both parties to terminate on notice without any breach occurring.
Can somebody explain where the 70% tax rate figure comes from?
Yes, a tenant can, by notice, terminate a fixed-term tenancy if the landlord refuses consent to a subletting. The notice period depends on the duration of the tenancy.As far as my memory recollects, if a landlord refuses consent then the tenant may walk away with, I think, 1 month's notice and not that set out according to how long the tenant has lived there.
The big disadvantage for the licensee/lodger is that if the landlord refuses to return the deposit then the licensee's only option is to go to the small claims court (it may be the district court?) to try to retrieve same. This can be very time consuming and if not the SMC, then more expenses which may be a discouragement to do so.I think if I was a tenant, I’d look to avail of the “rent a room” scheme to make things more manageable.
The current environment is terrible though; bad for tenants and bad for landlords, which is hard to believe.
We have failed our citizens, particularly the younger ones, but landlords are not to blame; they and private capital generally can be part of the solution though.