Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Do you think that tenants are ready for Property Tax-inspired rent increases?
Options
Comments
-
Revenue would simply write to you to inform you that (for example) the gross payment received from the tenant is taxable, regardless of what it says in the lease.
It hasn't happened yet (that I know of) because this sort of clever (but IMO perfectly fair) accounting is a new thing, created by the raft of new charges being brought in. We'll find out within a year or 2 if Revenue are happy about it. I'd love it if they were.
My point is that if the landlord has room to increase the rent then whats the stop them just turning around and saying that the increase is to bring it more in line with market rental rates or whatever? Of course they will be increasing to cover extra costs, but if they arent blatent about it (as in the example above) then I really dont see what revenue or anyone else can say about it. The entitlement to a yearly rent review pretty much means that these costs can be passed onto the tenant without too much of a fuss being made or too much disclosure being needed.0 -
Yes. The tenant receives the property in a certain condition and is expected to return it to the landlord in the same condition.No allowance for fair wear & tear?
Sure rent somewhere a few years and you'll end up buying new carpets for the landlord even if you were the model tenant
Irish tenants scream bloody murder about the "rights" that German tenants have...completely ignoring the responsibilities they have into the bargain. Two way street in Germany.0 -
Sorry, there was confusion again. I meant that Revenue may write to landlords in the near future indicating that the creative accounting (levying the govt taxes separately to the rent etc.) is forbidden. I think these things should be borne by the tenant in law, but that's not likely, so the least the state could do is officially sanction the inclusion of these blasted taxes as an allowance against income tax.My point is that if the landlord has room to increase the rent then whats the stop them just turning around and saying that the increase is to bring it more in line with market rental rates or whatever? Of course they will be increasing to cover extra costs, but if they arent blatent about it (as in the example above) then I really dont see what revenue or anyone else can say about it. The entitlement to a yearly rent review pretty much means that these costs can be passed onto the tenant without too much of a fuss being made or too much disclosure being needed.0 -
That's a bit optimistic. The landlord should accept fair wear and tear. For example, if you rent a place out for two years with new carpets fitted, you can expect to get it back with two year old carpets in reasonable condition for their age; I'd accept that they should be quite clean.Yes. The tenant receives the property in a certain condition and is expected to return it to the landlord in the same condition....
The idea is even built into your tax calculations, where you are allowed a deduction for wear and tear.0 -
Yeah, but Irish tenants would cry into their beer if they were told they had to have all the carpets professionally cleaned to remove 2 years of their skin cells and other assorted grime. Typically German landlords fit laminate or parquet flooring throughout, to avoid such issues, but damage to a wooden floor caused by high heels would be the tenant's problem in Germany, not wear and tear.P. Breathnach wrote: »That's a bit optimistic. The landlord should accept fair wear and tear. For example, if you rent a place out for two years with new carpets fitted, you can expect to get it back with two year old carpets in reasonable condition for their age; I'd accept that they should be quite clean.
The idea is even built into your tax calculations, where you are allowed a deduction for wear and tear.
I would prefer tighter regulation for all and deposit retention etc. I favour making renting more attractive to all. Part of that is making tenants really responsible for the upkeep of their homes. Major maintenance is and should be the landlord's problem of course.0 -
Advertisement
-
Stamp duty was not borrowed as part of the mortgage in the enormous majority of cases.
Stamp duty did not push up prices. Your argument on this makes no sense. You are saying stamp duty kept prices down except when it was increased.
We will have to disagree on the psychological effects of very large lump sum up front or smallere amount over an extended period
Did people write separate cheques for the deposit and stamp duty, I think not, this was the age of the 100% mortgage and banks throwing money at people as far as I remember
The 250k ceiling on stamp duty provided a barrier, beyond which prices struggled to go over. This was a good thing, however our property obsessed Government raised the ceiling to 300k. This removed the barrier and prices quickly rose to the new barrier, thereby a tool to increase prices.
People buy so that they don't have to pay rent. How do you think they will approach a situation where they are presented with yearly tax of between €1k and 2k. You would be doing your best to keep it closer to the 1k level and not overbidding on property0 -
Agree, but 100,000 are not, what long term effects do you think this will have on property prices, rent and the likleyhood of landlords/ladys pasing on additional costs to tennants
Dont be ridiculous. People who are paying their mortgages should be foreclosed on? This happens in no normal economy.
