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

I too have Polish friends who return to Poland for medical care. The care they return for is private care. The public health system in Poland is just as bad if not worse in some areas as the Irish healthcare system. Polish people who live/work in Ireland can afford private care in Poland hence the reason they return for it.

Despite what people will tell you living in Poland is not easy.

We have gone to far to the "left" whether people accept it or not. I am in my early 50's started full time employment in the mid 80's at a point when you did not get any social welfare unless you had your PRSI "stamps". So you had to work for a min of 6 to 9 months before you had enough "stamps" to get social welfare.

I am also a landlord who when renting my property was approached by a single mother who was "entitled" to HAP of a given figure. My niece and her partner both working full time with no children could not afford the rent or to buy in the very area my property was in. Ironically I found out that the single mother was only paying €200 a month to live in the location two full time workers could not afford to live in!

I still believe our welfare system is one of the main factors our property sector is the way it is.

The state is participating in nearly 1/3rd of private tenancies in the state via HAP, homeless HAP, Ras and enhanced leasing schemes. There is no doubt that state inaction on actually building housing or procuring it and instead interfering in the private rental market is causing huge distortions and likely driving up rental rates for everyone.

If the state is happy to pay 15k a year for rent for a property for someone and if by going out to work they'd lose this benefit why the hell would they? Especially with the price of childcare also. HAP is a disaster for the state and renters who arent eligible for HAP and great for the funds especially - state guaranteed rent which they can send to Canada/offshore tax free. Ires even "Happed up" a block and then leased it in bulk to an AHB to save the ongoing hassle https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/investment-fund-in-social-housing-lease-for-40m-apartments-1.4619780?mode=sample&auth-failed=1&pw-origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.irishtimes.com%2Fnews%2Fsocial-affairs%2Finvestment-fund-in-social-housing-lease-for-40m-apartments-1.4619780

Farcical. A Monty Python sketch.

God forbid anyone would ever suggest collusion within these deals. Not I, anyway.

Expropriation is going to happen, or something similarly gigantic. Anyone still genuinely thinking this is a matter of "building more" must be wearing horse blinkers that allow a square inch of vision, backward binoculars. How many home constructions would need to be built to reduce (not maintain) prices within a reasonable timeframe? 80k a year? Good luck with that.

And then the Ukrainian refugees crisis atop it all? As I said above, imminence.

nimbys out in their droves

To be honest I think immigration into the country to fill jobs will be higher than the Ukrainian refugees as a lot of companies are struggling to fill vacancies and won’t be able to keep the show on the road otherwise. The churn in employment as employers try to poach is also leading to pay rises which will lead to higher property prices…To put it simply the economy is to hot in certain sectors.

Affordability is a problem everywhere but one thing that is unique to Dublin is the opaque way property sales are done. At least when I found a place in London it was a next-day yes/no with the advertised price and not weeks of farting around.

This is where people don't realise (certainly from a private landlords perspective). The State is not paying €15k for rent. They are only paying €7.5k (€15k less tax @ 50%).

So if you look at this from an economic perspective for a moment. The State has "housed people", the State then dictates the conditions of rental making them legal. The State does not have risk of non payment of rent, the State does not have any maintenance issues etc.

On top of this the State does not need to employ staff to maintain council owned houses, the State can then sit back and blame the "evil landlord" (remember the local plumber, taxi driver, PAYE worker) which I suspect the majority of people have a private landlord either in their family or within their social circle.

The State (the Govt) is responsible for this but so are some sectors of society. We have people who are "entitled" to this that and the other. I regularly view Facebook and groups of those looking for council housing. The number of people in their mid to late 20's who highlight being on the Housing list for 10 - 12 yrs and are near the top of the list is shocking.

I am all for helping people to get on but we have this idea that "I am entitled". With rights/entitlements comes responsibilities, yes if you have tried to actually buy a property and you reach your mid 30's and you have been unable then yes the State should assist at that point. But not when you reach 18 and start getting housing support.

I remember reading multiple posts on Boards over the years saying people wanted the rental market to become professional and that the small landlords should be out of the market because they were amateur. Well guess what, you got your wish and look at how thats working out.

Our housing situation is intertwined with our welfare system and we need to review our welfare system if we are ever going to improve our housing situation. While this will not fix the situation on its own, it certainly will go some way to improving it.

Mods again I think the above needs to be factored into the thread regarding the housing situation because of the affect it plays on the wider housing market.

I would agree with most of your post especially the last sentence.

However most sw spend is now used to prop up/inflate house prices and especially rents. These policies enrich the most wealthy and to add insult to injury, these entities pay no tax even though the assets they hold would not be viable without infrastructure provided and serviced by the tax payer

I have not heard one left leaning party calling for this

Beware of the wolf in sheeps clothing

The posters picking on the age profile of a small section of the people in attendance at a public meeting is terribly simplistic, reactionary and nasty. If these same posters feel so strongly about the need for development like this to proceed why not attend themselves to speak up and advocate for such development? It would be a positive change from endlessly quoting tired "old biddy" tropes.

I would agree with that. They should plan properly and designate areas to build high rise together.

From the 2019 budget approx a quarter of the HAP budget went to "corporate landlords" so not an insignificant number. I expect a corporate landlord could encompass REIT,ICAVs,self directed pension wrappers etc. Yes the REIT shareholders will pay tax on dividends but the top 10 shareholders in Ires own 62% and are all tax exempt vehicles.

Also, if people have a property or two to top up their pension income on top of a the state pension then the tax take would be in the 20%s until their income was above 36k or so.

I'd welcome a study as to what level of income tax the state generates from rent and what HAP really costs but if I was to make a high level approximation I'd apply a low 30s% haircut to the HAP spend which will still accumulate to a nice ticking bomb in Leinster House to go with the pension time bomb for some other schmuck to sort out in 20 years time.

Add into that the "enhanced leasing scheme" where the state is responsible for repairs and the lessor gets rental increases based on consumer CPI then there is some serious investment uplift being pocketed by effectively tying a (admittedly dumb and potentially lazy) AA- borrower into a ridiculously bad deal. Dermot Desmond summed it up nicely pre pandemic with "having a laugh".