Irish Property Market chat II - *read mod note post #1 before posting*

Hubertj

cnocbui wrote: »

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/18/ireland-wants-a-compromise-on-bidens-15percent-global-tax-plan.html

This is actually a really cunning plan - embarrass the MNCs so much for operating in such a joke of a country that they up sticks and leave for a country run by adults, not cargo cultists with bones through their noes. This will free up a ton of houses in Dublin and the prices might even fall.

Worthy of Blackadder.

Sure the UK were at it the other day looking for exemptions for banking in the city. Everyone will want exemptions for something. Other countries use other countries for their tax shenanigans. Luxembourg, Caribbean, Isle of Man, jersey, Panama, and on and on and on….

MacronvFrugals

Its weird how quick the powers that be have moved with the tax rates although i'm sure years of ground work were required.

I remember people here laughing at Props last year "every time a new president gets elected nothing ever changes" but this time it does feel somewhat substantial unfortunately for Ireland.

hometruths

Hubertj wrote: »

Sure the UK were at it the other day looking for exemptions for banking in the city. Everyone will want exemptions for something. Other countries use other countries for their tax shenanigans. Luxembourg, Caribbean, Isle of Man, jersey, Panama, and on and on and on….

I'd agree on loopholes and exemptions. Leaving aside the argument of whether or not the MNCs that are already established here came for the tax, or the workforce or whatever, would you agree that anything close to the sort of levels of MNC investment we've seen in the last decade are unlikely to be replicated in the next decade given the tax changes?

awec

schmittel wrote: »

I'd agree on loopholes and exemptions. Leaving aside the argument of whether or not the MNCs that are already established here came for the tax, or the workforce or whatever, would you agree that anything close to the sort of levels of MNC investment we've seen in the last decade are unlikely to be replicated in the next decade given the tax changes?

We don't know anywhere near enough to even guess at this.

hometruths

awec wrote: »

We don't know anywhere near enough to even guess at this.

Fair enough, but if that's true then we also don't know anywhere near enough to even guess that the levels of investment will remain at the high levels seen over the past decade.

schmittel

schmittel wrote: »

Fair enough, but if that's true then we also don't know anywhere near enough to even guess that the levels of investment will remain at the high levels seen over the past decade.

If Ireland can win the same level of investment in the next 10 years we've had for the last decade it will be a fantastic performance. I have my doubts though but here's hoping.

Hubertj

schmittel wrote: »

Fair enough, but if that's true then we also don't know anywhere near enough to even guess that the levels of investment will remain at the high levels seen over the past decade.

We could engage in wild speculation and conspiracy theories to reach consensus on FDI for the next decade. More entertaining than just saying nobody knows.

hometruths

Hubertj wrote: »

We could engage in wild speculation and conspiracy theories to reach consensus on FDI for the next decade. More entertaining than just saying nobody knows.

Again fair enough. But then equally the projections used to claim that demand will continue to outstrip supply are wild speculation and conspiracy theories.

As you say, the truth is nobody knows.

cnocbui

schmittel wrote: »

Again fair enough. But then equally the projections used to claim that demand will continue to outstrip supply are wild speculation and conspiracy theories.

As you say, the truth is nobody knows.

460,000 adults still living with their parents rather indicates to me that no one needs to make 'claims' about demand outstripping supply.

Marius34

schmittel wrote: »

Again fair enough. But then equally the projections used to claim that demand will continue to outstrip supply are wild speculation and conspiracy theories.

As you say, the truth is nobody knows.

It would be wild speculation if we speak what's to happen in 5-10 years with demands/supplies. But we know we know what is happening now, and have an idea of near future, in terms of supply/demands.

josephsoap

Hubertj wrote: »

There ya go with the garden again!!

Speaking of gardens,

Some nice gardens with this property

https://www.daft.ie/for-sale/bungalow-derrygoan-ballinamore-co-leitrim/3412430

hometruths

cnocbui wrote: »

460,000 adults still living with their parents rather indicates to me that no one needs to make 'claims' about demand outstripping supply.

If those 460,000 are living with their parents because they are unable to afford a house at current prices, that is not demand but it is need as pointed out by another poster previously.

My point is that if you say any sort of forecasts re future FDI are wild speculation and conspiracy theory, then surely any sort of forecasts re immigration are also wild speculation and conspiracy theory?

And the idea that we need to build 30k units a year are in part based on immigration forecasts.

Marius34

schmittel wrote: »

If those 460,000 are living with their parents because they are unable to afford a house at current prices, that is not demand but it is need as pointed out by another poster previously.

My point is that if you say any sort of forecasts re future FDI are wild speculation and conspiracy theory, then surely any sort of forecasts re immigration are also wild speculation and conspiracy theory?

And the idea that we need to build 30k units a year are in part based on immigration forecasts.

It's not conspiracy, it's calculated probability/estimates. The further you go in the years, the wilder it gets.
Are we going to call weather forecast a conspiracy theory.

Hubertj

schmittel wrote: »

If those 460,000 are living with their parents because they are unable to afford a house at current prices, that is not demand but it is need as pointed out by another poster previously.

My point is that if you say any sort of forecasts re future FDI are wild speculation and conspiracy theory, then surely any sort of forecasts re immigration are also wild speculation and conspiracy theory?

And the idea that we need to build 30k units a year are in part based on immigration forecasts.

So how should they forecast build requirements? It’s not like a tap or assembly line. As we have seen it take years to build up capacity. They can’t wait and see every year.

And regarding the 460k adults living at home what does it mean? 18+? 21+? 25+?

Balluba

I have viewed a property that is being sold by receivers. Does any poster have views on the extra risks attached by buying like this?

hometruths

Hubertj wrote: »

So how should they forecast build requirements? It’s not like a tap or assembly line. As we have seen it take years to build up capacity. They can’t wait and see every year.

Whatever method they use, it should not be wild speculation and conspiracy theories, that's for sure.

Hubertj

Balluba wrote: »

I have viewed a property that is being sold by receivers. Does any poster have views on the extra risks attached by buying like this?

I presume your solicitor will perfect the title and all that but I would also try to investigate who the previous owner was or how it came to be in the hands of a receiver…. Would neighbours or former owners etc have an issue with you purchasing from receiver… maybe I’m being paranoid

hometruths

Marius34 wrote: »

It's not conspiracy, it's calculated probability/estimates. The further you go in the years, the wilder it gets.
Are we going to call weather forecast a conspiracy theory.

That's a different take, but also fair enough, to assume that projections are based on calculated probability/estimates.

In which case it begs the question of whether calculating housing demand projections based on the probability/estimates of immigration numbers largely driven by one sector which is vulnerable to external shocks outside our control is really that different to the last time?

In 2006 those making the projections could hardly be expected to have known the weaknesses in the global banking sector, which would bring the whole house of cards crashing down.

They can hardly claim the potential tailwinds facing MNC investment were not flagged up.

James 007

Your preference, €925K for a semi-d with a large rear garden a stroll away from the Dublin City Mortuary or for an extra €200K single two storey right beside the mortuary.:D

https://www.daft.ie/property-for-sale/drumcondra-dublin/houses

https://www.daft.ie/for-sale/detached-house-239-griffith-avenue-drumcondra-dublin-9/3412167

I somehow prefer to have my last stroll up to the mortuary on a fine summers day & take the cheaper one, it looks better value, your thoughts:rolleyes:

Amadan Dubh

MacronvFrugals wrote: »

Its weird how quick the powers that be have moved with the tax rates although i'm sure years of ground work were required.

I remember people here laughing at Props last year "every time a new president gets elected nothing ever changes" but this time it does feel somewhat substantial unfortunately for Ireland.

One word; Brexit. The City of London and Crown dependencies facilitate significant shady financial activities, tax avoiding being one of those activities. You can bet that Ireland leveraged their close relationship with the UK to have some clout in defending our own dubious practices and of course the UK is able to stand up to the French and Germans. Without them in the EU we are in no position to defend ourselves as we are too reliant on the EU, moreso than they are on us. Just think about there being an Irish exit from the EU - would we have been able to get some compromise from the EU the way the UK did?