Additional taxes as a result of our obsession with property will push more into arrears. We are in a downward spiral and I do not know how it will end, but it definitely wont be higher rents0 -
Agree, but 100,000 are not, what long term effects do you think this will have on property prices, rent and the likleyhood of landlords/ladys pasing on additional costs to tennants
Additional taxes as a result of our obsession with property will push more into arrears. We are in a downward spiral and I do not know how it will end, but it definitely wont be higher rents
Landlords will be pushed out of business reducing supply further.0 -
Milk & Honey wrote: »Landlords will be pushed out of business reducing supply further.
Why would that reduce supply - are you saying that the houses would then sit idle and empty rather than either be sold to a home-buyer or rented out by whoever the new owner is?
Neither has any affect on supply. One option removes a potential rental and at the same time removes a potential renter, the other simply changes would is renting out the property.
Please explain the thinking behind your argument, at first glance it makes little sense to me.0 -
Milk & Honey wrote: »Landlords will be pushed out of business reducing supply further.
And will they just chose not to rent their asset which is sitting idle.
Or will the bank that actually owns the property not force it's sale when the mortgage is not being paid ?
And btw it might actually benefit the whole letting business in the long run if a lot of the little buy to let and accidental landlords in Ireland were forced out.
In other countries a lot of the landlords are actually professional and thus run it as a proper business acting in a highly professional manner.I am not allowed discuss …
0 -
Advertisement
-
You do know people who buy houses may not be renting? The population is increasing but houses aren't been built. You take a house out of rental market it doesnt go back in
Why would that reduce supply - are you saying that the houses would then sit idle and empty rather than either be sold to a home-buyer or rented out by whoever the new owner is?
Neither has any affect on supply. One option removes a potential rental and at the same time removes a potential renter, the other simply changes would is renting out the property.
Please explain the thinking behind your argument, at first glance it makes little sense to me.
Take a 3 bed house shared among 4 renters. 2 hook up and buy the house and want to live together alone. Now you have one less rental but still have the need for another rental. Rental properties have a higher occupancy normally.
There are a lot of ways it won't cancel out far fewer for it to remain balanced when a rental property is sold.
Renters are now changing from people in their 20s to family units and more. There is actually an on going market for renters diminishing the old supply model. People will be renting for much longer further reducing supply.
I'll pass on the new charge as part of a general rent review. New expense in my rent calculations simple as that. Tenents are welcome to leave I charge the too little as is.0 -
This thread.
An industry where the supplier believes he can dictate the price to the consumer based upon his cost of sales.
Honestly.0 -
Or consumers expect additional costs in bringing product to market will not be passed on.This thread.
An industry where the supplier believes he can dictate the price to the consumer based upon his cost of sales.
Honestly.
It will be passed on it just a matter of when.
You got it wrong there it isn't "cost of sale"
It is cost of supply. No LL can avoid it so it likely to be passed on quickly. Never was by any definition like a cartel0 -
Ray Palmer wrote: »Or consumers expect additional costs in bringing product to market will not be passed on.
It will be passed on it just a matter of when.
You got it wrong there it isn't "cost of sale"
It is cost of supply. No LL can avoid it so it likely to be passed on quickly. Never was by any definition like a cartel
The supplier cannot avoid the cost but the consumer can choose other markets. Foreign rental, domestic purchase, foreign purchase.0 -
Yes the consumer can exit the rental market as can the supplier. No point being made here.
The supplier cannot avoid the cost but the consumer can choose other markets. Foreign rental, domestic purchase, foreign purchase.
By all means leave the country because LL increase rent it only ever happens in Ireland. Getting a new job is really easy once you leave the country and don't worry about any connections here you don't need them.0 -
-
-
Ray Palmer wrote: »You do know people who buy houses may not be renting? The population is increasing but houses aren't been built. You take a house out of rental market it doesnt go back in
Take a 3 bed house shared among 4 renters. 2 hook up and buy the house and want to live together alone. Now you have one less rental but still have the need for another rental. Rental properties have a higher occupancy normally.
Works both ways, Single owner of house can't pay mortgage, House repossessed and former owner rents a room in another house. 3 rooms released to the market for 1 taken
I think you could also safely say that, currently, population is falling. 1,500+ a week leaving all potential FTB's and family creators0 -
The supplier cannot avoid the cost but the consumer can choose other markets. Foreign rental, domestic purchase, foreign purchase.
They aren't really a valid product substitution though are they? You cannot rent a property in another country whilst working in Dublin (well OK maybe NI:D). The renter can choose a cheaper/poorer quality property in the same location or an equivalent property in a cheaper locality. Same argument applies for buying, which is why there are untold ghost estates in towns "an hour from Dublin city centre". Throw in switching drag from school places, jobs etc. and you can see why there will always be demand for rentals in good areas. In other areas the market price is effectively set by the RAS limits.0 -
You want check out the figures because the population inlcuding emigration and migration the population is increasing.
Works both ways, Single owner of house can't pay mortgage, House repossessed and former owner rents a room in another house. 3 rooms released to the market for 1 taken
I think you could also safely say that, currently, population is falling. 1,500+ a week leaving all potential FTB's and family creators
The reality is what is possible is not the same as what is likely. There aren't that many people who bought 3 bed house on there own versus how many people become couples.0 -
Advertisement
-
sunnysoutheast wrote: »They aren't really a valid product substitution though are they? You cannot rent a property in another country whilst working in Dublin (well OK maybe NI:D). The renter can choose a cheaper/poorer quality property in the same location or an equivalent property in a cheaper locality. Same argument applies for buying, which is why there are untold ghost estates in towns "an hour from Dublin city centre". Throw in switching drag from school places, jobs etc. and you can see why there will always be demand for rentals in good areas. In other areas the market price is effectively set by the RAS limits.
Dublin is more rent-able than Leitrim - that is not in dispute.
Look at the market as a whole.
The entire demand element of the entire rental market is made up of private renters and the State.
The State have already limited their financing for their portion.
My argument is that the private renters as a whole do not have the finance to sustain this proposed new higher rent.
The cash is simply not there.0 -
Dublin is more rent-able than Leitrim - that is not in dispute.
Look at the market as a whole.
The entire demand element of the entire rental market is made up of private renters and the State.
The State have already limited their financing for their portion.
My argument is that the private renters as a whole do not have the finance to sustain this proposed new higher rent.
The cash is simply not there.
I would say that it is inevitable that the increase in internal costs will be passed on, immediately in the case of high-demand areas and more slowly in areas in which there is potential competition or substitution. Any local services charges will be passed straight through to the tenant. If they can't afford the higher rent they will have to adapt, as per my previous post. I'd say the greater threat to rent levels is if the banks start throwing mortgage money around like drunken sailors again, but I don't see that happening any time soon.
Personally, as a somewhat reluctant "accidental" landlord, I would not disturb a good tenant for a small increase in rent, but we are renting out our erstwhile family home. If I was renting an investment apartment in Dublin the rent would be going up to the maximum market rate at each renewal/anniversary, no question. If the tenant doesn't like it, sayonara.0 -
The reality is that repossessions of family homes are very rare and banks are much less willing to go down that route, whereas BTL properties are easier politically.Works both ways, Single owner of house can't pay mortgage, House repossessed and former owner rents a room in another house. 3 rooms released to the market for 1 taken
I think you could also safely say that, currently, population is falling. 1,500+ a week leaving all potential FTB's and family creators
Rental supply is clearly drying up around my area (D15) anyway, and from the boards here and elsewhere, this appears to be the trend in Dublin right now, regardless of the theory, that's what's happening in practice.0 -
Ray Palmer wrote: »You want check out the figures because the population inlcuding emigration and migration the population is increasing.
The reality is what is possible is not the same as what is likely. There aren't that many people who bought 3 bed house on there own versus how many people become couples.
But where is the increase happening ?
Is it not in our birth rate which is one of the highest in the EU ?
I would guess the 20 to 30 year old bracket, who actually would be renters and indeed future buyers are leaving the country.
Maybe someone has actual figures on this ?
Of course the ones who manage to get a job or the ones who are content sitting on the dole will stay.
But the latters rental capability is set by the government and that pot of
money is going to keep shrinking.sunnysoutheast wrote: »I would say that it is inevitable that the increase in internal costs will be passed on, immediately in the case of high-demand areas and more slowly in areas in which there is potential competition or substitution. Any local services charges will be passed straight through to the tenant. If they can't afford the higher rent they will have to adapt, as per my previous post. I'd say the greater threat to rent levels is if the banks start throwing mortgage money around like drunken sailors again, but I don't see that happening any time soon.
Personally, as a somewhat reluctant "accidental" landlord, I would not disturb a good tenant for a small increase in rent, but we are renting out our erstwhile family home. If I was renting an investment apartment in Dublin the rent would be going up to the maximum market rate at each renewal/anniversary, no question. If the tenant doesn't like it, sayonara.
Yes landlords can increase the rents, but as you have even said it depends on circumstances.
And a lot of that is location, location, location.
Like everything there is only so high a price that the market can bear.
Above that the item becomes unsellable.
