More poking at the landlord means more BTL sales

delboythedub

I wonder will these vulture fund companies pay 60% tax to our government like our landlords. Interesting. And also our government cannot dictate house prices therefore have they any business getting involved in setting rent control prices. Government getting 60% of monthly rent ie monthly rent €1700 government gets €1020 and landlords gets €680 . Something drastically wrong here

pc7

delboythedub wrote: »

I wonder will these vulture fund companies pay 60% tax like our landlords. Interesting.

They do in their barny! https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/central-bank-landlord-a-vulture-fund-paying-no-irish-tax-says-sf-1.2771263

Is there anything to stop someone starting a company and using the company to manage their properties?

handlemaster

there is a big issue with problem tenants , non paying, damage etc. landlords could be more flexible with tenant choice if they had the ability to evict such tenants quickly

kaymin

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Is there anything to stop someone starting a company and using the company to manage their properties?

You can do it but close company rules and minimum profit distribution requirements make it not tax efficient.

hognef

hognef wrote: »

Don't see why anybody would have a problem with publishing statistics on prices, however, it should be done as €/sqm (which will, of course, require floor area to become mandatory information). Anything else, like €/unit or even €/3-bed-semi would be utterly meaningless, and would be more likely to end up as you predict.

PS: Your definition of average is actually the definition of median.

I've no issue with a 'rent register' per se, it is the bullsh1t reasoning behind it that is galling. It is being introduced as a way of bringing rents down, or stopping/slowing the increases. I can see no way in which this will happen and would put money on it exacerbating the problem. As others have pointed out, it will only drive out the small guys and give the big guns a larger market share. This is bad news for everybody, except the REITs, and i include the government in that. They should be encouraging small, independent landlords, with all the tax they make from it.

There is one simple solution to the housing in this country: Build more. If the Gov't aren't willing to do it, then contract it out and/or introduce tax breaks for builders. Enforce the social/affordable housing requirements and....bingo. The fact that builders were able to pay their way out of those requirements is the biggest elephant in the corner of the room i've ever seen.

pc7

Interesting one, I emailed DCC this morning to see if they were interested in purchasing my property. They rang me immediately, said they send a building inspector, if meets regs etc. they get the valuer out and offer market value for it (not a discount). I still think I'll put it on the open market and see what happens. Will talk to my friend first currently renting to see if they are interested in buying it.

kaymin

pc7 wrote: »

Interesting one, I emailed DCC this morning to see if they were interested in purchasing my property. They rang me immediately, said they send a building inspector, if meets regs etc. they get the valuer out and offer market value for it (not a discount). I still think I'll put it on the open market and see what happens. Will talk to my friend first currently renting to see if they are interested in buying it.

I don't think I could do that to my neighbours (i.e. sell to DCC).

hmmm

I'd love to see more professional landlords. Amateur landlords are just that, it's a pain renting off of someone who has a property "as their pension".

In saying that, I don't understand why you would want to squeeze amateur landlords during a rent crisis. New regulations, tax rises etc are forcing these landlords to leave their property vacant, or shift to Airbnb etc.

We need to increase supply in the short term by actually increasing the number of amateur landlords (the rent a room scheme is great), and over time transition the entire market to professional, well-managed rental blocks.

murphaph

hmmm wrote: »

I'd love to see more professional landlords. Amateur landlords are just that, it's a pain renting off of someone who has a property "as their pension".

In saying that, I don't understand why you would want to squeeze amateur landlords during a rent crisis. New regulations, tax rises etc are forcing these landlords to leave their property vacant, or shift to Airbnb etc.

We need to increase supply in the short term by actually increasing the number of amateur landlords (the rent a room scheme is great), and over time transition the entire market to professional, well-managed rental blocks.

Best of luck finding a property to rent anywhere there are no apartments. REITs aren't interested in houses.

l5auim2pjnt8qx

A Declaration of War against Landlords minus the Vulture Funds is all that is missing from the bootlicking Corporate lover Minister Murphy today.

This stunt may well silence the whimpering tenants and Threshold's alike for
a short time, but when they see hundreds if not thousands of Landlords flush
there tenants out before the summer recess in anticipation of €15,000 fines
and threat of inprisonment - they will come back screaming blue murder to
the government for lack of available properties.

