As my rent is very low and I have no mortgage, the 14K tax-free would be very positive for me in the short term.
So CGT relief for a period of time (5 years/8 years) whatever they deem necessary to encourage investors in the market (existing/new).
Tax Treatment of Landlords has to be Revisited
- Thread starter Always Learning
- Start date
- Status
So CGT relief for a period of time (5 years/8 years) whatever they deem necessary to encourage investors in the market (existing/new).
It’s very simple, same threshold as for rent a room, first €14k tax free without utilising losses
If they just fixed the situation with overholding and levelled the playing field in standards so that the standards for private rented housing were no higher or lower than the standards for owner occupiers or council housing that would go a long long way to stabilising the market. The only other thing they need to do is get rid of rent controls between tenancies. I think it's fair to regulate rent increases on sitting tenants by law. In fact I suspect before RPZs that many landlords tended to leave rents alone for entire tenancies and only increase them when a new tenancy begins (that's how I used to do things). But I strongly disagree with the mechanism governing rent increases (completely ignoring inflation except to set an upper bound-grossly unfair) and I disagree with compelling landlords to hold rents permanently low because they were not gougers in the first place when this RPZ stuff was introduced.
Government continues to ignore what most landlords are saying though. It's not about taxation but fairness. REITs should not have a tax advantage over small landlords. That's unfair. Tenants should not be able to overhold and live for free. That's unfair. Taxing us like everyone else is not unfair.
Government continues to ignore what most landlords are saying though. It's not about taxation but fairness. REITs should not have a tax advantage over small landlords. That's unfair. Tenants should not be able to overhold and live for free. That's unfair. Taxing us like everyone else is not unfair.
I assume this won't change until the next budget?
So won't change until 2024 at least.
While this would be welcome the unfairness of RPZ should be fixed for those of us who were caught low when it started.
T McGibney
Registered User
- Messages
- 6,205
There's not a hope in hell of anything like this being ever introduced.
Further demonising of landlords and thumb-twiddling seem the most likely courses of action. If I was paying an effective 52% income tax on my rental profits I would also be looking very hard for something else to put the money into, given the risk of overholding under the current regime. I can tolerate more risk than people paying that tax rate as I only have rental income in Ireland and my country of residence does not tax Irish rental income at all, so I pay a lot less tax on my rental profits than many landlords here, so the rewards are greater and hence my appetite for risk is greater.
Broadcaster
Registered User
- Messages
- 141
Bigger problem on the horizon is the likelihood of Sinn Fein being in Government. They can’t wait to crucify the landlord further. They don’t care about losses incurred by landlords, unpaid rent, bad tenants etc. they only see things from one side.
Rent a room doesn't work like that. If you go €1 above €14k, you're liable for tax for the full amount i.e. €14001 is fully taxable, no relief.
WHAT about utilities oil electricity bins gas etc..I think they are included in the 14000K,so as an example if you include say 3k for them per annum then you are only getting 11000k rent tax free per annum.Perhaps i am wrong about this!.Can anyone clarify?.Thanks.[ if i am correct then with 14001k you would be paying tax on 3k of utilities twice ,once when you purchase them and also again a second time]
Not sure what this means - REITs are not subject to tax on their profits from rental income but they have to distribute 85% or more of this to the shareholders who generally are taxed - so the tax is paid, just collected from the beneficial owners
Certainly there are better tax breaks and writedowns for larger landlords.
Junior just received his eviction notice along with 119 other students from Campus accommodation in Dublin during the week. Landlord citing a change in rental direction and focus, certainly means getting rent from a different demographic of population. Out by 31 May 2023 or two months notice.
As a small landlord there needs to be tax breaks and fast, I may have to evict to allow personal use for junior................
Junior just received his eviction notice along with 119 other students from Campus accommodation in Dublin during the week. Landlord citing a change in rental direction and focus, certainly means getting rent from a different demographic of population. Out by 31 May 2023 or two months notice.
As a small landlord there needs to be tax breaks and fast, I may have to evict to allow personal use for junior................
I don't know. What the left likes to refer to as "vulture funds". I was under the impression these institutional investors were at a tax advantage over small time landlords. Perhaps I am wrong or just used the wrong terminology??
T McGibney
Registered User
- Messages
- 6,205
The left as usual are talking nonsense, on every front.
"A vulture fund is an investment fund that seeks out and buys securities in distressed investments, such as high-yield bonds in or near default, or equities that are in or near bankruptcy. The goal is to 'swoop in' and pick up underpriced shares that are perceived to have been oversold to make high-risk but potentially high-reward bets." - Investopedia
These properties are not being bought at underprice, or in anything resembling a default situation.
And this explains the tax position well.
T McGibney
Registered User
- Messages
- 6,205
No. Why should they be? All traders etc aren't treated equally, for example.
This topic is confusing me! Are we all splitting hairs over my terminology or what is going on? I originally posted that REITs are at a tax advantage compared to small time landlords and I was called up on it and then this big discussion ensued, but in the end there seems there is a difference in how "big landlords" (call them whatever you like I don't care) and "small landlords" are treated by the tax code, which was the point I was making and which I think was actually clear enough in the first place.
I think it's a basic principle of fairness that "big landlords" and "small landlords" should be subject to the same tax regime. The fact that the tax code is unfair in other aspects doesn't mean it should be unfair here too! Two wrongs never did make a right
I think it's a basic principle of fairness that "big landlords" and "small landlords" should be subject to the same tax regime. The fact that the tax code is unfair in other aspects doesn't mean it should be unfair here too! Two wrongs never did make a right
T McGibney
Registered User
- Messages
- 6,205
Who here has demonstrated that such a difference exists?
- Status