Whatever chance there is to fight the G7 headline corporate tax rate reform, we are snookered when it comes to EU collective action as we are just going to have to take whatever we are given from the top table.

Marius34

schmittel wrote: »

That's a different take, but also fair enough, to assume that projections are based on calculated probability/estimates.

In which case it begs the question of whether calculating housing demand projections based on the probability/estimates of immigration numbers largely driven by one sector which is vulnerable to external shocks outside our control is really that different to the last time?

In 2006 those making the projections could hardly be expected to have known the weaknesses in the global banking sector, which would bring the whole house of cards crashing down.

They can hardly claim the potential tailwinds facing MNC investment were not flagged up.

Yes, the economical environment changes time to time, and they get prediction wrong time to time. Prediction are not, and should not be taken for granted, but it's much better than a wild guess.
But currently property market in itself is totally different from Great Recession, and not driven by crazy credits, and difference in supplies are massive.

Amadan Dubh

Deloitte UK have put out their post-covid WFH policy which is that employees can decide how much they want to come into the office. It's 3000 they employ in Ireland so quite significant if they followed a similar approach here. This is the best policy to implement; flexibility for the employees to decide if they want more or less time in the office.

Although, if I was the company I'd be wondering why I'm paying a premium for an employee to be in the office 4 days per week in terms of office rent I need to pay to cover them coming in and also the premium salary I need to pay them as they want to live in the city where the cost of living is higher. This is something lost on people who are claiming that salaries might become commensurate to where the employee moves; it essentially becomes a premium to hire someone who wants to be in the office a lot and who wants to live in the city where the cost of living is higher.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/jun/18/deloitte-ultra-flexible-working-uk-stagg-decide-when-where-how-they-work

javaboy

javaboy wrote: »

These “bubbles” are not comparable. For the most part, builders have no problem selling what they build even at the current prices. When prices rise, I don’t expect them to struggle to sell them either.

There are loads of mortgage approved buyers out there clamouring for houses. Due to the central bank lending limits and the more risk averse mid-COVID lending from banks, these buyers are unlikely to default.

So can you explain what will make this bubble pop? Because if it isn’t going to pop, then it’s not a bubble.

Rising prices alone aren’t indicative of a bubble.

Answer to my question please
Why lobby groups and builders putting heavy presure on government and Central bank trying reduce requirements to make people with small income borrow more ?
If sales as you say are flying there is "shortage" of property for buyers with money ?
Thank you

hometruths

Amadan Dubh wrote: »

One word; Brexit. The City of London and Crown dependencies facilitate significant shady financial activities, tax avoiding being one of those activities. You can bet that Ireland leveraged their close relationship with the UK to have some clout in defending our own dubious practices and of course the UK is able to stand up to the French and Germans. Without them in the EU we are in no position to defend ourselves as we are too reliant on the EU, moreso than they are on us. Just think about there being an Irish exit from the EU - would we have been able to get some compromise from the EU the way the UK did?

Whatever chance there is to fight the G7 headline corporate tax rate reform, we are snookered when it comes to EU collective action as we are just going to have to take whatever we are given from the top table.

Totally agree with this, and it is worth remembering that we've spent an enormous amount of our political capital with the EU on Brexit. The EU members had our back on the border, but there will be very little sympathy for our position on the tax score.

javaboy

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Answer to my question please
Why lobby groups and builders putting heavy presure on government and Central bank trying reduce requirements to make people with small income borrow more ?
If sales as you say are flying there is "shortage" of property for buyers with money ?
Thank you

Oh sure that’s an easy one. They want more money. Increase the LTI multiple and prices will rise. There’s no shortage of mortgage approved buyers but they’re not able to spend as much as the lobbyists and builders would like to get.

It’s the same reason I’m sure landlords would like to see an end to RPZs.

javaboy

javaboy wrote: »

Oh sure that’s an easy one. They want more money. Increase the LTI multiple and prices will rise. There’s no shortage of mortgage approved buyers but they’re not able to spend as much as the lobbyists and builders would like to get.

