2021 Irish Property Market chat - *mod warnings post 1*

yagan

WhiteWalls wrote: »

Just watching prime time from a few nights ago on player. Fella on representing funds and he is highlighting the fact that the property market relies on funds to ramp up supply in this country? I'd have thought there is hundreds on ppl looking to buy and funds are definitely not needed.

Can anyone explain this concept to me?

He's talking up his business.

The Maynooth purchase by a rent farmers did the opposite of adding supply, it actually reduced supply to the market.

90% of the apartments sold last year in Dublin bypassed the open market and were sold to rent farmers too.

The home buyer is being crowded out by the rent famers and the government that fails to protect the home maker.

I find it impossible to give the government the benefit of doubt that they're just incompetent. I have zero doubt the landlords in Fianna Fail and Fine Gael had their fingerprints over all the creation of long term rental streams, only they were too greedy to overlook that they could be outbid in their own weeze by foreign funds.

fliball123

Browney7 wrote: »

http://budget.gov.ie/Budgets/2020/Documents/Budget/Part%20II%20-%20Expenditure%20Allocations%202020-22%20(A).pdf

Knock yourself out. 23bn is not being paid to layabouts and dossers as much as you may want it paint it as so.

I never said it was, but we are not paying nearly all our 23 Billion paid out on welfare on OAP as referenced by this poster far from it.

EddieN75

Wouldn't hap be also pushing up rental prices?

Government pumping free cash (taxpayer) directly into landlord pockets

NickNickleby

timmyntc wrote: »

I and other posters have made clear why they should be incentivised to give it up. Not forced.

They have the right to stay in it of course, but it should be made attractive to downsize and maybe use some of the extra equity to enjoy the rest of their life.
Old houses in prime central locations will have to be redeveloped into something denser going forward. Instead of waiting till death & probate to buy the house - there should be clear incentives for pensioners to downsize instead.

As a potential victim of this incentivisation, I'm curious. Is it like the 'green' incentives to use less fossil fuels, tax the **** out of it. like the vaunted 'bedroom tax'. I'm already paying property tax.... which I would have no problem with - if it was applied to ALL homes.

Amadan Dubh

WhiteWalls wrote: »

Just watching prime time from a few nights ago on player. Fella on representing funds and he is highlighting the fact that the property market relies on funds to ramp up supply in this country? I'd have thought there is hundreds on ppl looking to buy and funds are definitely not needed.

Can anyone explain this concept to me?

It's a good observation. The line trotted out by the investors is that the properties won't get built without their finances but, like you, I don't see how this is the case with the huge demand for rentals and among FTBs, which translates to little risk in investing to build to rent or to sell off to individuals.

Amadan Dubh

EddieN75 wrote: »

Wouldn't hap be also pushing up rental prices?

Government pumping free cash (taxpayer) directly into landlord pockets

As of 6 months ago when I read it, 1/3 of all tenancies were getting some form of support from the State. Yes, the State has itself inflated rental prices due to the scale of its involvement in the market, in direct competition with individual renters and buyers.

Browney7

fliball123 wrote: »

How can tomorrow be better than yesterday when today we are borrowing a ridiculous amount already for today. Your post would mean more with out the personal digs I get as much exercise as I need.

Also if this was a country that people show a bit more personal responsibility instead of the state having to step in and help and welfare cheats?? Last I checked we paid out over 23Billion in social protection

https://whereyourmoneygoes.gov.ie/en/socialprotection/2021/

How much more blood do you want from this stone?

Its funny some posters on here think that halving a persons nett worth will be good for them because everyone will benefit. I am wondering if I have wondered into a communist Russia thread.

The problem is that for all your ideals someone has to pay for them and the well of people being asked are already paying through the nose in taxation. Also we are more Animal Farm when it comes to our leftist ideals as in some animals are more equal than others. (public sector take a bow) Way too many vested interests both right and left learning sucking at the public purse. These issues need to be tackled. There is no way of tackling the issue of people not being able to afford houses without throwing up moral hazard and unforeseen consequences.

Why do you or others think that its on current home owners to house everyone? Do you all think that as a home owner or a group of home owner we can all get together and say lets half our property price for the greater good? NO we cant and any mechanism the government has tried to implement to give FTBs in this county has actually pushed prices up.

