With SF threat gone, will landlords stay in?

This recent election podcast on housing policy is worth a listen. The expert on it suggests midway through that the next government may abandon the RPZ concept and move to a different way of regulating rent increases.

I doubt it. A lot of tenants are benefiting from low RPZ rents - we can see it here, a lot of posters are landlords renting at 50% to 100% discounts to market value. The rent increases for those tenants are tiny. A move to reference rents will impose a large increase on these tenants. They will howl. Threshold will become involved etc. etc.

Rent controls become embedded because a cohort of tenants benefit hugely. The last lot in Ireland lasted from World War 1 to the 1980's! Rent control in Sweden mean that some city centre apartments rent for pittance. This causes all sorts of distortions. There is an active black market, but the government can't get rid of them.

The only chance really is that the Funds who are 50% of the Dublin market engage in concerted lobbying. But again, not a good look for a government to be 'caving in to Vultures'.

Finally, the reports published by the RTB and ESRI last Thursday show that 60% of tenants' rents aren't increased at all on an annual basis. A further percentage of tenants' rent is increased by 2%. About 25% (from memory) is over 2%, but even the RTB admit that a lot of this is just rounding up or cumulative increases. The government can claim that the RPZs are working and keeping rents down. I could even see them extended to the whole country (increases are higher in non-RPZs). Of course, this does not take into account the fact that rents are in reality increasing; landlords stuck permanently on low rents will eventually sell, new landlords coming in will ensure they charge top dollar.
 
Back
Top