If prices are pushed too high then people just cannot afford it.
If the cost of accommodation gets too high and that added to increased taxes will push even more of our non tied generations, i.e. twenty and early thirty somethings, to find alternatives and the most likely one is to just leave the country.
The days when high rents were being backed by ever increasing salaries and lowering taxes ended back in the early 2000s.
What ended that rental boom was the fact more property became available and even with astronomically increasing house prices purchase was made easier with lashings of cheap credit.
Renters in the future won't have the increasing salaries to cover increasing rents and they won't have the option of buying with cheap credit.
They will have two options, stay at home with mammy and daddy or leave the country.
What will that do to the rental market ?
The other thing that is looming on the horizon is repossession of rental property and I would bet there are a lot of landlords out there just hanging on.
You can even find on here people worrying about the end of their interest only mortgages and increasing interest rates.
Sooner or later the lenders are going to have to move on these.
I think it is dangerous business thinking by landlords if they think every future additional cost can be lumped onto their tenants.I am not allowed discuss …
0 -
Jmayo
My understanding is more people are migrating here than are emigrating.
To suggest people will leave the country over <100 increase monthly in rent on an entire property seem silly.
Also suggesting salaries will not increase at some point again seems silly. We aren't talking about sky rocked changes to rent.
Rent in many other countries is more expensive and salaries aren't higher. There is no magical place where everything is better. It is a trade off every time.
I for one am quite happy to say leave if you think you can get better. I'll forego the fact my taxes educated them. If you going to moan about everything in country as you know better go find the better in practice.
I travelled and my experience tells me that the grass is always greener on the other side especially if you are clueless.
Italian, French, Spanish etc. come here to avoid a lot of things at home that aren't issues here. Try being in your early 30s and get a job in Italy, France or Spain. Have you been in flat in a Spanish city?0 -
Ray Palmer wrote: »Jmayo
My understanding is more people are migrating here than are emigrating.
I would like to see those figures.Ray Palmer wrote: »To suggest people will leave the country over <100 increase monthly in rent on an entire property seem silly.
If you are scraping by and someone adds another 1200 annual cost it does have an effect.
At the same time more than likely the tenant could be taking home less pay due to more taxes.
What about when a landlord decides to add another 1200 next year to cover increased interest rates or fact they have gone off interest only mortgage ?Ray Palmer wrote: »Also suggesting salaries will not increase at some point again seems silly. We aren't talking about sky rocked changes to rent.
You could be talking about a 5% to 10% rent increase.
Meanwhile you are getting a zero or even 5% decrease in take home pay.
Of course salaries are going to increase sometime and maybe even now for the lucky few.
But in the grand scheme of things don't you realise we are fooked with a current deficit that means increased taxes and the country, hell indeed most of the world is in a recession.
There aren't going to be guys and gals wandering around with massive pay hikes from their companies or from jumping companies like when we had rental bubble around 2000.Ray Palmer wrote: »Rent in many other countries is more expensive and salaries aren't higher. There is no magical place where everything is better. It is a trade off every time.
Yes but where are we talking about.
Are we once again comparing us to New York, Paris or London like was done when comparing house prices ?
Also what is the quality of the rental properties in this other countries ?Ray Palmer wrote: »I for one am quite happy to say leave if you think you can get better. I'll forego the fact my taxes educated them. If you going to moan about everything in country as you know better go find the better in practice.
I would leave in the morning, but sadly I am tied due to family.
And BTW sunshine my taxes have more than paid for my education so I don't owe you anything.
Oh and speaking of other people using your taxes.
Have you as a landlord never benefitted from other people taxes like in interest relief, section 23/50 to offset rental income, rent allowance, etc ?
I always find you remind me of some of our typical landlords who think they are doing everyone else a favour.
BTW that comment above is typical of the ones in this country who have always being cushy, where anyone that challenges the status quo or Godforbid complains are told to pi** off.
Sure didn't Dev even do it.Ray Palmer wrote: »I travelled and my experience tells me that the grass is always greener on the other side especially if you are clueless.
Italian, French, Spanish etc. come here to avoid a lot of things at home that aren't issues here. Try being in your early 30s and get a job in Italy, France or Spain. Have you been in flat in a Spanish city?
How many Irish emigrate to France, Italy and Spain ?
I think you will find they go to US, Britain, Canada, Australia, NZ, Germany, Holland before those above countries.
But I guess you have travelled and know better. :rolleyes:I am not allowed discuss …
0 -
Jmayo
Way to increase the amount, so it's 1200 now? And it is on a property so will be not a 5-10% increase
With regards to education I was referring to the graduates you claim will leave.
