The eviction ban

While having a corporate landlord is generally better for the tenant, an Irish person investing in a corporate landlord will pay the same on earnings from that investment as if they invested directly in property.

If the tenant is still living in the property, presumably rent would continue to be paid until the sale is completed.

Heard this story at the weekend about a couple who want to sell with their tenant in situ.

This couple have to sell because they cant afford the mortgage any longer. They gave notice back in Jan 2022 and the tenant was due to leave in June but the owners were happy to wait until their tenant found a new rental as she works in the area and her two children attend local schools. The tenant is on a rent subsidized scheme and couldn't find anything affordable in the area, then the eviction ban came in.

The owners need to sell, tenant rang her local td, council was contacted about the tenant in situ scheme and four months later the owners are still waiting for the council to do an initial inspection of the house. It seems the 2 bed house may be unsuitable because the children, a boy and girl, need separate bedrooms. The tenant and her children are very happy where they live, the owners want to sell but the council may not be able to purchase.

What will happen is anyones guess. Rent is still being received by the owners but if the council are not able to buy, everyone is back to square one after six months. Stress all round.

I think you have a point although I think such situations would be comparatively rare. If it did turn out to be a big issue in practice, then safeguards could be introduced whereby the landlord could recover the lost rent from the State as well as the tenant or, alternatively, the offer of LA housing could be made conditional on continued payment of rent to the landlord on the same basis as the recently expired contract and likewise conditional on continued accommodation provided by the landlord to the tenant until the handover takes place.

So there we have it, 82 to 68 in the Government's favour.

Probably a good time to remind some people, maybe Mary Lou and O'Broin and political tulip Ivana Bacik in particular, that nobody elected a socialist Dáil and that carrying-on the way they have been on the opposition benches will backfire spectacularly.

I mean, we now see the colour of the Indys' money and yet Labour have painted themselves into the position of having to proceed with their confidence motion, or else they'll look like amateurs, even though the known outcome will make them look like wasters and morons.

Holly Cairns says ending the ban is “cruel” and “inexplicable”.

it’s only cruel on the owners of those homes, inexplicable ? It’s pretty straightforward Holly, people who provide services / amenities to and for people by way of entering a legal business agreement, expect the other party to uphold their end of the deal..

maybe Holly, if people are not getting paid for a service they are providing, they shouldn’t have a gun put to their heads and told… “ you are to keep providing it, free gratis, so suck it up”.

cruel and inexplicable ? Yeah, right…. People of Cork South-West, please sort your shît out.

Soc Dems REALLY hate landlords as far as I can see.

Quite how they will help resolve a shortage of rental accommodation, I cannot see.

You are aware that this is the ending of the "no fault" eviction ban? Nothing to do with tenants who don't pay rent.

Not true. Corporation Tax on profits derived from land and buildings is 25%.

Private landlords pay their marginal rate of tax on rental profits, not rental income, after allowable expenses. If they have other income over €40k they will pay higher rates of income tax and USC.

Think you might have taken a wrong turn there......

You are going down unnecessary rabbit holes. There will be either a periodic tenancy, a tenancy at will, or a tenancy at sufferance depending on if and how rent is paid. Despite their names, the latter two aren't "tenancies" as per the legal definition of same in relevant legislation. The latter one concerns the case where the landlord has not consented.

So an Irish investor who invests in a corporate landlord will effectively be taxed up to 62.5% (50+12.5)? Of course the 12.5% is only on the profits isn't it? Is the 50% that the investor pays on the company profits or the full rental amount?

As far as I'm aware, if it is all paid out in the form of dividends then there's no corporation tax as there's no profit. However the investor will still pay at the marginal rate. Here the fund is acting as a conduit for the investor to invest in property.

Still wall to wall coverage about the eviction ban. Terrible situation and stress for anyone who will be affected by it.

Still havent heard any politician of any hue or any commentator discuss the elephant in the room, ie, the rapid increase in immigration which must be a major contributor to the squeeze on supply. Everyone agrees at this point that the state needs to build more social homes, we also need more rentals and more properties for sale but its hard to see how any political party can ever stabilise the housing situation if the population and demand keeps increasing at such a fast rate.

I think we as a culture like tangible assets. Funds, shares, bonds, derivatives and the like we don't really trust. Yet we need such investment in rental properties.

A possible solution is to market investment in funds the way some hotels raised money during the boom years. What you could do is "buy" a room in a hotel and derive an income from it. So you would have, say, room 501 in a particular hotel Now the hotel itself still determined who stayed in the room and your income wasn't really from that room but rather a share in the overall hotels income. It was more like a general shareholding in the hotel but you were made to feel like you owned a room and hotels were able to raise money this way.

Translating this to the rental market, you would get to "own" an apartment in a block. The fund for the block would handle repairs, sourcing tenants, collecting rents etc and you would get a portion of the overall rent for the block in proportion to how much you own of the block. You would not need to worry about void period, damage to the property, non-payment as this would be spread out among all the owners of the block.

There would also be benefits to tenants such as security of tenancy. The landlord would not be able to move him/herself in and nor would the tenant be evicted if the landlord exits the scheme.

Eviction moratorium never applied to delinquent tenants.