"None of our children on the list are getting these houses"

Eric Cartman

Yurt! wrote: »

Further, there is absolutely zero moral basis for passive rental income to be taxed at less than PAYE levels. If you want to make the arguement that institutional landlords should pay the same rate, you might be on to something.

It should be that you can deduct the full mortgage pre tax like every other business expense.

Kermit.de.frog

alastair wrote: »

Except there’s no evidence to support this notion. The serious reduction in asylum applications took place in the two years prior to the referendum. The reduction in numbers for the two years following the change in law was about 1,000. The reduction in the two years prior to the change was 7,000. The numbers applying were already falling, and at a faster rate before the change in the law.

It was a pretty dumb policy at the time, let's be honest.

I remember that time and there was serious anxiety among the population. They were literally giving birth on ferries in Irish waters.

Eric Cartman

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

It was a pretty dumb policy at the time, let's be honest.

I remember that time and there was serious anxiety among the population. They were literally giving birth on ferries in Irish waters.

The 2004 law change was overwhelmingly good, a lot of the very ‘open borders’ elements of our society want it undone which would be a nightmare

Geuze

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Bought btl’s with 100% mortgages a decade ago, 40% tax on rental income means rent has ro be 2x hefty mortgage to turn a profit

Note that rental profit is calculated after paying mortgage interest, not the mortgage capital repayment.

Many people make this mistake.

I suspect that all landlords make huge profits, as mortgage interest must be below rental incomes.

Geuze

Eric Cartman wrote: »

It should be that you can deduct the full mortgage pre tax like every other business expense.

The full mortgage interest.

Eric Cartman

Every other business gets the capitol as a pre tax writeoff too , buy a tractor, a packing machine, a patent , a warehouse - full pre tax writeoff over a time period . A residential house - no chance here

CrankyHaus

Eric Cartman wrote: »

The 2004 law change was overwhelmingly good, a lot of the very ‘open borders’ elements of our society want it undone which would be a nightmare

You have to applaud the double-speak from those who on the one hand oppose it and want the law changed back and on the other assure us that it was utterly inconsequential and had no impact.

BanditLuke

str8talkingguy wrote: »

What's most laughable about this thread is people thinking all their tax money is funding social housing, when in reality social housing is a tiny tiny % and in reality almost all of it is towards bank debt.

It's easier for people to look down on those less fortunate than themselves. That said it's the way the system has been configured to keep the establishment protected and those with sub standard intelligence fall for it time and again.

Geuze

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Every other business gets the capitol as a pre tax writeoff too , buy a tractor, a packing machine, a patent , a warehouse - full pre tax writeoff over a time period . A residential house - no chance here

You mean capital allowances? I see.

There must be a reason for that. I will think about it.

smurgen

Eric Cartman wrote: »

A good property in D2/4 will yeild 8-9% gross, you lose half that in tax and thats if theres no vacancy or repairs to be done. Most landlords in dublin under mortgage are netting 3.5-5% , drop that off a % if an agent is involved , ones doing airbnb or corporate lets getting 10-12% nett , managed and little risk of overholding. Them and the ones without mortgages making money

If you've to get a mortgage out to buy your investment property I'd argue you shouldn't be allowed to be a landlord.

Eric Cartman

smurgen wrote: »

If you've to get a mortgage out to buy your investment property I'd argue you shouldn't be allowed to be a landlord.

Almost every property investment is mortgaged , from btl’s to skyscrapers, there is little point in having the money tied up in it if you can make returns above interest rates and use the money for other projects

alastair

Eric Cartman wrote: »

The 2004 law change was overwhelmingly good, a lot of the very ‘open borders’ elements of our society want it undone which would be a nightmare

And yet it seems there’s little evidence if it doing any ‘good’.

Yurt2

alastair wrote: »

Except there’s no evidence to support this notion. The serious reduction in asylum applications took place in the two years prior to the referendum. The reduction in numbers for the two years following the change in law was about 1,000. The reduction in the two years prior to the change was 7,000. The numbers applying were already falling, and at a faster rate before the change in the law.

The numbers peaked in 2002.

There was a Supreme Court Judgement in early 2003 where it was ruled that illegal non-nationals could be deported despite having children born in Ireland under the jus soli rules at the time. The number of asylum claims immediately collapsed.

I predict you're now going to try to tell me that there was no link between the pull factor being removed by the Supreme Court in early 2003 and the huge fall in asylum claims that year.

smurgen

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Almost every property investment is mortgaged , from btl’s to skyscrapers, there is little point in having the money tied up in it if you can make returns above interest rates and use the money for other projects

Not small time landlords.I have no problem with investment funds going bust or institutional investors losing money.but average joes should be dissuaded in tying up so many of their wealth in a single investment. Because so many have their next egg in property it means we've to keep the bubble artificially inflated.

Eric Cartman

alastair wrote: »

And yet it seems there’s little evidence if it doing any ‘good’.

And absolutely no evidence of it doing any harm

smurgen

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Every other business gets the capitol as a pre tax writeoff too , buy a tractor, a packing machine, a patent , a warehouse - full pre tax writeoff over a time period . A residential house - no chance here

The amount of government subsidies that goes into housing is unreal. The amount of NIMBYism to protect against supply jumping is unreal. The sector is too protected.
There should be mass building of property in Ireland on a grand scale.our property prices are completely out of whack to similar countries.
The truth is the government cant seem to let property prices collapse as too many citizens have their wealth tied into it.

smurgen

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Every other business gets the capitol as a pre tax writeoff too , buy a tractor, a packing machine, a patent , a warehouse - full pre tax writeoff over a time period . A residential house - no chance here

That's because other business add value and therefore capital employed creates more wealth.housing is a cost. It is basically a utility and should be treated as such.

