Sinn Féin propose much-needed mortgage interest relief for homeowners - Pearse Doherty TD

Brendan Burgess

Brendan Burgess

Founder
Messages
52,160


Sinn Féin spokesperson on Finance, Pearse Doherty TD, has called on the Minister for Finance, Michael McGrath, to give much-needed mortgage relief for homeowners.

The Donegal TD was speaking ahead of his party’s motion, to be debated in the Dáil on Wednesday, which calls on the government to introduce timely, targeted and temporary mortgage interest relief to support borrowers struggling with rising interest rates.

Teachta Doherty said:

“Mortgage holders are seeing a large rise in their interest costs as a result of interest rate hikes by the ECB.

“Last week’s hike was the fifth since July. That means that borrowers will be paying thousands of euros more in interest this year and others are likely to see their interest rates increase in the coming period

“In the grip of a cost of living crisis, with sharp and significant rises in interest costs, now is the right time to introduce timely, targeted and temporary mortgage interest relief.

“The now Minister for Finance, Michael McGrath, while in opposition in 2015, described mortgage relief as ‘a very important support for families’ and that ‘the process of withdrawing it from existing homeowners at the same time as they are subject to a residential property tax highlights a government that is pursuing policies that are making home ownership increasingly unaffordable for families’.

“Sinn Féin agrees with Minister McGrath’s then assessment but considers it an apt description of the policies of the current Fine Gael, Fianna Fáil and Green Party government.

“Minister McGrath’s U-turn on this issue, as confirmed by his statements last week that he has no plans to introduce mortgage interest relief despite his previous calls in opposition, suggests Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael cannot be trusted to support homeownership or homeowners.

“What Sinn Féin is proposing is different to the mortgage interest relief that existed in the past, which was based simply on the total interest paid on a mortgage loan.

“Instead, it would provide mortgage interest relief equivalent to 30 percent of increased interest costs relative to June 2022 up to but not exceeding €1,500 per annum.

“The measure is temporary and the measure is targeted – it would provide relief on increased interest costs as a result of interest rate rises.

“We would also work with the Central Bank to enhance the supervision of vulture funds in the interests of struggling borrowers, and we would examine the taxation of the banking sector including the treatment of corporation tax loss relief.

“These proposals would absorb a portion of borrowers’ increased interest costs as a result of rate hikes since June. This measure is sensible, affordable and necessary.”

ENDS
 
I will be discussing this with Pearse Doherty on Newstalk Breakfast tomorrow at 8.15

I don't agree with it.

If the vulture funds or banks are charge excessive rates, then a mechanism should be found to bring down those rates. As a taxpayer, I don't want to pay for the problems caused by vulture funds.

People on cheap trackers have had 10 years of close to zero mortgage costs and now that they have increased, Sinn Féin wants the taxpayer to subsidise them?

If there is taxpayers' money available, it should be targeted at those who need it and those who need it most will be people in arrears.
 
Brendan Burgess said:
The Donegal TD was speaking ahead of his party’s motion, to be debated in the Dáil on Wednesday, which calls on the government to introduce timely, targeted and temporary mortgage interest relief to support borrowers struggling with rising interest rates.
Click to expand...
:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:


Blanket mortgage interest relief is the exact opposite of a targeted measure. I don't need it and nor do most mortgage holders.

I hate tax reliefs in general. If the government wants to subsidise certain categories of people it should do so via general expenditure voted on annually via the Estimates process. The net effect is the same, but voted expenditure gets far more scrutiny and debate.
 
I would feel the same. I am one of these tracker mortgage holders. I know and I knew that I was very lucky to get one in October 2008. My interest rate previously had been as high as 5.75% I think. While I have no issue with targeted measures helping people who need them, these kinds of measures are costly and unnecessary for most. Does nobody notice that flights to sun destinations are back to pre-covid levels and the amounts of savings in banks? Don't get me wrong, I do realise that lots of people struggle, but lots don't.
 
Not great that the future minister for finance doesn't understand why interest rates were increased.

If mortgage interest relief is given, there won't be any drop in disposable income and inflation won't come down. It will make the whole purpose of increasing rates pointless and they might as well be decreased again and we live with inflation.


As for the targeted bit, how are they going to do this? Remember they were going to target who received the children's allowance but said the cost of filtering it out would cost more than the savings? And that was a pretty simple exercise to do. Imagine trying to do it for mortgages? High earners with high levels of debt will be hit harder through the increase in rates. Or are high income earners not allowed to benefit from any provisions under SF? They just have to supply the money to pay for them. :rolleyes:
 
Brendan Burgess said:
“The measure is temporary and the measure is targeted – it would provide relief on increased interest costs as a result of interest rate rises.
Click to expand...

By "targeted" they appear to mean "targeting the increase" rather than targeting and individual.

But this is not targeting at all. Someone with a mortgage of €100k who has seen their interest rise from €1,000 to €4,000 a year, having paid €1,000 or so for the last 10 years does not need any subsidy from me.

Brendan
 
Brendan Burgess said:
If there is taxpayers' money available, it should be targeted at those who need it and those who need it most will be people in arrears
Click to expand...
Wrong. Those who need it most are struggling, working families. Give a bit back to those who pay their taxes.

I think Doherty's suggestion is a good one and should be supported not opposed.
 
What I don't get is how limiting it to the increase is in anyway helping those who struggle. Saying I am the €100000 mortgage payer, my mortgage has increased to €4000 but might be still totally affordable and my repayment are still quite small. I am not delighted about it but manage well. My neighbour might have a mortgage that he fixed in the spring because he was concerned of increased repayment because money is tight, not at an amazing rate and bigger mortgage. Struggling but no help.
 
ArthurMcB said:
Wrong. Those who need it most are struggling, working families. Give a bit back to those who pay their taxes.

I think Doherty's suggestion is a good one and should be supported not opposed.
Click to expand...
The lower paid don't pay very much in taxes. A married couple can earn €80,000 at 20% tax.

And who is going to pay for all of this? The people who pay the most taxes already!
 
Anyone have the coordinates for the forest of money trees that SF have obviously planted.

Asking for a friend.

Their proposal gives about a max of €125 a month. This on top of the generous help to buy scheme too.

And I suspect that the cost of operation would be in the millions especially as rates change regularly.

A truly ridiculous idea
 
Last edited:
I can see the temptation to offer a "targeted" measure for those borrowers who don't have the option to fix. Anything wider than that and it creates moral hazard. Targeted or otherwise, if I were a vulture fund I'd know this just means I could push up rates even further thanks to the government intervention. Net effect it would be a glorified state subsidy for the vulture funds.

Now if I were a fund I think one thing that's going to scare me is the threat of a PIA and losing out on some or all of the benefits of higher rates.
 
skrooge said:
Now if I were a fund I think one thing that's going to scare me is the threat of a PIA
Click to expand...

Hi skrooge

But in most cases people have plenty of equity in their homes and are able to pay their mortgage even at these high rates so very few will go for PIAs.

So if you get 6.5% from 30,000 customers and you have to concede a PIA on 3,000 of them, then you will do very well overall.

Brendan
 
Very true, I'm sure the funds have a good idea how far they can push people. Hence why a MITR would just spur them on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top