Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Proposal for landlord tax break in budget

Options
15791011

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 371 ✭✭bluedex


    Not when they are WUMs just looking for a reaction. It's quite the adult choice to block WUMs, it means reasonable debate can continue.

    Now, I expect you will completely disagree with me, given previous posts, but there you go....

    Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.



  • Registered Users Posts: 632 ✭✭✭squidgainz


    It's not wums because they are against your view. People are raising points as to why landlords should not get a tax break. They should however be given greater autonomy over their property



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,335 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    But you think anyone with more than one property doesn’t need anymore money?



  • Registered Users Posts: 632 ✭✭✭squidgainz


    People who own more than one property DO NOT need to be given additional tax breaks by the government imo. I have been saying that all along , grand my post was phrased poorly. But we are talking in the context of landlords tax breaks ie more money. But of course you took it out of context of the actual thread title.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    When one poster has over 16,600 posts but has only four things to whinge about I think its worth blocking them.

    1. Significant number of Landlords are tax dodgers. CSO and RTB figures don't support this opinion.
    2. Small landlords should leave if they cant hack it. They are and that's contributing further to the accommodation crisis.
    3. The state are subsidizing landlords. No they are providing supports to vulnerable tenants.
    4. Rentals should be run by monopolies. Monopolies stifle competition and limit substitutes for consumers.

    Whenever somebody shows him how his opinions are wrong with facts and figures he calls them stupid and moves onto the next topic. I don't think there is any point in engaging in the same conversation over and over that's why most posters now recommend ignoring him at this stage.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 29,154 ✭✭✭✭HeidiHeidi


    Why do you feel the need to repeat the same thing about 150 times over?

    We know you think landlords shouldn't get tax breaks. You've never actually put forward a cogent argument as to why you think this, though. Some of us think it might be a bit of an incentive to landlords to stay in the market, which is what is currently most urgently needed. Personally I don't think it'd make a jot of difference, it wouldn't have changed my mind anyway.

    Posting the same thing over and over and over again is just spamming.



  • Registered Users Posts: 371 ✭✭bluedex


    Well you didn't disappoint me anyway 😂

    But yes, the problem is totally caused by all the Big Bad Greedy Landlords

    Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.



  • Registered Users Posts: 371 ✭✭bluedex


    I agree, won't make a difference at this stage, it's too late as investors have lost confidence.

    Also, don't you know that wumming an spamming are now considered reasonable debate? Keep up 😉

    Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,335 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    No I just went on what you said which was a ludicrous statement that needed to be clarified.



  • Registered Users Posts: 632 ✭✭✭squidgainz




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 891 ✭✭✭Emblematic


    I'm not a tax expert and so open to correction, but is it not fairly easy to set up a limited company. I had one myself a few years ago when I was working for myself. The issue is that in order to benefit from it you have to get money out of it and into your pocket and, in doing so, you end up paying tax at the marginal rate.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,966 ✭✭✭✭Furze99


    Yes but there are annual requirements re reporting and costs associated, so it's not worth it for your average sole trader/ self employed. The main reason one might do this in this situation is to limit liability. But no sole trader/ self employed should be exposing themselves to excessive liability.

    Likewise for your typical small landlord with a single property let out, they just need to accept that they pay tax at marginal rate on this income.



  • Registered Users Posts: 891 ✭✭✭Emblematic


    That's not really the point I was making. The point I was making was that there isn't any great tax advantage. The company may be paying a low rate of corporation tax but you still need to get the money out, and that money will be taxed at the marginal rate of income tax. No tax savings. But I am open to correction on this.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,809 ✭✭✭mrslancaster


    There was a post on another thread a few weeks ago where the poster explained very clearly what the tax differences are between letting a rental property directly and setting up a limited company to manage the rental. If I can find it i'll post a link.



  • Registered Users Posts: 891 ✭✭✭Emblematic


    I would appreciate that. If there are significant tax advantages then that's what landlords should be doing. Although it was a few years ago for me, I don't remember the paperwork being particularly onerous just a bit annoying. Certainly worth it if it saves thousands of euros.

    A lot of the reasoning put forward by others however I think is erroneous. The fact that a corporation pays 12.5% corporation tax on profits and that being unfair compared to personal income tax is probably wrong since there will always be a need to get money out of the company and into the owner's pocket. And that final bit will be taxed at the marginal rate.

