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

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

Options
1794795797799800804

Comments

  • Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,982 ✭✭✭hometruths


    If it is only a 5% discount that is not much in the way of affordability. Seems quite significant whether or not the list price is 5% or 20% discount to market price.



  • Registered Users Posts: 371 ✭✭Gary_dunne


    Just to clarify that these affordable housing schemes are not eligible for FHS as in order to get the reduction on market vale to the 20% DCC state "Purchasers will enter an Affordable Dwelling Purchase Arrangement (ADPA) with Dublin City Council whereby the Council will take an equity share in the dwelling equal to the difference between the market value of the dwelling and the price paid by the purchaser expressed as a percentage of the market value of the property. The Council's equity share in the property may subsequently be redeemed by making payments to the Council."

    So technically the new owners to get the 3 bed at 475k will own 80% of their home with DCC owning the other 20% equity which will need to be repaid at any point of sale or incrementally to increase your stake in your home.

    With HTB, a couple on 106k could reduce it to 445k for the upper level 3 bed which with a 10% deposit would equate to roughly a €1700 mortgage over 35 years.



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,564 ✭✭✭✭Bass Reeves


    I think there is a state subsidy for apartment building at present. It was put in place last year after finance dried up for apartment building from pension funds.

    Just to put the price of these houses in context. At present in Limerick it woukd have been( considered the 4 dearest city in Ireland for housing) new developments in Patrickwell ( it not Adare) and Coonagh are both at around 500k.

    The ERSI think we will only need about 35k units per year to 2050 a substantial difference compared to the predictions of 50-80k by some analysts.

    On someone buying and selling at a profit after the retention period yes it may happen but it will be limited numbers. Seldom do houses remake there first day value in the short term due to mortgages rate differences, HTB subsidies, professional costs related to purchasing etc.

    As well these housing estate could be considered only a step above social housing. Many will have shared equity attached to them where the buyers have only a joint income of sub 100k

    Remember

    "Never let the perfect get in the way of the good"

    Slava Ukrainii



  • Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,982 ✭✭✭hometruths


    On someone buying and selling at a profit after the retention period yes it may happen but it will be limited numbers. Seldom do houses remake there first day value in the short term due to mortgages rate differences, HTB subsidies, professional costs related to purchasing etc.

    I was being a bit facetious, apologies. I think it would be very limited numbers indeed for anybody profiting selling after retention period. Quite the opposite.

    If these figures are based on market value of these houses being 600k, which I am bit confused TBH on the 20% discount idea, I think it is very unlikely anybody will be selling these at a profit anytime soon.

    As you point out as soon as they are second hand houses, they don't qualify for subsidies, so if your circumstances change in the short term and you have to sell, you're up against it in trying to recoup the market priced that was claimed at time of first sale.



  • Registered Users Posts: 232 ✭✭Montys return


    As far as I can tell, and they haven't published the market values yet like Fingal Coco did, but the upper limit of 475,000 reflects the minimum discount to maket value which is 5%.

    Dublin city council would have to offer to take a minimum of 15% as equity for the applicants with the lowest income that are eligible, so the 18-22% they referred to as their discount offering is for the minimum price set for each house type.

    Your logic at the end is still fine just with the exception that DCC only have 5% equity of the home.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4,613 ✭✭✭Villa05


    I thought this type of thinking would have disappeared after Covid and we would have respect for those people that make sure food and other goods are on the shelves, prepared food for those that need it, those that care for our children and elderly parents and even barmen and women who help collect significant amount of taxes which are increasingly used to drive up the wealth of asset owners and ensure those workers can't afford housing in any of its forms.

    I guess we must revert to paying homage to those working in Legal, Finance, Real Estate, and insurance professions



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,613 ✭✭✭Villa05


    Its a pity that the ceiling for apartments in Limerick was not increased from 450k so the the council could avail of it for the 630k they are paying for social and affordable apartments in the new development on the Ennis Road.

    The reason the ceiling for apartments is not increasing is there is absolutely 0 demand for apartments priced at 450k or anywhere near that price in Limerick from people that are paying the majority of the price from there own pocket. Proof if ever it was needed that these schemes have moved on from propping up the property market to taking it to ever more unsustainable levels



  • Registered Users Posts: 486 ✭✭Ozvaldo


    Who would really pay 500 k for a house knowing you could end up next to someone on affordable housing ?



  • Registered Users Posts: 371 ✭✭Gary_dunne


    I think you are thinking about social housing, no affordable and even if you are your point is a pretty nasty punching down viewpoint.

    As we have been discussing affordable housing now constitutes couples that are on a combined salary of €106k. At what salary level do your neighbours need to be on to be acceptable to you?



  • Registered Users Posts: 486 ✭✭Ozvaldo


    Twas a sarcastic joke



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4,613 ✭✭✭Villa05


    Summer 2024 - inflation largely under control, energy prices falling, interest rates have peaked, record employment levels, wages increasing quickly (now surpassing price growth since COVID), tech stock indexes breaking new record highs, corporation tax take surging to new highs, FF/FG likely remaining another 5 years

    Only yesterday we were informed of another costly unnecessary government scheme will result in an increase in our refuse bill. The 80% previously compliant have to pay for the 20% that were not

    Energy provision a severe constraint on future growth

    Employment in the tech sector is at 2016 levels in the US

    Tech indexes are being propped up by a reducing magnificent "5" with insider selling rife in these companies

    Inflation easing and wages rising is not a sustainable condition

    EU under significant threats if breakup externally and internally with a Donald Trump presidency most likely to add to that pressure later.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,613 ✭✭✭Villa05


    The reasons you propose as benefits are exactly why the Scheme is terrible

    Escape the rent trap: state land should be used to ease the pressure on rentals not a gift of up to 50% of the value to 1 family. It then acts as bridge to ownership and the next family gets an opportunity



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,187 ✭✭✭DataDude


    Yeah I think that’s a fair comment and wouldn’t economically disagree. The overall scheme is 40% cost rental, 40% social, 20% ‘affordable housing’. I guess the 20% affordable housing is designed to have a more diverse estate and give some sense of long term ‘equity’ for some people in the estate. Theres also the social element of people feeling more like they ‘belong’ when they own vs cost rental. 20% seems an ok balance of that vs long term state assets to me.

    Either way, I’m happy to see that cohort of households in the €40-€100k bracket get a good break for a change.



  • Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,982 ✭✭✭hometruths


    The bulk is likely to be social housing, as 40% was earmarked for social, 20% for cost rental and 20% for affordable purchase to low income.

    It agreed that the developer Glenveagh Properties would build 853 homes, 40% for social housing, 40% for cost rental and 20% for low and middle-income workers qualifying for the affordable purchase scheme.

    https://www.rte.ie/news/dublin/2024/0626/1456761-oscar-traynor-woods/



  • Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,982 ✭✭✭hometruths


    This is an odd headline in today's Indo leading with the story of the ESRI's latest forecasts:

    You'd normally get no argument from me with those warning about the dangers of oversupply, but the ESRI's research goes to great lengths to stress these projections are only for future need based on population growth and demographic changes - they do not account for any surplus or deficit right now in the current housing stock.

    So it's a bit disingenuous, but eye catching, all the more so as it is very unusual for any media in Ireland to even consider the possibility of building too many houses, never mind plaster a headline on the front page.

    I wonder is the Indo becoming contrarian. I won't hold my breath!

    https://www.independent.ie/business/housing-demand-may-be-significantly-below-simon-harriss-50000-a-year-target-esri-report-says/a860917181.html



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,187 ✭✭✭DataDude


    Quite amusing, I was only saying to someone today how both RTE and Irish times had gone other end of the spectrum. Picked the most extreme requirement of the 12 scenarios set out by ESRI (which was 53k) and used that as their headline. Good to see independent flipping it on its head.

    I get that ‘average ESRI projection is largely consistent with government housing targets’ may generate less clicks but it’s a shame to see our national media purposely massaging the facts to generate attention. They’ll well know the majority won’t read the detail

    https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2024/0702/1457635-esri-housing-report/



  • Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 5,982 ✭✭✭hometruths


    Minister was getting a grilling on News at One about why his Dept had commissioned this research from ESRI that didn't make any attempt to measure pent up demand.

    On the face of it a fair question, and he basically said that they already had the Housing Commission's estimate of 250k, the Central Bank's of circa 120k and Housing Europe of 180k, so there was little point in asking the ESRI to throw their hat in the ring too.

    I wouldn't be too quick to praise O'Brien but I thought it was a fair point.

    I think reading between the lines the ESRI are in fairly strong disagreement with Housing Commission on the estimate, and it would probably cause more problems than it solves to have them come out with a wildly different figure. I suspect they were gently encouraged to leave it well alone.



  • Registered Users Posts: 19,610 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump


    How about the poor sod paying 500k and him being the one who needed the affordable subsidy on top of it…………..



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,687 ✭✭✭RichardAnd


    The person who has no choice and needs a suitable place to live. However, I agree with your sentiment.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,027 ✭✭✭Blut2


    "100k is nothing in Dublin really". This is absolute nonsense in reality, lets have a look at some of the actual statistics:

    The median household income in Ireland in 2023 was €55k.

    As of early 2024 about 357,000 households now earn more than €100k jointly. Or circa 20% of the households in the country.

    And as mentioned on a previous page, alternatively for an individual earner, it puts someone in the top 7% of earners in Ireland.

    So someone in either the top 7% of earners individually, or a household in the top 20% if income, is the income now required to buy "affordable housing".

