NoRegretsCoyote
Registered User
- Messages
- 5,766
Here it is.
I had remembered it wrong. Gross rental is about €3bn, with a bit more than a billion as allowable expenses. Therefore profits is €2bn or so, it says nothing about tax.
"Rents are at a record high – so why are private landlords selling up?"
- Thread starter Brendan Burgess
- Start date
I had remembered it wrong. Gross rental is about €3bn, with a bit more than a billion as allowable expenses. Therefore profits is €2bn or so, it says nothing about tax.
Excellent point. Any cost imposed on a landlord has to be grossed up and charged to the tenant.
PebbleBeach2020
Registered User
- Messages
- 639
yes it doesn't have anything on the rate of tax paid, if you want to correct your original post.
Remember, the median is a better measure of the central tendency of a group as it is not skewed by exceptionally high or low characteristic values.
Remember, the median is a better measure of the central tendency of a group as it is not skewed by exceptionally high or low characteristic values.
PebbleBeach2020
Registered User
- Messages
- 639
yes it doesn't have anything on the rate of tax paid, if you want to correct your original post.
Remember, the median is a better measure of the central tendency of a group as it is not skewed by exceptionally high or low characteristic values.
An ever increasing proportion of the buy to let market are using institutional money to purchase, and this is not reflected in the mortgage numbers.
Not really.
If the individual in my example was, say, 35 and had a total income, including rental profits, of €25,000, he would only pay tax at an effective rate of 12%. A heck of a lot less than your suggested flat rate of 42%.
Rental income - allowable expenses = rental profit. You know, what you pay tax on!
PebbleBeach2020
Registered User
- Messages
- 639
So a 35 year old with an investment property but wages + rental income of €25000. That's realistic alright. He has no mortgage on this property either no?
He's barely even earning the dole equivalent outside of rental income????
Of course it's realistic!
The taxpayer in my example might have a high-earning spouse and only works part time.
Or might not work at all.
Just because a flat tax rate of 42% on rental profits might suit you, it doesn't mean that it would suit everybody.
Anyway, there is no chance of a flat tax rate being introduced on rental profits so this is all totally academic.
Or they inherited a place in a different part of the country from Granny and they rent it out while they are in college or they have decided that they just want to walk the earth for a few years or lots of other reasons.
As someone who bought their first pair of slippers in the past 12 months, I suppose I am now of the mom-and-pop cohort (which is a lot cuddlier than Gen X). For us, we could afford the shortfall between the mortgage and net income (after tax is paid). I would see it as a form of saving and would be a lot cheaper as it would keep herself out of BTs
. And I would reasonably expect the property to be worth something in 20 years time.For us, the reason we're not investing is the risk of a bad tenant not paying the rent. It would be too great a risk, would bring on untold levels of stress, so just not worth it. Investing in a pension may/may not give the same returns, but it's zero effort on my behalf..
PebbleBeach2020
Registered User
- Messages
- 639
“I think also we’re conscious that a lot of smaller landlords are exiting the market. We’ve got to address that,” said the Taoiseach.
Article on the Journal about the upcoming budget. There's going to be something for small landlords, but what is the question.
Article on the Journal about the upcoming budget. There's going to be something for small landlords, but what is the question.
It’s exactly doubled in value as seven years ago was pretty much the very bottom of the market.
PebbleBeach2020
Registered User
- Messages
- 639
If 200k to 400k then yes it makes sense to sell and back free of CGT.
Would you consider going back in and buying again? Or no interest in being a landlord?
I have a dilemma regarding selling that property because I have above market average rent on that property, with fantastic tenants (on homeless HAP… therefore pretty much guaranteed income) where as my others are all below market average. However each year from now that I do not sell I eat into my CGT benefit.
I want to bump a post I made a while ago in another thread as it is so important this message gets out there……
RENTS ARE NOT AT RECORD HIGHS FOR THE VAST MAJORITY OF LANDLORDS !!!
I keep track of the number of rental properties on daft in Swords. A few years ago there were around 200 or more properties available. The last few weeks has averaged less than 10.
The SAMPLE of properties being used as a measure of rental prices is therefore tiny !!!
The vast majority of landlords are restricted by the rent pressure zone limitations and are achieving rents way below market average.
The tiny sample on daft often represent brand new landlords who are not subject to RPZ restrictions and landlords who ignore the restrictions knowing that no body is actively monitoring the rules. So rents as reported on Daft are jacked up according to whatever supply and demand will allow. So this market average rent is massively artificially inflated.
Some landlords are getting more than others - but for those who aren't getting the 'max':
Was there a time these landlords were getting a higher rent than they are currently getting?
ps I'm not in favour of RPZ legislation as currently constructed, just something about your claim struck me as off
Hey odyssey06,
Apologies if I am misunderstanding your question, but are you suggesting a landlord who was achieving for example €3000 per month a few years ago is now only getting €2000. I can’t think of too many cases where a landlord would be reducing the rent over time?
J
Would it be feasible as an emergency measure for say the next 5 years to offer landlords the ability to reduce their gross rental income by say 30% for the purposes of calculating tax? That way all landlords benefit, regardless of their marginal tax rate.
Just a suggestion to cater for those on the different tax rates…
Would it be feasible as an emergency measure for say the next 5 years to offer landlords the ability to reduce their gross rental income by say 30% for the purposes of calculating tax? That way all landlords benefit, regardless of their marginal tax rate.
DazedInPontoon
Registered User
- Messages
- 357
The sentiment of these two statements seems to contradict each other.
While you made some points about daft in the first quoted comment I don't think that rules out that rents are also at an all-time high. Both things can be true, right?
Well yes that's kindof my point. Are there many landlords out there who are getting less than their own particular "all time high" for a property?
If so when were they getting higher rents? 2007?
So while some landlords are getting higher rents than others, even for similar properties, there can't be many properties out there being currently rented for less than the "all time high" of the property.
Yes sorry I didn’t word that very well.
I was trying to say that the average landlord is achieving rents way below the reported Daft record high rents.
Last edited: