Excellent article on how important small landlords are and how screwing them over hasn't worked

The Student

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119323253#Comment_119323253

Your last paragraph stood out to me. Over half the rent of small landlords goes back to the State and you could not have more tenant friendly anti landlord environment if you tried.

You think the govt is subsidising the small landlord. It can take two yrs to get a property back for non payment of rent going through the rtb and you think the govt is on the side of the small landlord.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119323838#Comment_119323838

Take that massive subsidy out of the market and see how you like it. It is all hypothetical as the politicians both have their own fingers in the pie, and have too many buddies with their fingers in their pie. In 2019, the money pumped into the housing and rental market by the State was more than two thirds of that spent on unemployed people.

And what is this novel claim about half the rent going back to the State (presumably from idiot landlords who don't know how to write off expenses btw, but that is another matter). I had forgotten that one again how only landlords are unfairly subject to income tax on their income.

Perhaps you should get onto the UN about it and explain why poor landlords are being discriminated against ..... by being subject to the same income tax rates on their income as everyone else. Mad isn't it? Tends to be a particularly popular view among civil servants who think that because they already get to leech a good living off the state for doing the absolute minimum effort, that others should also pay all the tax for them as well!

Landlords get a good return for the risk they take on. It is up to you then to manage that risk and your fault if you don't either understand it, or if you are unable to manage it. That's business.

Flinty997

The only people who want HAP and such are tenants who use it. The private market has never needed or wanted it.

If it was popular with LLs they wouldn't be leaving when it's at it's highest.

The majority of landlords got into the market before all these subsidies became a crutch for social housing provision.

The Student

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119323893#Comment_119323893

So as demand exceeds supply in your world of economics price falls.

Interesting concept seems all the economists are wrong and one of the fundamental basic concepts of economics is wrong.

So corporate landlords pay income tax? Maybe someone should tell revenue as they aren't collecting it.

Oh yeah the good living of the majority of civil servants who are on less than 40k a year, you know the clerical officers, the nurses, teachers etc. I forgot they are on so much money they can easily afford a property.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119324093#Comment_119324093

The social welfare handouts to landlords, such as HAP, simply artificially inflated rents, and thus also artificially increased house prices. Couples with more indirect government assistance to landlords such as increased protections and stays against repossessions etc.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119324576#Comment_119324576

How on earth do you conclude that "demand" rises when the price that a large number of people can pay is suddenly reduced to fractions of what it was???? Economic "demand" doesn't just mean someone sitting in a corner whinging "I want it now now now". It refers to the price that people are willing to pay for the good or service. The demand of the person who was getting, say, 600 on the HAP and putting their own 100 in on top of it will be reduced from 700 to 100 if HAP is stopped.

"Corporate Landlords" are entitled to structure their business as an actual business. The exact same as you are entitled to do. Corporation taxes are lower of course, but a business is an inanimate entity which is ultimately owned by people. A "business" cannot go out and enjoy money or go on a holiday. It is merely a organizational construct. The people who own the business can of course extract value from that business and spend it on a holiday. But as that money is extracted, it is taxed at that point in time as income for them. I see rants like yours fairly frequently. But they stem from a lack of understanding.

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119324602#Comment_119324602

The handout is to the tenant. LL can just get a non HAP Tenant.

The reason it exists to try and be competitive in market that was rising BEFORE the subsidy existed. It has failed.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119327391#Comment_119327391

That's fine. You are just illustrating that you don't understand. There is not just HAP btw. There are other schemes and long term rentals of private property. But we can leave it at that.

Dav010

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119328230#Comment_119328230

I don’t know who I’m more embarrassed for, you, or the idiots who took the bait and responded to your inane opinions.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119328281#Comment_119328281

If you don't understand it either then you can join the club with the rest of the people who can't comprehend basic concepts. It's completely fine and no skin off my nose.