GreeBo

Idbatterim wrote: »

meh, government offer a free housing and people wonder why people would hold out for it? LOL!

whats the altertnative? try save a deposit, by existing for years, living at home or in a kip, then paying a marginal tax rate of FIFTY percent?

You still dont understand how tax in Ireland works.
Its not 50%.
It has been explained to you multiple times on multiple threads.
You keep spouting this as FACT when its totally incorrect.

Please stop, its tiresome SF propaganda.

Eric Cartman

smurgen wrote: »

The amount of government subsidies that goes into housing is unreal. The amount of NIMBYism to protect against supply jumping is unreal. The sector is too protected.
There should be mass building of property in Ireland on a grand scale.our property prices are completely out of whack to similar countries.
The truth is the government cant seem to let property prices collapse as too many citizens have their wealth tied into it.

If you allowed landlords to write off capitol before tax you would see lower rents.

But I agree planning needs reform and we need to end zoning laws that restrict residential so much , also build higher

alastair

Yurt! wrote: »

The numbers peaked in 2002.

There was a Supreme Court Judgement in early 2003 where it was ruled that illegal non-nationals could be deported despite having children born in Ireland under the jus soli rules at the time. The numbers of asylum claims immediately collapsed.

I predict you're now going to try to tell me that there was no link between the pull factor being removed by the Supreme Court in early 2003 and the huge fall in asylum claims that year.

I am - because it had no impact on the rights of residency in the EU for those who had children born in Ireland - irregardless of their status in Ireland. That didn’t change until the referendum, which was more than a year away. And given that the premise for the change in law was that people were entering the country to gain EU residency rights, and then going back to where they actually lived, elsewhere in the EU, this wouldn’t have had any bearing on their situation.

GreeBo

CinemaGuy45 wrote: »

This situation makes me sick the working class have been stabbed in the back.

A low wage work force has been imported from Poland and surrounding nations and now you can include Brazil in that which has slashed working class wages this is a fact.

Africans are being imported in mass and given free everything and areas are becoming no go with African gangs we had a five hour riot at the Red Cow on new years with them suppressed by the media.

These homes should be going to Irish WORKING people.

That hatred of the working class here makes me sick.
These African gangs are not going to pay you pension.

Posing facts like that here is like walking on eggshells shill posters wait to attack and mods are ready to ban if you answer them back.

Any sources for your facts?

How are all these johnny foreigners affording rent if they are taking all the jobs. Why aren't Irish people taking these same jobs?

Yurt2

smurgen wrote: »

That's because other business add value and therefore capital employed creates more wealth.housing is a cost. It is basically a utility and should be treated as such.

Very true. Purchasing a BTL property and letting it out is not part of the productive economy. In fact, it dips into the pockets of the productive economy and takes money out if its pocket, it adds to the privately held debt of the country also. It's the very definition of passive income. It does not add to the housing stock of the country.

Someone working in retail, fixing engines, working in a factory, pulling a pint, working in accounts etc etc is engaging in productive activity. A landlord is sitting on his/her hoop and might call around if the washing machine is broken (or more likely not).

alastair

Eric Cartman wrote: »

And absolutely no evidence of it doing any harm

Not the claim you we’re making though, is it?
A majority here support a change in citizenship law to allow for citizenship through birth and residency.

Yurt2

alastair wrote: »

I am - because it had no impact on the rights of residency in the EU for those who had children born in Ireland - irregardless of their status in Ireland. That didn’t change until the referendum, which was more than a year away. And given that the premise for the change in law was that people were entering the country to gain EU residency rights, and then going back to where they actually lived, elsewhere in the EU, this wouldn’t have had any bearing on their situation.

*Facepalm*

alastair

Yurt! wrote: »

*Facepalm*

Those are the facts. Sorry.

Eric Cartman

Yurt! wrote: »

Very true. Purchasing a BTL property and letting it out is not part of the productive economy. In fact, it dips into the pockets of the productive economy and takes money out if its pocket, it adds to the privately held debt of the country also. It's the very definition of passive income. It does not add to the housing stock of the country.

Someone working in retail, fixing engines, working in a factory, pulling a pint, working in accounts etc etc is engaging in productive activity. A landlord is sitting on his/her hoop and might call around if the washing machine is broken (or more likely not).

So should vending machines, photocopier rental etc... be taxed like that, all passive income for utilities also

Yurt2

Eric Cartman wrote: »

So should vending machines, photocopier rental etc... be taxed like that, all passive income for utilities also

taxed like what? there's no reference to taxation in my post.

GreeBo

Do we have any details on how many house offers this person has rejected?

GreeBo

CinemaGuy45 wrote: »

People like me have seen their wages slashed by 25% or more since 2008 to fund greedy business and support open boarders this is not even taken inflation into account.

I get no private health insurance or sick pay like I use to.

Sure if any more is taken off the real working class why work?

Who exactly is "greedy business"?
Is he a friend of "Fat Cat bankers"?

Yurt2

alastair wrote: »

Those are the facts. Sorry.

They're actually not. I'm familiar with the case law surrounding this (and you actually got you're interpretation way off).

You're trying to tangentially imply that there was no link between the huge fall off in cases, and the 2003 judgement.

Did they all decide that the rain was too much for them in 2003 of all years? That must have been it. Or perhaps the fact that having a child born in an Irish hospital was now of limited defense against deportation? No, impossible, surely not.