    Not quite "nothing", I think most people would agree.

    And also objectively hugely worrying - what are the other 80% of households meant to do exactly? What are they to afford, if heavily subsidized 'affordable' housing in Coolock is out of their price range? We're not talking about private sector, 5 bedroom detached houses in Donnybrook, being unaffordable here.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,512 ✭✭✭Timing belt


    is that household income stat not disposable income (I.e. after tax etc) rather than salary?

    So when adjusted your 20% becomes something like 80%



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,027 ✭✭✭Blut2


    No.

    "In 2016, the median household income in Ireland was €45,256. Adjusting
    for inflation to 2020 (the latest year for which income data is
    available), the equivalent median household income is approximately
    €55,000"

    https://gamma.ie/2023/03/22/geographical-home-affordability-patterns-in-ireland/

    Though the article I quoted from was from 2023 their data does appear to be from 2020, so it certainly is more than 55k now I'll concede.

    But even allowing for significant income increases since between 2020 and now (off the top of my head its at about 15%?) median income is going to be at most circa 65,000 now. Nowhere near 100k household income being a common thing.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,512 ✭✭✭Timing belt


    CSO stats which show that the figures relate to disposable income and are identical to the figures you quoted in original post.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,027 ✭✭✭Blut2


    The CSO disposable income figure doesn't discount much income.

    " disposable income is after some payments have been deducted:

    • Interest paid
    • Social contributions (such as PRSI) and pension contributions
    • Tax like income tax, capital gains tax and Universal Social Charge
    • Miscellaneous transfers like donations and subscriptions to Non-Profit Organisations"

    https://www.cso.ie/en/interactivezone/statisticsexplained/nationalaccountsexplained/householdgrossdisposableincome/

    Someone earning €32,500 a year only pays approx €4,600e a year in taxes. Which would mean an after tax household disposable income of €55k would equate to a pre-tax household income of approx €65k, as above.

    And again, even if inflated by another 10%, or 20%, or even 30% its absolutely miles away from €100k being a common household income. €100k is by any reckoning tens of thousands of euros above the median household income, nevermind being "nothing" as claimed.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,512 ✭✭✭Timing belt


    the median earnings for Dublin was 46,136 in 2022 According to cso

    So that would be 92k (46k x 2). Allow for the fact that we have seen wage inflation and 100k as the median income for a couple working doesn’t seem that crazy or way off the mark as you claim which yet again shows that the figures in your original post to be questionable at best seeing as I highlighted that they relate to disposable income. As for your follow on post you do realise we have a highly progressive tax system….don’t think anymore needs to be said on that and how it impacts disposable income.

    Source :



  • Registered Users Posts: 155 ✭✭Murt2024


    If the median is 55k for a couple they to upskill instead of thinking the state will provide for them in handy jobs



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,613 ✭✭✭Villa05


    we have a highly progressive tax system….

    Edit Correction (post relates to the redistributive nature of taxation, rather than progressiveness)

    I'd love to see a forensic independent analysis of this statement as it constantly rammed down our throats by the media.

    The department of housing budget is approaching if not exceeding 8 billion. The nations wealth is predominantly held in housing/property so is it the wealthy or the less well off that are the beneficiaries of this spend. Every measure introduced by the housing minister has resulted in an increase in property values thereby benefitting the wealth owners of the state.

    We are on slightly below median income for our area, as a couple, according to timing belts post, however I am aware of several colleagues who earn more than us who are recepients of medical cards plus associated benefits simply because of their outgoings on accommodation costs. Is this a benefit to the less well off or a further hidden subsidy to bloated property owners

    carbon tax is highly regressive paid predominantly by the poor with the proceeds going to the well off in housing renovation grants, new electric cars etc. Vat is very high and impacts those who live pay cheque to pay cheque most on a percentage basis. Half the working population have no pension and of the ones that do the tax benefits favour higher incomes

    Is "progressive tax system" the same as €630,000 2 bed apartments "affordable housing" in Limerick? Discuss

    Post edited by Villa05 on


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,512 ✭✭✭Timing belt


    Not getting nto a debate on tax as this is a housing forum and not tax a tax forum.

    OP stated tax etc didn’t discount much income which is totally not the case especially when you get into higher tax brackets. My point was simple that this is bs because the more you earn the more tax you pay (I.e. progressive tax system) so there is a big difference between disposable income (as defined by cso) and gross income



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,227 ✭✭✭herbalplants


    And don't start me on the lack of services especially basic health services. So many of the poorer countries have better services than us.

    Some people live in a bubble here.

    Living the life



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,687 ✭✭✭RichardAnd


    I pay about 40-45k in tax each year. That's money that I will not only never benefit from, but rather it's money given to a state that will use it to create the mayhem that has become "normal" in the last few years.



Advertisement