If it's a War the government want against Landlords then that's want they should get.If Landlords can hold off long enough the Murphy & Co will come back begging us to let our properties and for a hugh premium.The 2K 2/3 properties
market in Dublin available at he moment will double to 3-4k as the REITS will be the only player in the market apart from the poor few Landlords that couldn't get out on time.


The too few properties that will be left on market will have the poorest standard as price restrictions will not incentivise any Landlord to throw money away. FG will have played its last card as Landlord & tenant will hate them for it......then it will be time for FF to pull the plug on FG and not before time.

Wheres Me Jumper?

_Brian wrote: »

Yea this will just further the exodus from landlord holdings we’ve seen over the past years. With only a small portion of these housing going back to rentals the rental stock is getting less and less thus driving prices north.

We need a functioning rental market and currently it’s not functioning for landlords, one sided legislation and excessive taxation are driving out landlords. I know a guy who has sold most of his properties and he says the money is better just sitting in the bank.

sorry but that's just plain wrong.

if you deposit say €500k with a Bank how much interest pa do you think your friendly Banker will give you?
currently the top rate is from PTSB Signature a/c, an 18 month fixed account. on that they'll give you a whooping great 0.5%. work it out, and i think you'll find that equals €2500 Gross.

on the otherhand if you bought a 2 or maybe 3 bed apartment and rented it out, how much rent pa would you get?
assuming rent pcm of €1500, that equals Gross Rent pa of €18,000. of course the poor LL will have to pay tax, but there really is no comparison.

Claw Hammer

Wheres Me Jumper? wrote: »

sorry but that's just plain wrong.

if you deposit say €500k with a Bank how much interest pa do you think your friendly Banker will give you?
currently the top rate is from PTSB Signature a/c, an 18 month fixed account. on that they'll give you a whooping great 0.5%. work it out, and i think you'll find that equals €2500 Gross.

on the otherhand if you bought a 2 or maybe 3 bed apartment and rented it out, how much rent pa would you get?
assuming rent pcm of €1500, that equals Gross Rent pa of €18,000. of course the poor LL will have to pay tax, but there really is no comparison.

Tax, service charges, repairs, maintenance, letting agent fees, lpt. The risk of default by tenants has to be factored in, as well as the risk of litigation and consequent costs, all on top of a considerable number of unremunerated man hours. Yeah right!

Wheres Me Jumper?

Claw Hammer wrote: »

Tax, service charges, repairs, maintenance, letting agent fees, lpt. The risk of default by tenants has to be factored in, as well as the risk of litigation and consequent costs, all on top of a considerable number of unremunerated man hours. Yeah right!

Deposit income also attracts Tax. in the above example interest after DIRT would be a measly €1475.00! that's hardly a months rent.

you also neglected to factor in asset appreciation. property prices are as many think likely to continue to increase.

do you think your friendly Bank manager is likely to give you a few extra €1000 when you decide to close your account? Yea right!

Claw Hammer

Wheres Me Jumper? wrote: »

Deposit income also attracts Tax. in the above example interest after DIRT would be a measly €1475.00! that's hardly a months rent.

you also neglected to factor in asset appreciation. property prices are as many think likely to continue to increase.

do you think your friendly Bank manager is likely to give you a few extra €1000 when you decide to close your account? Yea right!

As has been shown asset prices can also fall. Rents can also fall. Just because "many" think property prices are likely to continue to increase doesn't mean they will. "Many" has been wrong time and again regarding asset prices. Do you think your friendly purchaser will give you an extra few €1000 when you decide to cash in your investment?

Wheres Me Jumper?

Claw Hammer wrote: »

As has been shown asset prices can also fall. Rents can also fall. Just because "many" think property prices are likely to continue to increase doesn't mean they will. "Many" has been wrong time and again regarding asset prices. Do you think your friendly purchaser will give you an extra few €1000 when you decide to cash in your investment?

property has been a much better bet than putting your hard-earned in a Bank earning a lousy 0.5%. it will continue to be so, despite these recent announcements. (in fact these measures might even accelerate property price growth!)

of course we all know assets can go up and down. Banks can go bang-wallop too, as we all discovered not too long ago.
There are no certainties in life, except ....

Berserker

Wheres Me Jumper? wrote: »

if you deposit say €500k with a Bank how much interest pa do you think your friendly Banker will give you?
currently the top rate is from PTSB Signature a/c, an 18 month fixed account. on that they'll give you a whooping great 0.5%. work it out, and i think you'll find that equals €2500 Gross.