So while we have champagne communistic ideas everyone is equal no matter who pays for it and the capitalism cannot fail no matter the costs attitudes in this country coming from both sides. I dont see why I should help anyone else get a house. I am already paying my taxes into the 23 Billion paid out in social protection.

So what was this rant then Fliball? Why keep bringing up 23bn trying to spin it? You're the first to lambast posters who post when they try to use numbers for their benefit

EddieN75

Amadan Dubh wrote: »

As of 6 months ago when I read it, 1/3 of all tenancies were getting some form of support from the State. Yes, the State has itself inflated rental prices due to the scale of its involvement in the market, in direct competition with individual renters and buyers.

1/3 of all tenants are getting the bulk of their rent paid by the government (taxpayers)
While the other 2/3 are paying extortionate rents and taxes too

Who sounds like they have a better deal

yagan

EddieN75 wrote: »

1/3 of all tenants are getting the bulk of their rent paid by the government (taxpayers)
While the other 2/3 are paying extortionate rents and taxes too

Who sounds like they have a better deal

The government is simultaneously distorting the property market and supporting those affected by those distortions.

This can not go on indefinitely.

fliball123

C14N wrote: »

Hardly. The Land Value Tax would be a great way to do this, and it's something Milton Friedman endorsed as one of the best possible taxes that can be used by government. Calling the father of neoliberalism or his economic proposals Marxist is absurd. Its also currently practised in highly capitalist Taiwan.

Nobody is talking about expropriating assets here, it's about setting up incentives so that instead of what we currently have, which is inefficient land use is the financially rational choice for individuals to me, you set up incentives so efficient land use is the financially rational choice. Sunk costs aren't a great reason for bad policy that negatively impacts the economy and future generations overall.

If you want to analogise it to cars, many people may have put a lot of money into diesel vehicles, but those are going to end up being phased out over the coming years too, because of the negative externalities they cause, and we already have taxes that specifically incentivise fuel-efficient vehicles and disincentivises keeping older ones, which drivers all have to pay on an annual basis, but nobody in their right mind would claim this is Marxism. Maybe some people paid a lot of money for those older cars, or have very fond memories of their old vintage car, or whatever else, but they can still keep them and drive them if they really want to, it would just be cheaper to get something more efficient.

Have you ever bought and sold a house in this country? The analogy to cars is not really apt. As it does not address
The stress of buying or selling
or solitiors and their fees
Or paying Stamp duty
Or surveyors
Or having to get documentation for things like bill though the years where things like NPPR was an issue and you have to prove you were living there.
Go and sort out any certs for anything added or taken away from the property over the years

In your post outlined below you targeted those who are old and living in a house that is too big for them and living in areas that are highly desirable. You seem to think that buying a house 30/40 years ago was cheap as I outlined to another poster check what the interest rates and stamp duty rates where back then.

How do we do this with out any moral hazard impacting on tax payers - You say incentives so let me ask you why should the tax payers pay this old geezer more to downsize when they get zero benefit. Also why should another guy who has the same house in the same neighbourhood who is a bit younger and who has a property worth the same but has paid more for his property and with a couple of kids in tow? Do you not think he will be looking for the same deal and is right to deny him the same deal? Do we really want more state involvement in property? Have we not learned our lesson yet?

Your original post was in bold below,

Originally Posted by C14N View Post
I actually don't agree. Might sound cold but I think elderly people living in large family homes (many of which are not up to modern-day building codes) with gardens in high-demand areas that they happened to buy on the cheap 30 or 40 years ago is an inefficent use of land and should generally be discouraged by public policy instead of protected. At the same time, it should be made easy to move out and find new smaller places within their community, but both push and pull effects are important. Maybe not as big a deal in small towns or the countryside, but more in city centers and surrounding areas.



Just as an aside
The Land Value Tax how would this work? So we tax someone who has already paid out of after tax salary money to buy the land/house along with stamp duty and property tax and other fees related to buying to pay out more how is that fair? Now if your talking about Land that has not been built on yet and held by developers I have no issue with that but you can be damn sure that the builders will pass that cost on so FTBs and people who have not got a house and looking to buy will be asked to pay more.

fliball123

Browney7 wrote: »

So what was this rant then Fliball? Why keep bringing up 23bn trying to spin it? You're the first to lambast posters who post when they try to use numbers for their benefit

Are there people in this country getting handouts and have absolutely no intention of work??? Yes there is. Where is the other 15Billion going Browney. I was replying to a poster who was under the impression that the 23Billion paid out for in welfare most of it was going to pay pensions which is not correct. Yet people on here who dont own their own home and look at those who own a home and blame them for their problems. Homeowners do not control the property market. So its not their fault.

hometruths

Amadan Dubh wrote: »

It's a good observation. The line trotted out by the investors is that the properties won't get built without their finances but, like you, I don't see how this is the case with the huge demand for rentals and among FTBs, which translates to little risk in investing to build to rent or to sell off to individuals.