It’s the same reason I’m sure landlords would like to see an end to RPZs.

They simply can do that bringing prices up without puting any preasure on government.But because buyers on market not enough they try get them.That is my point.
By Shery Fitzerald analyst on Newstalk couple days ago.
There is not enough houses for rent in Dublin because land lords masively get rid of the property and no new coming on market.
Well if things so good why they selling milking cows !?

javaboy

[Deleted User] wrote: »

They simply can do that bringing prices up without puting any preasure on government.But because buyers on market not enough they try get them.That is my point

You’re wrong. Why bother with lobbyists if they can just put the prices up? All mortgage applicants are bound by the rules. This dampens prices.

As for there not being enough buyers, you must be ignoring all the headlines about thousands of buyers going after a handful of houses.

Timing belt

Amadan Dubh wrote: »

Yes, it will be linked to the US again. Just look at our recovery, it has relied on US MNCs and US institutional investors to employ people in Ireland and hoover up our distressed assets. This is why it is useful to read what happens there in order to appreciate the risks appropriate to Ireland, moreso than to monitor what is happening in other EU countries anyway. At the same time, it is totally out of the hands of those of us commenting here on Boards so is sort of like plane or bird watching, it is just a hobby interest to follow and discuss.

One thing I read in the last week was related to the institutionals being reluctant to drop rents, which we understand is linked to book values of the assets, how drops in asset values could trigger breaches of covenants in finance arrangements related to those assets, which of course could lead to forced asset sales by the lenders. The Central Bank also mentioned this in its risk report; the risk of asset fire sales and its impact on the property market. Liquidity and easy money is there until isn't.

Short story long, what happens in the US is extremely relevant to Ireland and not so much what happens in other EU countries.

What happens in Luxembourg will have a big bearing as most of the property funds are located there.

Gloomtastic!

Great article in the IT this morning about living in post-COVID Ireland. Views from various people of renown on topics that affect us all. I liked the piece by Dermot Desmond on housing......

https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/people/new-ireland-new-ideas-by-david-puttnam-dermot-desmond-catherine-motherway-and-more-1.4596401

Housing & property
Dermot Desmond – businessman and investor
Dublin has the highest rents of all EU capital cities. A starter home in Dublin is twice the cost of one in Belfast. We must rectify this by deflating prices for zoned land and controlling selling prices.

Irish housing policy has concentrated power among a small number of institutional developers to the detriment of the small builder and competition. Site ownership is corralled and planning permission hoarded to the detriment of housing supply. Apartments are left empty for protracted periods for fear of putting downward pressure on rents, while developers are allowed to sit on planning approvals granted. Simultaneously the State is inflating prices by guaranteeing rents, overpaying for social housing, utilising the SHDs (strategic housing developments) to reduce the quality of housing while protecting developers, and transferring public lands to private ownership.

We must cease using tax benefits to seduce foreign institutions into purchasing Irish homes at inflated prices. The following measures should also be taken . . .

Planning permission: All planning permission should include conditions that require work to commence within one year of grant and work to complete within three years. The practice of requiring large-scale issues to be agreed as conditions to the permission subsequent to its grant should be discontinued. Where there is any breach of conditions the State should retain the right to impose the cost of default on the developer and the right to have the work completed

Vacant property levy and tenant lease breaks: Where a landlord owns more than five rental properties, a vacant property charge equal to 50 per cent of the market rent should be levied if the property is vacant for more than three months. This would impact all professional landlords, including tax-exempt institutions. (Allowances would be made for significant renovations on older buildings). Tenants should be enabled to break all residential leases on three months’ notice, thereby ensuring landlords are not charging above market rents. Similarly, the State should have a right to impose an increasing levy if zoned residential land is not being developed.

Utilise State land: The State should become directly involved in the master-planning and building of new housing on State-owned land to facilitate the smaller builder and encourage competition.