You are bang. We rent our place and we have a long standing agreement with our landlord. We will be moving abroad when my OH finishes her training and gets a good bit of experience under her belt, so we try and get the best interest rate that we can on our savings. The rates are soul destroying. We've decided to change cars and go on a big holiday at the end of the year. Might as well do that than lock it into some account for 1% interest for a few years.

Deleted User wrote: »

There is one simple solution to the housing in this country: Build more. If the Gov't aren't willing to do it, then contract it out and/or introduce tax breaks for builders. Enforce the social/affordable housing requirements and....bingo. The fact that builders were able to pay their way out of those requirements is the biggest elephant in the corner of the room i've ever seen.

Building more isn't going to bring down the prices and any incentives given to builders will not be passed onto the buyer. Building more will increase the stock levels but people will not be able to afford to buy them and you are going to end up with ghost estates. If the government gives the buyer an incentive, the price of property will increase to include that value. We've seen all this before.

Topgear on Dave

Wheres Me Jumper? wrote: »

property has been a much better bet than putting your hard-earned in a Bank earning a lousy 0.5%. it will continue to be so, despite these recent announcements. (in fact these measures might even accelerate property price growth!)

of course we all know assets can go up and down. Banks can go bang-wallop too, as we all discovered not too long ago.
There are no certainties in life, except ....

I though the last decade had taught people that leveraged Irish property is a highly risky rollercoaster. Obviously not.

I have friends only coming out of NE now after buying 10-12 years ago.

Owing somewhere between 10 and maybe 50 thousand with no equity to clear and maybe insufficient income is not to be lightly sniffed at.

Berserker

Berserker wrote: »

Building more isn't going to bring down the prices and any incentives given to builders will not be passed onto the buyer. Building more will increase the stock levels but people will not be able to afford to buy them and you are going to end up with ghost estates.

Crazy talk. The reason they are so high at the moment is because the stock is so low. So everywhere is overpriced. Supply and demand. If there were more of them, enough to meet demand, then people could afford to be choosy. The properties at the lower end of the scale would not be selling and prices would fall to reflect that. If builders have houses to sell, and they're not selling, they will drop the price.

The point of the tax break isn't to pass it on to the consumer, but rather to make it more profitable for them to build houses in the first place. You know, make it more enticing. Stimulate the building industry, except this time the social / affordable housing should be enforced.

The Student

Deleted User wrote: »

Crazy talk. The reason they are so high at the moment is because the stock is so low. So everywhere is overpriced. Supply and demand. If there were more of them, enough to meet demand, then people could afford to be choosy. The properties at the lower end of the scale would not be selling and prices would fall to reflect that. If builders have houses to sell, and they're not selling, they will drop the price.

The point of the tax break isn't to pass it on to the consumer, but rather to make it more profitable for them to build houses in the first place. You know, make it more enticing. Stimulate the building industry, except this time the social / affordable housing should be enforced.

Property is not like other products. People don't change regularly if supply exceeds demand. Property purchases are a long term purchase whereby most people are looking to "put down roots".

Builders wont sell if they are not covering costs. The affordable and social housing model does not work and wont work unless we change our attitude to housing. We have people in private houses and council houses who have not paid mortgages or are behind on rents and they are not evicted. We have this bizarre notion that people are entitled to be housed no matter what.

A prime example of this is the 20000 houses in mortgage arrears for over two years who have paid nothing on their mortgages yet they are not evicted and even when a bank tries to obtain an order for repossession a judge will put a stay on the order for anywhere for 3 months to 1 yr. Or the side you have people in social housing who are charged a differential rate and are still behind in their rents. If they can't pay what the State has determined is a fair rent then they should be moved to a lower cost model.

How is it fair that those who "play by the rules" always seem to subsidize those who don't and there are no consequences for those who don't.

Could anyone on boards name one TD or Minister who would come out in public and say people should be evicted for non payment of rent. The Chairman of the Housing agency (I think it was him) recently stated that there were people gaming the system and he was vilified for the statement. We all know its happening but no one is actually willing to say it.