There is very little demand at current prices outside the funds and state buying/renting to maintain those prices.

Remove the funds and state and prices would fall.

WhiteWalls

schmittel wrote: »

There is very little demand at current prices outside the funds and state buying/renting to maintain those prices.

Remove the funds and state and prices would fall.

And would it be hugely controversial or even possible if they were removed?

yagan

WhiteWalls wrote: »

And would it be hugely controversial or even possible if they were removed?

This mess will not get a quick fix.

The government has waded in as a player in the market which has sent the like KBC out the door.

At this stage it will take years, if not decades to unwind their direct role in the market and their remaining stake in the three banks.

derekgine3

I'll try be positive about things:

Seeing quite a few properties hit the market in multiple areas in Dublin within the past two weeks.
Restrictions on viewings haven't even been officially lifted yet, do many people here predict a lot more stock to come on stream within the coming weeks and throughout the summer?

If i was a gambling man, i would say yes, whether it's enough to modestly drop prices by a couple of % remains to be seen.

yagan

derekgine3 wrote: »

I'll try be positive about things:

Seeing quite a few properties hit the market in multiple areas in Dublin within the past two weeks.
Restrictions on viewings haven't even been officially lifted yet, do many people here predict a lot more stock to come on stream within the coming weeks and throughout the summer?

If i was a gambling man, i would say yes, whether it's enough to modestly drop prices by a couple of % remains to be seen.

You could be right. And sadly due to Covid there will probably more executor sales than in normal times.

I've been watching a few target areas too and I'm not seeing a volume increase yet, but on the other hand there hasn't been much of a price rise either.

I find using proper.ie handy for gauging figures for the last two years.

fliball123

derekgine3 wrote: »

I'll try be positive about things:

Seeing quite a few properties hit the market in multiple areas in Dublin within the past two weeks.
Restrictions on viewings haven't even been officially lifted yet, do many people here predict a lot more stock to come on stream within the coming weeks and throughout the summer?

If i was a gambling man, i would say yes, whether it's enough to modestly drop prices by a couple of % remains to be seen.

The only thing is demand, demand will also rocket up if people who were on pup payments come back to the market they have essentially been locked out for the the majority of the lockdown. Its hard to know what way things will turn out.

Marius34

derekgine3 wrote: »

I'll try be positive about things:

Seeing quite a few properties hit the market in multiple areas in Dublin within the past two weeks.
Restrictions on viewings haven't even been officially lifted yet, do many people here predict a lot more stock to come on stream within the coming weeks and throughout the summer?

If i was a gambling man, i would say yes, whether it's enough to modestly drop prices by a couple of % remains to be seen.

If we look at the both sides of equation on demand vs supply. I fairly confident there will record high demands on second half of this year from accumulated First Time Buyers (since Celtic tiger).
What I'm not sure on level of demands from Council and Investors.
What I'm not sure on level of supplies hitting the market from all parties.

combat14

fliball123 wrote: »

The only thing is demand, demand will also rocket up if people who were on pup payments come back to the market they have essentially been locked out for the the majority of the lockdown. Its hard to know what way things will turn out.

thats if banks will be rushing to give out mortages to those who have been on covid payments for the last year....

could put the brakes on demand for another 6 months or so

fliball123

combat14 wrote: »

thats if banks will be rushing to give out mortages to those who have been on covid payments for the last year....

I think their is a hiatus of 3 to 6 months of them being back in work before they are eligable again. I guess it depends as well on how effective the vaccine it it works well hopefully we will not have to go back into lockdown

combat14

Marius34 wrote: »

If we look at the both sides of equation on demand vs supply. I fairly confident there will record high demands on second half of this year from accumulated First Time Buyers (since Celtic tiger).
What I'm not sure on level of demands from Council and Investors.
What I'm not sure on level of supplies hitting the market from all parties.

investors might have to be put back in their box and stopped from buying up properties en masse if the ff-fg government are to survive the next election

this will have to be done shortly - the level of public outrage even amongst the elderly with houses who typically dont care is unreal

mcsean2163

bubblypop wrote: »

Very thinly veiled there.....
It's not 'new arrivals ' that have caused any housing shortage.