Social and affordable housing: Ten per cent of the completed units in all large-scale housing developments should be provided at nil cost to the State and a further 10 per cent provided at cost. This would deflate land prices and recognise the benefit the State is conferring on developers and land owners through zoning and planning permission.

Derelict and unused sites: Greater use should be made of compulsory purchase orders to transform vacant/derelict/unused sites in city centres into residential development.

Stable communities are built by people with a long-term interest in where they live. This can be achieved for families via high-quality design and an appropriate sensitivity to the nature and scale of the receiving environment. The current policies inflate land prices, inflate the cost of housing, damage the quality of housing and protect institutional developers. Worst of all, we have created policies that have indentured the Irish tenant.

javaboy

javaboy wrote: »

You’re wrong. Why bother with lobbyists if they can just put the prices up? All mortgage applicants are bound by the rules. This dampens prices.

As for there not being enough buyers, you must be ignoring all the headlines about thousands of buyers going after a handful of houses.

Yes I do.Because those headlines are bought.

I cant find out which prices are rising when they are the same as on 2004 level or even lower
I remeber them because been interested buy house in those years and see completely similar prices now
For example the house which I want to buy in 2004 cost 145 000 in Dundalk and exact same house on same location were sold for 124 000
I remeber my mate bought house for 220 000 and today similar house on similar area cost 175 000
The other lad was trying sell his house at 500K in 2007 at the top of the boom and he sold it for 495 couple months ago
So here we have question or somebody tell lies or sombady mixing prices of prices on second hand and new built houses trying create panic
Or prices rising in Dublin only.

Browney7

Gloomtastic! wrote: »

Great article in the IT this morning about living in post-COVID Ireland. Views from various people of renown on topics that affect us all. I liked the piece by Dermot Desmond on housing......

https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/people/new-ireland-new-ideas-by-david-puttnam-dermot-desmond-catherine-motherway-and-more-1.4596401

Who knew he was such a raving socialist. He penned a piece over a year ago in the IT with similar sentiments expressed.

Wanderer78

Gloomtastic! wrote:

Great article in the IT this morning about living in post-COVID Ireland. Views from various people of renown on topics that affect us all. I liked the piece by Dermot Desmond on housing......

It's extremely disturbing to see our primary government parties will simply just not accept their approach to housing is catastrophically failing, and not only that, continually keep doubling down on their approaches, I suspect we re coming to the end of their era of governance

wassie

Gloomtastic! wrote: »

Great article in the IT this morning about living in post-COVID Ireland. Views from various people of renown on topics that affect us all. I liked the piece by Dermot Desmond on housing......

https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/people/new-ireland-new-ideas-by-david-puttnam-dermot-desmond-catherine-motherway-and-more-1.4596401

Fixing the supply side by reforming planning and taxation? Maybe I'm too much of a skeptic, but I suspect there's too much common-sense in that article for Leinster House unfortunately.

Amadan Dubh

Gloomtastic! wrote: »

Great article in the IT this morning about living in post-COVID Ireland. Views from various people of renown on topics that affect us all. I liked the piece by Dermot Desmond on housing......

https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/people/new-ireland-new-ideas-by-david-puttnam-dermot-desmond-catherine-motherway-and-more-1.4596401

While I always think Desmond looks like how I'd imagine a drug money-laundering Cuban banker would look (imagine him meeting you as you step off your water plane onto the island to discuss your "business" with him, "ah, Senor Escobar, buenos dias senor. Come, let's discuss business, but first, take this finest Cuaba Salomones as a gesture of good will."), it is music to my ears when ideas to fix the housing crisis specifically provide that prices need to be brought down. Too often, especially in the lobbyist pieces, we hear the term "affordable" but it is typically used to promote some measure which involves enabling individuals to be given more money to buy rather than to make prices cheaper (eg help-the-brickie talks about affordability by increasing borrowing for individuals, not decreasing prices).