_Brian

Wheres Me Jumper? wrote: »

sorry but that's just plain wrong.

if you deposit say €500k with a Bank how much interest pa do you think your friendly Banker will give you?
currently the top rate is from PTSB Signature a/c, an 18 month fixed account. on that they'll give you a whooping great 0.5%. work it out, and i think you'll find that equals €2500 Gross.

on the otherhand if you bought a 2 or maybe 3 bed apartment and rented it out, how much rent pa would you get?
assuming rent pcm of €1500, that equals Gross Rent pa of €18,000. of course the poor LL will have to pay tax, but there really is no comparison.

He said it was better in the bank, it wasn’t an earnings thing. Landlords are being demonised more and more, more problems with tenants causing damage and defaulting on rents, tenants who hold rent can stay in a property for far too long.

You can tout the headline figures all you want but landlords aren’t making sufficient profit for the investment and risk they are taking. If landlords can’t make profit they won’t continue and the market doesnt function properly are there are too few properties available.
It’s to be seen everywhere, less and less properties available to more renters.

_Brian

The Student wrote: »

Property is not like other products. People don't change regularly if supply exceeds demand. Property purchases are a long term purchase whereby most people are looking to "put down roots".

Builders wont sell if they are not covering costs. The affordable and social housing model does not work and wont work unless we change our attitude to housing. We have people in private houses and council houses who have not paid mortgages or are behind on rents and they are not evicted. We have this bizarre notion that people are entitled to be housed no matter what.

A prime example of this is the 20000 houses in mortgage arrears for over two years who have paid nothing on their mortgages yet they are not evicted and even when a bank tries to obtain an order for repossession a judge will put a stay on the order for anywhere for 3 months to 1 yr. Or the side you have people in social housing who are charged a differential rate and are still behind in their rents. If they can't pay what the State has determined is a fair rent then they should be moved to a lower cost model.

How is it fair that those who "play by the rules" always seem to subsidize those who don't and there are no consequences for those who don't.

Could anyone on boards name one TD or Minister who would come out in public and say people should be evicted for non payment of rent. The Chairman of the Housing agency (I think it was him) recently stated that there were people gaming the system and he was vilified for the statement. We all know its happening but no one is actually willing to say it.

TDs would be mad to come out and say that even if it’s true.

A cohort of non mainstream politicians have pedalled the notion that people are more and more entitled to stuff for free and that somehow society owes them. This has take a scary hold and if you publicly say otherwise now your seen as some sort of monster.

They are laying the path for people to default and have protections for doing so,

enricoh

I'm not a landlord or tenant so I've no skin in the game. Would have considered purchasing a buy to let for my pension previously though.

Every month seems to bring some new anti landlord measure and yet nothing to speed up non paying tenants. What's the reasoning behind it do ye think? Is it simply a PR exercise due to pressure from the homeless industry. Or is it to get people to sell up and only have the big foreign crowds as landlords?
Seems bananas if so as the smaller landlords pay 52% tax and the big crowds pay sod all if I have the story right.

pc7

enricoh, I think its PR and as Bertie would have said its all smoke and daggers. There is a housing crisis due to a shortage of housing, successive governments failed to address this and kicked the can down the road. But they have no solution, they tried quick rapid build modular housing in finglas and it would have been quicker to just build permanent houses. Then tenants were meant to be in for short term until they could find something long term and that failed as no where else to put them, they are now in them permanently. https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/homeless-families-to-be-housed-permanently-in-modular-housing-1.3082859

The Student

enricoh wrote: »

I'm not a landlord or tenant so I've no skin in the game. Would have considered purchasing a buy to let for my pension previously though.

Every month seems to bring some new anti landlord measure and yet nothing to speed up non paying tenants. What's the reasoning behind it do ye think? Is it simply a PR exercise due to pressure from the homeless industry. Or is it to get people to sell up and only have the big foreign crowds as landlords?
Seems bananas if so as the smaller landlords pay 52% tax and the big crowds pay sod all if I have the story right.

I suspect its Govt intention to only have large scale professional landlords. This removes the need for the Govt to maintain the properties and if any evictions are needed it will be the professional landlords doing it and not the State so no politician will be blamed and the politician will no doubt fight the tenants case.

All I would say is be careful what you wish for, the grass is not always greener on the other side!

I as a landlord will be treating my tenants differently going forward. I did try to help them where I could as some of them are starting out in life, but no more simply because of the stance the Govt has taken by removing my right to do what I want with my property.

