Was there a builder bail out in the budget?

ninty9er

I can't find one. The only mention of construction in the budget was in relation to causality of the current economic conditions.

NO FTB mortgage as crystal ball gazed widely, nor any requirement to buy new houses in the increase of mortgage interest relief.

No bail out.....all the FF bashers must be gutted that they have one less thing to bitch about:D:D

Of course being blind to anything that's not criticism of FF they'll never come to terms with the idea that FF and builders aren't inextricably linked:rolleyes:

Akrasia

ninty9er wrote: »

I can't find one. The only mention of construction in the budget was in relation to causality of the current economic conditions.

NO FTB mortgage as crystal ball gazed widely, nor any requirement to buy new houses in the increase of mortgage interest relief.

No bail out.....all the FF bashers must be gutted that they have one less thing to bitch about:D:D

Of course being blind to anything that's not criticism of FF they'll never come to terms with the idea that FF and builders aren't inextricably linked:rolleyes:

No bail out??/?
What about the 1.6 billion euros that have been allocated for state backed sub prime mortgages that are only eligable for purchasers of New homes?

What about the increase in mortgage interest relief for FTBs at the direct expense of people who already own homes.

The only thing worse than a smug FFer is a Smug ffer who is talking absolute horsesh1t

mountainyman

[1] The Irish government is to act as a lender to people who haev been refused home loans by banks.
[2] These loans will only be available to buyers of new homes.

The purpose of this is to give builders the chance to sell their existing stock at a profit.

MoominPapa

ninty9er wrote: »

Of course being blind to anything that's not criticism of FF they'll never come to terms with the idea that FF and builders aren't inextricably linked:rolleyes:

Having your tongue up someones arse does not make you inextricably linked but you are linked nonetheless.

dresden8

The governments response to a financial crisis fuelled by a sub-prime mortgage crisis is to........

give out more sub-prime mortgages.

Is Lenihan stupid?

gurramok

Here you go ninty9er.

http://www.homechoiceloan.ie/

Sub-prime lending by the govt to buyers who are refused by the banks and it only applies to new builds!!

Crazy stuff.

homechoiceloan wrote:

Home Choice Loan is a mortgage provided through a number of local authorities for First Time Buyers who can not get sufficent finance from a bank or building society.

Home Choice Loan will provide up to 92% of the market value of a property purchased. The maximum loan amount will be €285,000. The loan is a normal Capital and interest bearing mortgage which is repaid on a monthly basis.

The mortgage term will be for a maximum of 30 years.

Home Choice Loan will only be available for newly built homes.

homechoiceloan wrote:

have proof of being unsuccessful in securing a sufficient mortgage from a bank or building society to buy a home.

leninbenjamin

mountainyman wrote: »

The purpose of this is to give builders the chance to sell their existing stock at a profit.

bollocks to that. Some may, but many have been sitting on properties they can't shift for the past year. In that time they will still have been paying interest on the loans, still had payrolls to pay etc. this allows them to keep their companies, and they people they employ, ticking over for a litte while longer. for most it will simply be a case of minimising loss.

Climate Expert

gurramok wrote: »

Here you go ninty9er.

http://www.homechoiceloan.ie/

Sub-prime lending by the govt to buyers who are refused by the banks and it only applies to new builds!!

Crazy stuff.

It only applies to new builds..hmmmm. I wonder why. What difference would it make if you were genuinely trying to help a person get a mortgage for a home? Of course it makes all the difference when you are trying to bail out your builder friends with their unsold stock.

I've just registed an interest with that site and I put down a nice message for them in one of the text boxs.

dresden8

leninbenjamin wrote: »

bollocks to that. Some may, but many have been sitting on properties they can't shift for the past year. In that time they will still have been paying interest on the loans, still had payrolls to pay etc. this allows them to keep their companies, and they people they employ, ticking over for a litte while longer. for most it will simply be a case of minimising loss.

It is not the purpose of public money to minimise losses for private companies. Especially when it's my money going to FF cronies.

They took the profits on their "risk", now it's time to take the losses.

Good to see you agree it's a builder's bail-out though. At least we agree on something.

luckat

Tax the poor to pay for the mistakes of the rich, that was this budget.

Here are some of the incentives for builders:

€5 million for warmer homes scheme
€1.65 billion to be spent to housing programmes in 2009
Government to take an equity share in affordable housing
First-time buyer's tax relief up from 20% to 25% for 1st and 2nd years
Top rate of commercial property stamp duty cut from 9% to 6%

Separately, Japan has just brought out its budget, in the same circumstances. From a news report:

"Japan's parliament on Thursday enacted an 18-billion-dollar emergency spending plan to stimulate Asia's largest economy as Prime Minister Taro Aso said troubled markets also want stronger US action.

"The 1.81-trillion-yen plan includes measures to help consumers, companies and farmers cope with high fuel costs and a credit crunch.

"It was approved by the opposition-led upper house soon after Tokyo's Nikkei stock index suffered its biggest loss in two decades, plunging more than 11 percent Thursday as fears of a global recession grew."

SkepticOne

Another bail out of the builders that has been going on is the affordable scheme/initiative. This is where the tax-payer pays over the odds for stuff the builders cant sell at prices builders want.

nesf

dresden8 wrote: »

It is not the purpose of public money to minimise losses for private companies.

Actually sometimes, as with the banks, it's unfortunately in the public interest. Like it or not, if things are as bad as they say with a few developers owing huge amounts to certain Irish banks then we might be forced to minimise those developers' losses to minimise the banks' losses because of how unstable our financial system is at the moment.