    What I think might be the advantage is possibly the ability to spread earnings over a number of years so that there isn't a spike in one particular year in personal income. The tax experts might be able to comment here.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,809 ✭✭✭mrslancaster


    IIRC the post noted that there was no tax benefit to single M&P landlords in going the limited company route.



  • Registered Users Posts: 891 ✭✭✭Emblematic


    That's what I would have thought too.

    This undermines the idea that corporations, in and of themselves, confer a tax advantage due to paying 12.5% or under corporation tax, and that therefore small landlords, who don't invest via a company, need a tax break on that basis.



  • Registered Users Posts: 891 ✭✭✭Emblematic


    I can see why the government is giving small landlords a tax break but I would question whether this is the best use of taxpayers money.

    To solve the current crisis what is needed is more residential units built. While giving landlords more money may help a little indirectly in generating more units, it will do so in a very untargetted manner. More profit for the landlord means a higher value on rental properties and properties in general. A higher value on properties means more incentive for builders to build houses and apartments. This is true but it is probably not a very efficient way of getting more gaffs built and has the downside of making things harder for the FTB to get on the ladder.

    Instead, money should be directly aimed at building new units. Streamline planning permission (I think one TD in the debate was saying it takes longer to get planning permission than it does to build the thing). Streamline and incentivise provision of infrastructure needed to build. Increase the number of social homes built. Attract international investment in new builds to rent and to sell. Provide tax incentives and structures Irish people to invest in new builds.

    These are just a few ideas and would actually bring prices down for both renters and those trying to get on the ladder.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,335 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    Isn’t the big issue the lack of control the LL has over their property as opposed to the tax on any profit they might make?

    I think the talk of tax is actually taking away from the real issue of problem tenants and the fact the RTB has no interest in representing the LL.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,966 ✭✭✭✭Furze99


    Yes I think so - regulation and the sense of lack of control seems to be what p*sses off most 'accidental' landlords. In truth though, whilst it'll always be understandable that people will have a property here or there that they don't want to sell and wish to let, they just need to pay tax on this income like everyone else. If they're into letting in a bigger way, then they need to treat it as a business and the work associated with that.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,786 ✭✭✭DownByTheGarden


    I only block trolls to be fair. Funny how everyone knows who is blocked :)



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,786 ✭✭✭DownByTheGarden


    So why not let them just sell up and leave the sector. You either want them or you dont.



  • Registered Users Posts: 34,799 ✭✭✭✭o1s1n
    Master of the Universe


    They can, just with tenants in situ and at a much lower price than the actual value of the property.

    He doesn't want them but he also wants them to make a lot less on the way out. They already have enough money for their tops hats and monocles as is apparently.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,987 ✭✭✭downtheroad


    The rate of corporation tax for rental income is 25%, not 12.5%



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,786 ✭✭✭DownByTheGarden


    Its almost like the government are setting it up so that no normal buyer can buy a property that was once rented, so the value is instantly knocked down. No investor will by it now either. Oh wait, the government are going to buy it, the very shower who pushed down its value, by not letting you get fair market price for it, so they could get it cheap. No market manipulation at the expense of the owner there at all.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,786 ✭✭✭DownByTheGarden


    Exactly. no landlord gives a sh!t about a tax break that we all now will not really be a tax break. There will be lots of forms and red tape and conditions with it. No landlord even wants it. They just want to be allowed to get their property back now and sell up at a fair market price.

    This whole tax smoke screen should be just taken off the table. Everyone knows that even if it was zero tax that 90% of landlords still want out. Tax is not the rental stock killer. Its constantly changing legislation and an unfair playing field.



  • Registered Users Posts: 891 ✭✭✭Emblematic


    Thanks. That furthers my point that there's no real tax advantage for corporate landlords due to the corporate structure itself.



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,839 ✭✭✭✭elperello


    Why should it be taken off the table?

    Surely something that might help to maintain supply is at least worthy of discussion.

    It's a bit of a stretch to claim no landlord wants a tax free income.

    Where did you get the 90% of landlords want out figure?



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,786 ✭✭✭DownByTheGarden


    By all means, leave it on the table, but dont put it front and center so you can ignore the real causes of the the exodus.

    I was being generous with 90%. I know a lot of landlords. Was one myself for a long time until recently. I dont actually know any who are left in the market who arent getting out as soon as they can get their tenants to move out. The straw has fallen on the camels back.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 632 ✭✭✭squidgainz




Advertisement