Property tax to be passed onto tenants? No thanks.

Jacknory

daltonmd wrote: »

You have hit on what they will probably do in the future. They will then impose the property tax and revert this charge to a service charge payable by renters. They obviously had some reason not to put this charge to tenants now.

Landlords cannot impose charges out of the air for whatever reason. If a tenant has signed a lease for x amount then the LL cannot demand anything above that. And again you have hit on the reason - Rent Increases - not going to happen I'm afraid, LL's can try but they will never force tenants to pay this and will not be able to evict tenants for non-payment - it won't hold unfortunately.

True. This will only effect tenants that enter into new leases in the future. What I was trying to get across was that it was logical for the tenant to pay for services they use......which will see rent increasing for future tenants.

daltonmd

Jacknory wrote: »

True. This will only effect tenants that enter into new leases in the future. What I was trying to get across was that it was logical for the tenant to pay for services they use......which will see rent increasing for future tenants.

I agree completely and I think that the confusion caused is deliberate.

Household charge by name but laid out like a property charge.

Here's a little more about it:
http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/1215/household-business.html

"The Minister of State, Fergus O'Dowd, has said the Government intends to apply the €100 household charge for two years after which a property tax will be brought in.
He told the Dáil that Environment Minister Phil Hogan is to establish an expert group who will examine how best to implement the property tax, in a way that is equitable."

I still disagree regarding the rising of the rents because as sure as there will be new tenants in the future there will also be new landlords. Those who bought at half the price and can afford to cut rents in areas by a large margins.

Onthe3rdDay

This charge will be added onto rents but they'll continue to fall. Instead of asking for a 10% reduction on my rent in a month or twos time, I'll probably be generous to my Landlord and only ask for 8%.

I'd advise all others who are negotiating to do the same.

Show some kindness this Christmas, especially to those who always said that renting was dead money.

Branoic

This notion that tenants have that all landlords are some type of fat cat property developers out to screw tenants and who are responsible for the current problems is a joke. Newsflash - landlords are regular people too.

My wife and I are a young couple. We bought a small 1 bed apartment 6 years ago. The plan was to live there for a couple of years then sell it and move on when we were ready to start a family. Didn't quite work out. Had to move out 3 years ago and in with the inlaws because with job losses etc we could no longer afford the mortgage.

The rent we get is less than half the mortage repayment.

We have the PRTB expenses

We have the BER cert expenses

We even have the fookin "Non Principal Residency" tax because even though we don't own another property, it's still not our principal residence because we no longer live there.

We bend over backwards to keep our tenants happy whenever they have an issue.

So I'm sorry, but I'm not a big fat cat property developer who screwed over all you poor tenants in the boom years, and yes, I do think the household charge should be passed on to residents / tenants, just like a TV licence. I for one certainly won't be paying it (apart from going halves on the house we're currently in).

ballsymchugh

oceanclub wrote: »

And if wishes were fishes. It's not; it's a property tax on property owners.

P.

then they should call it a property tax, and not a household charge.

snickerpuss

If it was mooted to me by my landlord that he was looking for either €100 or €300 annually towards this I'd tell him to start looking for a new tenant and it is more than likely that if he put it up for rent again that he'd lose at least one months rent from us - €850. Won't be worth most landlord's effort if tenants go this route.

It's your asset, you will own it outright eventually so as far as I'm concerned the landlord can pay the taxes, especially the second home tax. I'm sorry if some people bought apartments they no longer want and have to rent out but frankly it's nothing to do with me, I just want somewhere to live and I'm not here to subsidise decisions that didn't work out for other people who are now landlords.

lolo62

snickerpuss wrote: »

If it was mooted to me by my landlord that he was looking for either €100 or €300 annually towards this I'd tell him to start looking for a new tenant and it is more than likely that if he put it up for rent again that he'd lose at least one months rent from us - €850. Won't be worth most landlord's effort if tenants go this route.

It's your asset, you will own it outright eventually so as far as I'm concerned the landlord can pay the taxes, especially the second home tax. I'm sorry if some people bought apartments they no longer want and have to rent out but frankly it's nothing to do with me, I just want somewhere to live and I'm not here to subsidise decisions that didn't work out for other people who are now landlords.

well said.

what seems to be the problem from where im standing is that the imf have outlined it as a 'property tax' and enda kenny has said its a 'household charge' and this is why there is so much confusion...?

not even wrong

Branoic wrote: »

and yes, I do think the household charge should be passed on to residents / tenants, just like a TV licence.

The TV license is not "passed on" to the residents, the TV license law specifically makes the resident (as opposed to the property owner) liable for it.

You wouldn't put up with it if your tenant came to you with some sob story and demanded €160 telling you they were "passing on" their TV license fee to you due to their difficult circumstances, would you? Well that's exactly what you're attempting to do with the household charge.

Dyr

wildefalcon wrote: »

edit - sorry about the rant - very sore topic - why should people screwed to the wall with stupid mortgages pay the tax when those who rent don't? It's a tax on Homes, not houses.

Becasue they were stupid and very probably greedy while people who rent were'nt?

The_Honeybadger

I'm a few months into a lease so my LL can't levy any charges on me until that is up, and if after that my LL sends me a letter saying that he is passing on these charges to me I will simply move to one of the other vacant properties in the area which have been on DAFT for months, and tell him good luck with getting a new tenant, and to look up caveat emptor!