And yes, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth but we mightn't have a choice in the matter.

dresden8

So now we've exploded the "risk-taker" myth take over the companies and throw them out on their arses.

nesf

dresden8 wrote: »

So now we've exploded the "risk-taker" myth take over the companies and throw them out on their arses.

Nah, we just need to give the banks a good crack around the back of the head and tell them to cop themselves on with their lending. Taking a good long look at the regulatory set up for the financial sector would also be a good idea. The problem here isn't actually the builders, they acted reasonably given that the banks literally threw money at them.

gurramok

So to help the banks and developers, the first time buyer who is refused a huge mortgage amount from the banks themselves due tighter lending criteria(more like normal) gets that big loan from the Housing Finance Agency to buy an overpriced house.

Sub-prime written all over it, negative equity looming and the gullible buyer is shafted for 35 years!

luckat

I absolutely agree, nesf, that the idea that everyone should buy their own house is a foolish one.

(Not that I think buying your own house is foolish - not at all. But there's a time to do it, and that time is when you're earning enough for it to be a sensible decision.)

But if we're to have a sound rented sector, the astonishing Constitutional decision that landlords' rights supersede tenants' rights has to be reversed, and tenants have to have the right to an affordable rent and security of tenure.

ninty9er

Bolllllix....my apologies...I couldn't find it in the Budget so assumed it wasn't introduced. My apologies.

I agree...it is a load of crap.

Edit: I'd still apply for one. It's unlikely someone earning over €40k would be refused a €285k mortgage though.

nesf

luckat wrote: »

But if we're to have a sound rented sector, the astonishing Constitutional decision that landlords' rights supersede tenants' rights has to be reversed, and tenants have to have the right to an affordable rent and security of tenure.

I'm pretty sure that we'd disagree with how far to take it but renters rights definitely need to improve. Things have been getting better over the past decade but at the moment renting for life just isn't an attractive option for many people, especially those looking at starting a family.

brianthebard

gurramok wrote: »

Here you go ninty9er.

http://www.homechoiceloan.ie/

Sub-prime lending by the govt to buyers who are refused by the banks and it only applies to new builds!!

Crazy stuff.

WTF? The government is getting into the sub prime business as every other sub prime lender implodes? **** this I'm emigrating.

nesf

brianthebard wrote: »

WTF? The government is getting into the sub prime business as every other sub prime lender implodes? **** this I'm emigrating.

Sub Prime implies poor credit record (actually that's the exact definition of a Sub Prime mortgage), this could be looked at differently and if they are giving out loans to "lower" earners (40K+ isn't low tbh) and not to people with bad credit records it could work out ok. The actual nuts and bolts of the scheme are what matter here not the "headline" figures (i.e. exactly what reasons can a bank say no to you for that this scheme will say yes, are we talking about too low an income or too poor a credit record, the two are different things).

slagger

Does the comercial property tax reduction from 9% to 6% count.

cabinteelytom

A 1.65 billion euro sub to the building industry, divided by 4.2 million people is, I calculate, 390 euros from ( not to ) each man, woman and child in the State; in this case to turn into property owners people who could not afford to buy property unaided.
Now a year ago, we were being told these builders were a great example of our enterprise culture, and the great profits they were taking were an appropriate reward for those who had courage, seen opportunities and taken risks.
Where is the 'moral hazard' in running a building company, gambling that people will continue to buy second and third homes, and everyone can aspire to become a buy-to-let landlord, and the germans will lend us more euros... forever? Who takes the risk?
In the US , a much bigger economy, the Senate and the Congress baulked at forking out 700 billion dollars to bail out their entire overpaid banking sector. But at least they recognised this was controversial and demanded that a public interest case be made.
But all I can see here is an illogical sub from the taxed middle classes to the very rich, and some of the poor (almost certainly not selected in any fair or logical way.}
I thought this was the most dubious thing in the budget; out of step with everything else.

The_Conductor

ninty9er wrote: »

It's unlikely someone earning over €40k would be refused a €285k mortgage though.

A married couple, both civil servants, one on 40k, the other on 37k, would qualify for a mortgage of 237k from BOI or 274k from AIB last week.

Multiples have all been changed back down to reasonable levels by the lending institutions. If you checked you'd actually be very surprised at how many people would qualify under the the government scheme.

galwaybabe

If anyone would be interested in talking about this with Frank Fahy T.D., he'll be promoting it in the Marriot hotel in Galway tonight at 8.

The_Conductor

Shudder.....:mad:
Wasn't it Frank who had Galway Corporation blow its entire budget for the affordable housing scheme back in March- on the understanding they would get additional money in a supplementary estimate?

Idiot.

jacool

The Oireachtas library stated in 2005 that Frank Fahey owns, or part-owns, 16 properties in Galway; Athlone; Dublin; Kildare; Boston and Brussels. (Landlord of apartments in Eglinton Court and New Docks Galway; house at Dun na Coiribe, Galway; house in Claregalway, house at Kilbeacanty, Gort. Shares in the following properties: Moydrum, Athlone; four apartments and shop at Lr Gerard St, Limerick; development land (ten houses), Claregalway; development land, Gort; house at Rinawade Close, Leixlip; house at Liscannor, Co Clare; dwelling at Dromard Tce, Sandymount; development site at Orwell road, Rathgar; residential property at Strathmore Rd, Boston; residential property, Brussels; apartment, Dun Na Coiribe, Galway.
) I might come round tonight to see if I can rent something off him, because I can't afford to buy !