I can't wait until the next election and canvassers come to my door!

The Student

The Student wrote: »

Property is not like other products. People don't change regularly if supply exceeds demand. Property purchases are a long term purchase whereby most people are looking to "put down roots".

Builders wont sell if they are not covering costs. The affordable and social housing model does not work and wont work unless we change our attitude to housing. We have people in private houses and council houses who have not paid mortgages or are behind on rents and they are not evicted. We have this bizarre notion that people are entitled to be housed no matter what.

I agree people do not change regularly, but there are a steady stream of people entering their 20s who will be looking to buy a place. If/when supply exceeds demand prices will fall. When the ar$e fell out of the economy and nobody was able to get a loan, the demand dropped* and prices fell through the floor.

I agree wholeheartedly with the rest of your post. I suspect that successive Governments have failed to deal with this as a) they don't want to be the bad guys who introduce eviction legislation and b) they don't want to be the guys who added X number of eople onto the corpo housing lists. Spineless, really, when you think about it. We are now stuck in this mess because they failed to grasp the nettle.

*People were still looking to buy but couldn't get approval

The Student

Deleted User wrote: »

I agree people do not change regularly, but there are a steady stream of people entering their 20s who will be looking to buy a place. If/when supply exceeds demand prices will fall. When the ar$e fell out of the economy and nobody was able to get a loan, the demand dropped* and prices fell through the floor.

I agree wholeheartedly with the rest of your post. I suspect that successive Governments have failed to deal with this as a) they don't want to be the bad guys who introduce eviction legislation and b) they don't want to be the guys who added X number of eople onto the corpo housing lists. Spineless, really, when you think about it. We are now stuck in this mess because they failed to grasp the nettle.

*People were still looking to buy but couldn't get approval

if we had a properly functioning market people could get approvals if banks can repossess properties and the property is then available for those who want to and can buy.

Based on whats being discussed on boards expect an increasing number of landlords leaving the sector. This will do nothing other than take bed spaces out of the rental market making it even more difficult to find accommodation.

Wheres Me Jumper?

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

I though the last decade had taught people that leveraged Irish property is a highly risky rollercoaster. Obviously not.

I have friends only coming out of NE now after buying 10-12 years ago.

Owing somewhere between 10 and maybe 50 thousand with no equity to clear and maybe insufficient income is not to be lightly sniffed at.

all markets that i know of involve a degree of roller-coaster. if you don't have the stomach for it, then you best stick with the merrygoround.
the key word you used is LEVERAGED. investors who did this during the Celtic Tiger boom/bust were very foolish and i agree many were badly stung. more shrewd investors used that period of high growth to DE-LEVERAGE, and have done very well out of it.

handlemaster

Wheres Me Jumper? wrote: »

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

I though the last decade had taught people that leveraged Irish property is a highly risky rollercoaster. Obviously not.

I have friends only coming out of NE now after buying 10-12 years ago.

Owing somewhere between 10 and maybe 50 thousand with no equity to clear and maybe insufficient income is not to be lightly sniffed at.

all markets that i know of involve a degree of roller-coaster. if you don't have the stomach for it, then you best stick with the merrygoround.
the key word you used is LEVERAGED. investors who did this during the Celtic Tiger boom/bust were very foolish and i agree many were badly stung. more shrewd investors used that period of high growth to DE-LEVERAGE, and have done very well out of it.

Yes if the investors bought outside of major cities. Cork dublin galway. It they held on and were able to keep payments up the sun is shining now. If they bought outside of these areas at the height of the boom they will never see the colour if thzt money again. I know someone who purchased a three bed in a new development in a small village in the midlands paid around 220 k . The houses went down to 50k now are around 120k with low rental value.

Wheres Me Jumper?

handlemaster wrote: »

Yes if the investors bought outside of major cities. Cork dublin galway. It they held on and were able to keep payments up the sun is shining now. If they bought outside of these areas at the height of the boom they will never see the colour if thzt money again. I know someone who purchased a three bed in a new development in a small village in the midlands paid around 220 k . The houses went down to 50k now are around 120k with low rental value.

your post kinda makes sense and therefore i kinda agree with it, but you seem to overlook one very important thing.

as with investing in any market, probably the most important thing is TIMING. it all depends on WHEN people bought & sold.