It's not racist to have an immigration policy. IMHO, we've benefited enormously from immigration. It's a massive positive but if the system is falling apart the government could easily institute a 6 month immigration pause to enable housing resolution. I don't see why it would be that big a deal if it was phrased in a positive manner.

Then again our politicians are pretty incompetent...

cnocbui

The REITs being essential as funders of developments is bogus. In 2019 REITS bought up apartments that had been completed, en masse, without them being offered to the market, bought finished houses and bought apartments under construction.

So egregious was this that the UN criticised the Irish government for it.

First-time buyers will be deprived of the chance to buy almost 300 apartments at one of the country’s biggest new developments.

The 282 properties, which are still under construction at the Citywest Quarter development just outside Dublin, have been put up for sale in one block by builder Cairn Homes.

...

The proposed Cairn sale is the latest in a series of similar transactions. Last week, the country’s biggest landlord, a property investment company called Ires Reit, snapped up 118 family homes in the Dublin suburbs in a single deal from builder Glenveagh.
...
The UN recently criticised the practice of selling homes to investors en masse.

In a scathing assessment of the housing market, UN special rapporteur on the right to adequate housing Leilani Farha wrote to the Government, accusing it of facilitating the “financialisation of housing” through preferential tax laws and through weak tenant protections, among other measures.

https://www.independent.ie/business/personal-finance/property-mortgages/cuckoo-funds-elbow-young-buyers-out-of-housing-market-37973743.html

hometruths

cnocbui wrote: »

The REITs being essential as funders of developments is bogus. In 2019 REITS bought up apartments that had been completed, en masse, without them being offered to the market, bought finished houses and bought apartments under construction.

So egregious was this that the UN criticised the Irish government for it.

https://www.independent.ie/business/personal-finance/property-mortgages/cuckoo-funds-elbow-young-buyers-out-of-housing-market-37973743.html

If the UN criticised this in 2019 what on earth lit the touch paper in Maynooth to kick off all the reaction this week?

Hubertj

schmittel wrote: »

If the UN criticised this in 2019 what on earth lit the touch paper in Maynooth to kick off all the reaction this week?

I think because that development went to market with some people having already bought while others were on a waiting list. I think the developments in the article never went to market.

Amadan Dubh

schmittel wrote: »

If the UN criticised this in 2019 what on earth lit the touch paper in Maynooth to kick off all the reaction this week?

Maybe all the positive news regarding covid and being able to plan for summer etc. means people are starting to focus on normal life again and all its problems, with housing being the single biggest political issue bar maybe climate change.

Marius34

combat14 wrote: »

investors might have to be put back in their box and stopped from buying up properties en masse if the ff-fg government are to survive the next election

this will have to be done shortly - the level of public outrage even amongst the elderly with houses who typically dont care is unreal

many things might happen, but is it really likely to happen shortly...

yagan

<SNIP>

Mod Note

Not for this forum thanks. There's an entire forum dedicated to discussion of Covid where I'm sure you're welcome to discuss the psychological impacts.

Bass Reeves

PropQueries wrote: »

So costs have increased by over 100% since 2018 as that’s the difference between Sisk Livings costs in 2018 compared to DCC stated costs this year?

Small builder ( foreign national) that is in the house extension market was pricing at 1400/sq meter last year. He has a lot of work lined up so quoted 2k/sqM for a few job's. He quoted for 6 jobs got 4 of them.

Materials are supposed to have increased 25-30% in last 6-8 month

WhiteWalls

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Small builder ( foreign national) that is in the house extension market was pricing at 1400/sq meter last year. He has a lot of work lined up so quoted 2k/sqM for a few job's. He quoted for 6 jobs got 4 of them.

Materials are supposed to have increased 25-30% in last 6-8 month

Is materials going up a way of somehow regulating supply of houses and everyone in the building industry basically milking the system?

Simplified version but why would developers/builders build enough houses if doing so will bring down demand and profit margins?