Another article on housing in the IT today, apparently a poll of voters asking whether they would be happy to have housing built near them and "most" would have no problem and also believe it should be harder to object.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/irish-times-poll-majority-would-be-happy-to-see-new-housing-nearby-1.4597519?mode=amp

While proposed new developments often attract objections from nearby residents, often supported by local politicians, two-thirds of respondents to the poll (66 per cent) agreed with the statement, “I would be happy to see a significant amount of new private housing built in my area”. Twenty five per cent disagreed.

A slightly lower proportion of respondents (60 per cent) said they would be happy to see “a significant amount of new social housing built in my area”, while 29 per cent disagreed.

Amadan Dubh

Browney7 wrote: »

Who knew he was such a raving socialist. He penned a piece over a year ago in the IT with similar sentiments expressed.

It's mad that socialism is used when calls are made to tilt the balance away from the few beneficiaries back to the middle. That isnt socialism (look at the US stock market if you want to see socialism in action).

Wanderer78

Amadan Dubh wrote:

It's mad that socialism is used when calls are made to tilt the balance away from the few beneficiaries back to the middle. That isnt socialism (look at the US stock market if you want to see socialism in action).

... Its also disturbing to see adults still using this childish argument!

Browney7

Amadan Dubh wrote: »

It's mad that socialism is used when calls are made to tilt the balance away from the few beneficiaries back to the middle. That isnt socialism (look at the US stock market if you want to see socialism in action).

Comment was made with tongue firmly in cheek. I agree with most of what he says and similar sentiments are frequently raised in here and derided. The commentariat will pick up on it today and say "well Dermot Desmond is saying X Y and Z so he must be correct".

Darc19

Browney7 wrote: »

Who knew he was such a raving socialist. He penned a piece over a year ago in the IT with similar sentiments expressed.

You can be wealthy and socially responsible.

And he's right.

At the end of the day there are just a few builders of scale in the country, mostly concentrated around Dublin and they drip feed supply.

Coupled with councils not wanting to rezone lands and you have pure perfection for developers.


There's plenty of land in Dublin that is eminently suitable for housing.

Amadan Dubh

Nothing to see here, Bank of Ireland dumping €350m non-performing loans off their books into the shadows. Central Bank says banks are robust and well-capitalised. The loans disappear off into the market where the Central Bank does not have a lot of oversight. I note it says PIMCO may have bought the bonds/notes which reference the performance of these loans and the Central Bank probably regulates the PIMCO fund(s) which have bought the bonds but won't have visibility on these funds' portfolios.

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/financial-services/bank-of-ireland-shares-slide-after-it-offloads-350m-of-non-performing-loans-1.4597198?mode=amp

Bank of Ireland slid by 7 per cent to the bottom of the Stoxx 600 index on Friday after it said it had disposed of €350 million of non-performing loans. The bank is racing to lower its level of such problem loans ahead of an expected spike in Covid-related defaults

The portfolio includes both owner-occupied and buy-to-let investment properties.

Bank of Ireland, led by chief executive Francesca McDonagh, confirmed on Friday that it had entered into a securitisation of the portfolio.

A mortgage portfolio securitisation deal involves a lender pooling a portfolio of mortgages in a special purpose vehicle, and selling bonds to investors where interest, or coupon, payments are covered by income from the underlying mortgages.

Hubertj

Gloomtastic! wrote: »

Great article in the IT this morning about living in post-COVID Ireland. Views from various people of renown on topics that affect us all. I liked the piece by Dermot Desmond on housing......

https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/people/new-ireland-new-ideas-by-david-puttnam-dermot-desmond-catherine-motherway-and-more-1.4596401

Just a lot of common sense here. His opinion on finance would have been interesting if expanded on - he references ending tax breaks for institutional investors etc. Alternative sources…?

I’ve still not heard a way government could finance it all without breaching EU Capex rules so unless there is a solution to that other sources of finance are required.

hometruths

Hubertj wrote: »

Just a lot of common sense here. His opinion on finance would have been interesting if expanded on - he references ending tax breaks for institutional investors etc. Alternative sources…?

I’ve still not heard a way government could finance it all without breaching EU Capex rules so unless there is a solution to that other sources of finance are required.