Facts are facts. Opinions are something else. It's not the end of the world if you get confused between them

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119328281#Comment_119328281

We all get our kicks in different ways.

https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/no-landlords-left-in-ireland-if-pbp-rent-reduction-bill-passes-says-taoiseach-1334292.html

Gets popcorn....

The Student

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119324635#Comment_119324635

When demand exceeds supply price rises until the point of equilibrium.

We currently have excess demand. Even if you remove HAP you still have excess demand. So instead of those receiving HAP getting the properties those who are not in receipt of HAP will rent them.

If you researched the shareholding of the corporate landlords you might actually realise that they are non resident and as such don't pay any income tax to Irish Revenue.

On a side note your tone in your posts (specifically your bold text) is unwarranted.

I won't however lower myself to personalising insults unlike you.

Viscount Aggro

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119324635#Comment_119324635

Corporate landlords are controlling the rental market, that is the problem.

Take D 14 / 16 for example.

The REITs are keeping back apartments, to avoid dropping the average rent.

That is control, where they are dominant in that part of Dublin.

People cant buy these apartments, they are sold in blocks.

In sporting terms... the You dont even get a chance to bat.

Check out Marlet website - the whole company is up for sale.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119328794#Comment_119328794

What you call a "corporate landlord" is a business entity. Which is registered to do business here. The individuals who own that business might indeed be based anywhere else. Of course you see the rant about the fact that they might not have to pay tax here on their dividend income. But they have to pay it where they are located. I could have an investment in country X generating an amount of money which I might not have to pay any tax on towards country X. But I would have to pay tax on it in Ireland.

Again, you are confusing the word "demand" in an economic sense, with a person "demanding something" as in saying "give it to me now".

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119328833#Comment_119328833

But hold on, we have people dismissing the notions that many "small landlords" (often just people who were able to get credit off the banks and outbid buyers who wanted to live in those properties) outbidding prospective buyers might be a bad thing. I was told a few times above, that they are providing a service.

Yet we can all recognise that that REIT outbidding prospective owner-occupies in order to rent that property back to them is a socially undesirable outcome. Even though they are proving the same service - just more efficiently.

The REIT block buying is at least more efficient and can be used to inject funding into the sector for new development. The developer can do one deal and have no messing or advertising or people chopping and changing and getting delayed etc. Having one building under the same ownership also helps with the provision of additional facilities. You're not dealing with trying to get owners to pay over their annual maintenance and fighting over what should be done with the money. The investment company might think "lets put a gym room in for the renters to make our entire building more attractive". Good luck with trying to get 100 random owners who are small landlords agree on such things.

I already outlined above that I think there should be strictly enforced vacancy taxes.

The Student

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119328862#Comment_119328862

With the greatest respect I am well aware of what demand is in economic terms.

You are unwilling to actually engage in a reasoned discussion.

Unfortunately I too (like other posters) have fallen into foolishly responding to your posts.

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119328794#Comment_119328794

The evil landlord thing is old. It will take it's own course. The % of new rentals in corporates tells it's own story. That ship has sailed. It just will take time due to sheer numbers involved.

The next thing will be what happens outside the cities.

https://extra.ie/2021/05/24/news/irish-news/cuckoo-funds-farms

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119328921#Comment_119328921

My posts are merely factual.

Social welfare being injected into the market artificially raises rents for everyone. It also raises house prices. And raises land prices.

Take all those subsidies which are there to benefit the politicians' "small landlord" buddies and let the market go back to it's natural level. You will still be able to partake in rent-seeking activity by buying a house and renting it out if you want. Your rental income will be less, but the price you can pay will also be less.

Topgear on Dave

Out of interest Donald, have you ever rented a place yourself?

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119328939#Comment_119328939

Flinty997, those funds do the same as you do. They are just better at it than you.

Funds might indeed buy agricultural land if they want. They won't do it for rental income though. Only for speculative purpose. Why?:

1) Yield would be maybe 2% on agricultural land. Happy out when interest rates are zero .... but it looks like those days are gone for the foreseeable.

2) Stamp duty is 7.5% on land.