I stand by the merits for any country being better than here. If people are going to moan and think everywhere/anywhere is better go find out. To be able to go to some of these places you need to be a graduate which tax payers here paid for.
I can tell you there are always people complaining about where they live. In Ireland the moaners are plenty but people of action are few. One of the least appealing aspects of the country. Probably many people leave over this directly and indirectly due the oppressive pessimism.
Moaning is not challenging the status quo.
Sorry for actually travelling and working abroad it's not like I could have actually learnt anything. I could just complain without a understanding or plausible solution.
As for tax benefits given to LL they are very little when you consider the taxes paid. We save the government a fortune providing accommodation which the government fails to do. You think rent is too high any idea how it would be if there was less to rent without tax breaks?
Generally the best thing for this country is if people either put up or shut up.0 -
Ray Palmer wrote: »
Way to increase the amount, so it's 1200 now? And it is on a property so will be not a 5-10% increase
Assuming that everyone pays rent equally then yes, it will be a 5-10% increase on the rent each person pays.Ray Palmer wrote: »With regards to education I was referring to the graduates you claim will leave.
I stand by the merits for any country being better than here. If people are going to moan and think everywhere/anywhere is better go find out. To be able to go to some of these places you need to be a graduate which tax payers here paid for.
It's all about perspective here. One can argue that by offering essentially fee free third level education that graduates of this system henceforth owe a debt to the country, but one can also argue that by investing in those aforementioned graduates the country owes them the chance to pay back that debt with plentiful highly skilled jobs commensurate with their education.
In any effect I do feel any argument along the lines of 'my taxes paid for this' is wholly redundant. Everyone pays taxes (Income Taxes/VAT etc) and virtually every country levies taxes on its population and goods to pay for the running of the country. Some pay more than others. Our tax regime in Ireland is actually one of the most equitable in the world.
Furthermore; I do think the diaspora have categorically shown that Irish people are extremely well capable of relocation and success in different countries and cultures. I'm not going to start reeling off names because I'll be here all day but I trust you can see the fallacy in your veiled suggestion.Ray Palmer wrote: »I can tell you there are always people complaining about where they live. In Ireland the moaners are plenty but people of action are few. One of the least appealing aspects of the country. Probably many people leave over this directly and indirectly due the oppressive pessimism.
You're actually bang on here, the shame being is you pretty much describe yourself above when you read your comments below.Ray Palmer wrote: »Moaning is not challenging the status quo.
But...Ray Palmer wrote: »Sorry for actually travelling and working abroad it's not like I could have actually learnt anything. I could just complain without a understanding or plausible solution.
As for tax benefits given to LL they are very little when you consider the taxes paid. We save the government a fortune providing accommodation which the government fails to do. You think rent is too high any idea how it would be if there was less to rent without tax breaks?
You then go onto moan anyway a lá the poor me landlord without whom the Government would be far deeper in the mire than it already is allegedly. The irony in this being that it is because of prospecting BTL buyers that the Government is in the mire full stop. Thus your fellow brethern are part of the problem as well as the solution.Ray Palmer wrote: »Generally the best thing for this country is if people either put up or shut up.
Just wow. An absolutely incredibly ignorant point of view and I do pity you if you actually believe that.
To clarify; I'm a firm supporter of the capitalist model; therefore I don't see any problem with landlords attaining market rate for their properties. In fact I'd encourage them to do so, disregarding intangibles such as the good tenant argument, you'd be mad not to try to achieve the best price for your let that you can. As was mentioned in the thread; the country is in the grip of recession and the majority of the population are flocking to the major employment centre of the country. A combination of this plus a once bitten mentality allied to restricted lending means we'll only see the renting market in Dublin go one way for the next couple of years.0 -
Cson
You want to talk ignorance. Look up the definition of moan.
The only thing I complained about was the constant moaners. I didn't complain/ moan about tax breaks I explained the reality. Never asked for more or said it wasn't enough.
Don't moan act, amazing ignorance on my behalf. Feel sorry for me for such a horrible view. Keep your pity.
I don't think you understand "put up or shut up"0 -
Advertisement
-
Perhaps this question was raised earlier, but I didn't find the answer to it.
I have a clause in my lease agreement that states that tenant is liable for paying "local authority charges ... including any which are imposed after the date of the lease agreement (even if of a novel nature)". Hence the question: Is property tax a local authority charge? and Will I as a tenant be liable for paying it to the Revenue?0
Advertisement