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

Those houses are in Mervue not Renmore. And despite the relative proximity there's a big difference.

40% of first home scheme recipients are single which would imply that wealthiest top 20% are the recipients of aid to purchase a home. One really needs to question if this is the best use of taxpayers money.

Most if not all will be buying a house so immediately it is underutilised, which is already a big issue so why are we giving subsidies to the well off to encourage more under utilisation

So you have an issue with helping single people buy a home? Currently it's incredibly difficult for a single person to buy.

The first home scheme is for new builds aka shared ownership

Edit: They appear to have changed it to include tenants that have received notice to quit, who wish to purchase the property from the landlord

The opening paragraph in the Eligibility section of the site directly contradicts your assertion.

“The First Home Scheme (FHS) aims to make home ownership achievable for thousands of individuals and families by bridging the gap for first-time buyers and other eligible homebuyers between their deposit and mortgage, and the price of their new home.”

Wouldnt happen anywhere. They bid on houses in US too.

Subsidies/assistance/help whatever we want to call it all increase price and further damage affordability for singles and couples

Personally I feel there should bo no assistance for anyone in buying a house, all efforts should be put into making rentals more affordable through reducing costs. Any help should be redeemable to help the next person(s)

I could guarantee that housing for all would be in a much better state with such a system

Individuals are welcome to avail of the scheme - that doesn't mean it won't encourage underutilization. Since FHS is new builds, self builds, or ex rentals sold to tenant, it is fairly unlikely to see single people buying 1 beds or 2 beds. There are a frighteningly small number of new 1 and 2 beds for sale in this country.

And as bass claimed up thread about renovations of old 2 beds - that is not FHS, it's a different scheme for vacants. FHS cannot be used for vacants or renovations, so older smaller stock will not come into picture for this scheme.

I thought it was that only high-earning single people could hope to buy a house, so most single owners who are using the FHS are probably on 70k+. Should we use supports like the FHS to help high earners onto the property ladder, or should they target lower-earning couples?

One of sample case studies on the first home scheme site

Jim has his own site and earns 75k a year and appears to be looking for a 100k from this scheme to fund his McMansion

Jim doesn't strike me as an individual that needs state assistance to fund his home.

Simon Harris can't stop mentioning farmers since his elevation maybe this is the reason this case study is in there

Tax isn't a savings account where the more you pay, the more you get back. Usually the opposite.

My personal experience is single people are more likely to house share than couples. Most couples don't want to share, and most singles don't want to live with couples.

apparently the higher interest rates are upsetting the construction companies ..

they cant be helping would be buyers here either

news from US today seems to be inflation is sticky there on top of sharp US growth slowdown - great combo in an presidential election year

I understand and sympathise with all of your well made points.

However the solution for all income groups is to ramp up supply that serve all income groups

This week we announced cheap loans @ 3.5% for existing homeowners to renovate there homes. Could we not do something similar for those with no homes.. According to the developers the labour is present to ramp up output and of course there is no shortage of land

The solutions are simple, what's necessary is the will to remove what's blocking the solution from being implemented.

I'm afraid that giving subsidies to those on a 100k salary adds to the dysfunction rather than doing anything to solve the problems

It wouldn't have anything to do with the weather I wonder. Son has started building arrived back to this when steel was supposed to go in in early March, delayed concrete by a week. We soldiered on many did not. Subfloor in awaiting the blocklayer to come back

Builders/developers won't build unless they get the profit they want and the market decides what that is.

They can't get finance at a reasonable figure to actually build. Giving low cost finance to those who want to buy is all well and good but who pays for financing these low cost loans?

No matter what people think I am sure there are aspects of building that we can't control (anything we need to either import or any input where there is a shortage).

It never ceases to amaze me how many people completely ignore simple economics. For example let's look at the rental sector for a moment we have a housing crisis, so we make the rental sector toxic for a landlord resulting in some (not all) selling up because of this fact.

But the property does not cease to exist! Correct but you are under utilising existing stock. Logic suggests give the landlord a short term break to encourage them to stay giving breathing space to increase the number of properties built/renovated (remember increased supply is the answer).

Why should someone on €100k not get a subsidy? This person is most likely contributing between €30k and €40k in income tax, PRSI, usc etc. Do you think their earnings are received from doing an easy job?