3) The author of that article is apparently aware of the current tax reliefs on leasing out farmland but is not aware of the conditions (such as a yearly limit for that relief - I think the current limit is 18k per annum for 5 year leases. Maybe up to 30k for longer. Regardless of the exact figure, the point is that it's not applicable to a rental income of 100k etc. )

Land also isn't as liquid as housing. Housing is itself, not exactly liquid.

I can see wealthy individuals buying agricultural land, but not "cuckoo funds".

The Student

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119328939#Comment_119328939

Exactly those renting are in for a very difficult time. Even Threshold acknowledge the fact that private landlords are needed in the market but I agree the damage is done which is why so many private landlords are leaving.

I will constantly review my position and will exit the market if I feel the need to.

MakersMark

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119328998#Comment_119328998

Except when the Shinners get in, you won't be able to exit, unless you can find a buyer willing to accept forever tenants!

They have stated they will remove a landlords right to sell vacant of tenants or use for himself or immediate family.

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119328989#Comment_119328989

I suspect it's not about renting or housing. It's about political ideology.

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119329064#Comment_119329064

That certainly encouraged quite a few to head for the exit.

amacca

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119329165#Comment_119329165

It's a hell of a thing when your property is no longer your property.

The Student

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119329064#Comment_119329064

I don't think this will happen. I may be wrong. All parties when they are in opposition will say they will do x,y and z when they get voted in and they realise they can't or wont when they are in Govt. Irelands history of property ownership is still engrained in the Irish psyche. A large % of the private landlords are your local plumber, electrician etc. I suspect the majority of people know a private landlord in either their family, social circle or work place.

These people are not faceless corporations and the psyche of property ownership (even as an investment) is still there that its their property to do with as they please (within reason). If this is pushed by any party in power then a constitutional challenge may be taken. I believe the constitution protects the right of property ownership (I can't say this for certain) but I would suspect it is correct otherwise the existing Govt would have already done something on this as it is one of the main issues out there.

I have no political affiliation to any party. But I doubt Sinn Fein will succeed in obtaining an overall majority in Govt to introduce their plans. They may be the bigger party at some point in a future Govt but I am not sure they understand Ireland from a business/international perspective.

I don't want this thread to veer into political commentary.

growleaves

"Good luck with trying to get 100 random owners who are small landlords agree on such things."

In retrospect - though I suppose it is too late now - small LLs should have formed some kind of guild, union or linked co-operatives to exercise collective power. Or at least a loose advocacy group.

Look at who does act corporately:

1. NGOs who advocate for tenants' rights

2. Political parties who write and pass legislation

3. Financial corporations now cornering the LL market

Can atomised individuals get a better deal than organised, co-ordinated groups?

Clearly they cannot, and blaming abstract entities like 'the public' or 'tenants' while running for the exits doesn't strike me as clever or brave.

Flinty997

The only thing that stopped SF the last time was they didn't have enough candidates and no one would go into coalition with them.

Other than a tenant breaking the lease, which isn't under the LLs control There's only two things left in the LLs control to regain a property. The expiration of the tenancy after 6yrs and taking the property to back to sell or use for family. if you consider all the rights that been created for tenants over the last 20 or 30yrs and none for the LLs. You'd have assume those last two are very likely to go next. More so if a socialist and left-wing govt are in place.

Many are leaving while they still can.

If someone is in it for the long term, like the next 20~30yrs they probably won't leave, and/or don't think they'll need the capital invested back.

Bass Reeves

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119330526#Comment_119330526

SF will probably hit 60+ seats the next time. However most of these seats will be at the expense of left wing party's and Independent's.

All tenancies from not on are of unlimited duration so the six year term has gone. LL's will continue to exit unless there is some changes in the next budget.

Ray Palmer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119328281#Comment_119328281

It is a fair point. DT is just ranting and proposing things that will never happen as they would be so disruptive causing many homeless people. It is insane what he is suggesting and saying. Along with his massive assumptions on who are landlords and how they make money. He is adding nothing and should be ignored as you suggested