This is true, it appears to be a very different story outside Dublin and the risks are not huge at all. I get a 10% ROI on my properties. All outside Dublin. All were bought in the past 6 years, so I'm not benefitting from 2013 prices.
Don't buy in a RPZ zone, only buy houses which were previously owner occupied so you can set the new rent, screen the tenants yourself and if fortunate enough, don't borrow (much). Follow the above and a 10% ROI (8% after expenses) is achievable in a lot of the country with very little hassle to go through for the return. There aren't many other investments around offering that kind of return.
Of course, I might be fortunate in my circumstances and where I'm based etc. but my point is it's all relative. It can still be quite lucrative to be a landlord in Ireland in 2023 if you invest in the right area and follow some simple guidelines.
I'm assuming you are referring to 10% as your rent as a percentage of the property value. Then the rent excluding expenses, with little or no mortgage, you are treating as income, so quoting the yield as 8% net of expenses makes sense for comparison with other income generating investments.
If you are paying higher rate of tax on the 8% it becomes 4%, but any income generating asset would be treated the same so from that perspective it makes sense to say the yield is 8%.
But for someone looking to invest for capital growth, who maybe has a mortgage, rather than to get income, like in my case, I think the effective yield is more like 4%.
That's because in my case I don't have net income, I add income to the investment to pay a mortgage.
So treating the full yield before income tax as the return doesn't make any sense because I get no income, the profits go in to pay down the mortgage. I think it's effectively a different type of investment when you have a mortgage.
I treat the increase in equity contributed by the rent less expenses, combined with the price growth, as the investment yield and use the income tax as a cost of investing (one that e.g. a REIT doesn't have). The reason for that is that I treat the whole thing as an investment to compare with alternatives that are capital growth rather than income generating investments (because for me it isn't income generating).
So I think property may be good yield-wise for investors where it is used as an income generating asset to pay income/pension, where you might even be on lower tax bands or over 65 tax bands etc. and where you have little or no mortgage but it is not appealing where you are looking at growing your investment and are on the 52% tax rate. The yield by location and outside RPZ does seem significant too but I think it's the income tax aspect that's the main drag, especially if you get no income from it because the rent goes in to the mortgage.
Maybe they could look at a tax break on that portion of rent that is invested in the rental property via the mortgage as well as the mortgage interest relief, it would level the treatment a bit versus REITS. It also avoids the argument that income is income and should be taxed like any other investment, because in this case it isn't income it's actually capital investment in the asset that generates the rent. And we want to encourage investment in rental units!