One tenant is leaving and landlord refuses assignment

Nothing confused at all. You are unable to support your propositions and resort to personal attack when confronted.

You seem to be unable to appreciate a simple analogy.
Here is another example of a missing item. There is no mention in that draft lease about complying with the House Rules in managed blocks. This is of the utmost importance in a lease.
Leases are drafted by landlords. Telling any landlord to use a lease template drawn up by the RTB ( a notoriously anti-landlord body) is extremely rash.

The lease which is drawn up should protect the landlord to the greatest extent not leave the landlord open to attack.

It is trading income. The fact that is exempt from tax is irrelevant. It must still be returned.

Restricting licencees is allowable. I simply showed the weakness of your reliance on a standard RTB template to attempt to show otherwise.

You haven't pointed out any errors. If I did make an error I doubt it is one you would be able to detect anyway.

You keep claiming I am incorrect but are unable to substantiate any of your own.

It gets better.
You now google tax on rental income to try and score a point.
A tenant can't charge a licencee rent as to do so would be sub-letting which requires the consent of the landlord and is not allowed by the Residential Tenancies Act.

I never sais sub-lettiong is a licence. It is anything but.
A sub tenant is charged rent. A licencee is a paying guest. The money paid by a licencee is taxed as trading income, not rent.
Get your facts straight.
A person cannot live with a sub-tenant.

Absolutely. It is not case 5. It is trading, same as Airbnb.

Children, you say no to crack.

You're delirious, best you sleep it off..…

The support is there, you just don't understand it. I could explain it to you, but you would continue arguing like a d*ck, so you got the response you deserve.

When you clean yourself up, you might note that all the assertions made by you are without support and that post you replied to was from Friday, not this week, did you lose a few days there?

Revenue guide - Part 07-01-32

Here you can use this to further confuse yourself - now do take care not to attempt to intersect the common language used therin with terminology used in other legislation - also please read it sober like a good man and hopefully we will see you posting in a more respectable manner going forward. I am not a social worker, but I am confident they probably have a steps programme for whatever your problems are.

All you have done is produced a Revenue guide without attempting to explain its relevance if any. Link dumping is not support.

The only feelings I have are pity.

It's unfortunate that RTB have so little information about licensees because it's 'outside their remit'. Available information is scarce, so renters have to keep asking questions to understand the legislation.

IMO, all licensees are not the same and it's confusing because they all get lumped in together in discussions. There's

1) the children and family members who are part of the tenant's household plus their visitors/occasional guests;

2) replacements for departing tenants;

3) additional long term house mates who pay the tenant, eg Rent a room;

4) short term guests who pay the tenant, eg AirBnB type.

It's fair enough that landlords should get written notice about others living in the dwelling, as they need to prevent overcrowding and comply with insurance. Notices about household members is straightforward, others are not so clear.

I would like to know what part of the regulations gives tenants an automatic right to move a person into the dwelling and charge them rent. A licensee who pays the tenant to use a part, or the whole dwelling, is not the same as a member of a tenant's household.

Assignments for the entire tenancy are fine with landlord's permission, but a licensee who replaces a departing multi-tenant, looks like an assignment of part of the lease. But that's not allowed per S38.4 and 5.

Sub-letting for the entire tenancy needs permission, and the original tenant moves out. However, if a long-term licensee is sharing and pays rent to the tenant, it sounds like a sub-let of part of the dwelling, also not allowed under S32.2 and 3. Also, RaR is just a Revenue scheme, nothing to do with the RTA, so how can tenants rent out a part of their tenancy if a partial sub-let is not allowed by the RTA?

When a tenant charges AirBnB guests to use a part or the whole of the dwelling for a short term, that also looks like a sub-let to me, and is not allowed.

At different times I've read that tenants can have licensee, as and when they like, can charge room rent or BnB, make no returns to revenue for rental income, all without landlord permission.

I've also read that landlords can't refuse to make a licensee a tenant. It would be interesting to know what legislation allows a landlord to change an existing lease and add on a new tenant simply because a licensee has six months occupancy and they request it? Surely the original joint tenants on the lease would have a veto - ie. they have a legal contract. If a landlord could do that, what's to stop any one of the joint tenants moving a licensee into the dwelling, and the licensee could then demand to become a tenant and added to the lease even if the other joint tenants disagree. That doesn't sound right, otherwise why would anyone sign a joint lease in the first place if that could be a possible outcome.

I've also read that licensees need landlord permission, whether they pay rent or not. That makes sense as tenants would be protected from having changes imposed on them by licensees that they may not have forseen.

It would be great if someone with legal expertise could give a user friendly explanation about this area of renting. It sounds fairly simple where the tenancy is one family household, but I know plenty of joint tenants who would like clear information. It seems crazy that the RTA is 20 years old and there are still questions about licensees, especially in house-share which are very common now.

This is the crux of the problem for a tenant. If he charges rent he is sub-letting a part of the property and in breach of the tenancy and can be terminated for breach of conditions.
If he doesn't charge rent and charges a lodging fee, he is carrying on a business which may also be a breach of his tenancy agreement. If the letting by the tenant causes any difficulty for the landlords insurance, that is also a breach of the tenancy conditions.
An owner occupier who takes in a lodger doesn't have to worry about it.

Tenants do not have an automatic right to move licencees in, particularly if they are intending to charge them.

Yorb point being?