He mentions ending tax breaks to stop investors inflating prices:

We must cease using tax benefits to seduce foreign institutions into purchasing Irish homes at inflated prices.

Are you asking if the institutional investors are not driving up prices, what alternative sources can find to inflate them?!

Are you Darragh O'Brien?!

cnocbui

The planning laws, An Bord Pleanála and An Taisce are rods Irish governments have made for their and the peoples collective backs. They all need reforming urgently.

They are great at preserving the interests of current property owners against the interests of those who would like to join them, while giving a ludicrous few unelected people, with often questionable mindsets, inordinate power over Irish society.

Hubertj

schmittel wrote: »

He mentions ending tax breaks to stop investors inflating prices:



Are you asking if the institutional investors are not driving up prices, what alternative sources can find to inflate them?!

Are you Darragh O'Brien?!

What I meant was - if tax breaks are stopped would the institutional investors leave as some claim? If they did leave what are alternative sources of finance for construction.

Marcusm

Darc19 wrote: »

You can be wealthy and socially responsible.

And he's right.

At the end of the day there are just a few builders of scale in the country, mostly concentrated around Dublin and they drip feed supply.

Coupled with councils not wanting to rezone lands and you have pure perfection for developers.


There's plenty of land in Dublin that is eminently suitable for housing.

Including the RTÉ lands in respect of which he or his wife are opposing low-mid height apartment developments!

hometruths

Hubertj wrote: »

What I meant was - if tax breaks are stopped would the institutional investors leave as some claim? If they did leave what are alternative sources of finance for construction.

Desmond's point is that currently the government is driving the costs up. They should be pursuing the opposite policies to bring the costs down.

Or in other words stop being the "gift that keeps on giving." It is helping nobody.

If some investors leave because they can no longer achieve 8%+ yield + capital gain, so what? If the demand for housing is there, alternative sources of finance will fill the void.

Mgit

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I cant find out which prices are rising when they are the same as on 2004 level or even lower
I remeber them because been interested buy house in those years and see completely similar prices now
For example the house which I want to buy in 2004 cost 145 000 in Dundalk and exact same house on same location were sold for 124 000
I remeber my mate bought house for 220 000 and today similar house on similar area cost 175 000
The other lad was trying sell his house at 500K in 2007 at the top of the boom and he sold it for 495 couple months ago
So here we have question or somebody tell lies or sombady mixing prices of prices on second hand and new built houses trying create panic
Or prices rising in Dublin only.

I bought a 3bed semi in dundalk in 2004 for 185k which crashed to 105k at bottom, at the peak a 3bed in estate sold for 317k slowly over 10 years prices recovered bit by bit, for last 3 years prices for 3bed houses in same estate were selling for max 175k. There seems to be a big change in last months though, houses going up for sale are going sale agreed in a few days and 2 bed went on 175k and sold in a couple of days so there seems to be heat in the market now. All of a sudden 3 beds are selling for about 200k.

Will be interesting to see if prices flat line again at that, I agree that it's a two tier market in dundalk between New and second hand 2 or 3 bed estate houses

Hubertj

schmittel wrote: »

Desmond's point is that currently the government is driving the costs up. They should be pursuing the opposite policies to bring the costs down.

Or in other words stop being the "gift that keeps on giving." It is helping nobody.

If some investors leave because they can no longer achieve 8%+ yield + capital gain, so what? If the demand for housing is there, alternative sources of finance will fill the void.

That’s exactly what I’m asking!! his view on it!!!

PommieBast

Wanderer78 wrote: »

It's extremely disturbing to see our primary government parties will simply just not accept their approach to housing is catastrophically failing

It is not a failure. It is a roaring success of bailing out those who paid too much for their property in the 2000's. They government just won't admit the latter and affordable housing are incompatible, and they made their choice of who is the real priority.

Marcusm

Marcusm wrote: »

Including the RTÉ lands in respect of which he or his wife are opposing low-mid height apartment developments!

He will be "socially responsible" as long as you are proposing, shall we say, "the right kind of housing for the right kind of people".