Jarren

mickeyk wrote: »

I'm a few months into a lease so my LL can't levy any charges on me until that is up, and if after that my LL sends me a letter saying that he is passing on these charges to me I will simply move to one of the other vacant properties in the area which have been on DAFT for months, and tell him good luck with getting a new tenant, and to look up caveat emptor!

same here

Pkiernan

Anyone renting out there who thinks this will not be passed on to the "poor suffering tenants" is incredibly stupid.

Renters - don't like giving your evil landlords money each month?? Then get a mortgage and buy your own fcikun houses. Problem solved.

This is the problem when communists like Labour get into power. The folks that voted for them are to blame for this tax, and they will be the ones paying for it.

mrmitty

horgan_p wrote: »

Amateur landlord hour again ?

).

Yup!!
Not only does this thread highlight this fact but it also highlights how economically illiterate we Irish are as a whole. (Tennants too:D)

mrmitty

It should also be noted that a property tax is an encumbrance or lien upon a property which in effect dilutes ownership.

Agent Smith

"let the bears pay the Bear Tax, landlords should pay the homeowners tax"

TwoShedsJackson

People are over-reacting entirely, is there anyone like the Irish who get so emotional about property?

If you are in a lease at the moment you are fine until that ends. When it does the landlord may try to increase your rent to cover this charge. If he does, you are perfectly within your rights to find somewhere else to rent, and you probably will be able to.

Stop letting the Government drive wedges between the different groups in society, be it 'landlords' and 'tenants', public sector and private, because the more divided we are the more **** we're going to have heaped on us.

howtomake

TwoShedsJackson wrote: »

People are over-reacting entirely, is there anyone like the Irish who get so emotional about property?

If you are in a lease at the moment you are fine until that ends. When it does the landlord may try to increase your rent to cover this charge. If he does, you are perfectly within your rights to find somewhere else to rent, and you probably will be able to.

Stop letting the Government drive wedges between the different groups in society, be it 'landlords' and 'tenants', public sector and private, because the more divided we are the more **** we're going to have heaped on us.

Thank you, finally some sense! Was thinking the same thing! Doesn't matter, the market will always dictate the price of rent. People getting their panties in a bunch. My real concern is if this 100 is just the beginning, we need to keep our eyes & ears open to that and not this blank vs blank nonsense again.

daltonmd

howtomake wrote: »

Thank you, finally some sense! Was thinking the same thing! Doesn't matter, the market will always dictate the price of rent. People getting their panties in a bunch. My real concern is if this 100 is just the beginning, we need to keep our eyes & ears open to that and not this blank vs blank nonsense again.

Yep, in the deal that was signed, in the coming years the document states that this government need to raise one billion - at 100 per year they will raise 160 million.

We are looking at a multiple of this amount in the coming years.

mambo

not even wrong wrote: »

The TV license is not "passed on" to the residents, the TV license law specifically makes the resident (as opposed to the property owner) liable for it.

You wouldn't put up with it if your tenant came to you with some sob story and demanded €160 telling you they were "passing on" their TV license fee to you due to their difficult circumstances, would you? Well that's exactly what you're attempting to do with the household charge.

Sorry, that's not a good analogy.

The household charge will inevitably get passed on to some degree, either explicitly as a supplement to the normal rent, or it will be taken into account by the landlord the next time the rent comes up for negotiation, when they will look at what other landlords are charging for similar properties.

It's like Tesco and M&S saying they're not going to pass on the VAT increase on 1st Jan. Okay, so they won't add %2 extra VAT across the board, but you can be damn sure that when they do their regular review of prices and compare with competitors and decide which to increase/decrease/leave as is, the extra 2% VAT will be factored into their calculations!

Max Power1

Jacknory wrote: »

What you outlined in your previous post is correct. But what you highlighted from my post is also correct.

Cant both be correct. They are mutually exclusive declarations in direct conflict.

A tax for ownership cant be also a tax for services provision (which this aint).

daltonmd

mambo wrote: »

Sorry, that's not a good analogy.

The household charge will inevitably get passed on to some degree, either explicitly as a supplement to the normal rent, or it will be taken into account by the landlord the next time the rent comes up for negotiation, when they will look at what other landlords are charging for similar properties.

It's like Tesco and M&S saying they're not going to pass on the VAT increase on 1st Jan. Okay, so they won't add %2 extra VAT across the board, but you can be damn sure that when they do their regular review of prices and compare with competitors and decide which to increase/decrease/leave as is, the extra 2% VAT will be factored into their calculations!

I reckon the stores will pass the VAT onto their suppliers. Tenants will not enter into any rent negotiations that involve an increase - landlords can look to what others are charging if they want to - but tenants have that option as well and there will always be properties asking lower rents.

As a tenant my lease is out next month - under no circumstances will I sign a new lease for more rent - so my landlord will have to make the decision and either look around for a new tenant, risking a vacant period which will swallow up any gain he might hope to make.

A smart landlord, with good tenants who pay on time and treat his property with respect would be crazy to try and increase the rent.

Just my opinion.

The_Honeybadger

Pkiernan wrote: »

Anyone renting out there who thinks this will not be passed on to the "poor suffering tenants" is incredibly stupid.

Renters - don't like giving your evil landlords money each month?? Then get a mortgage and buy your own fcikun houses. Problem solved.

This is the problem when communists like Labour get into power. The folks that voted for them are to blame for this tax, and they will be the ones paying for it.

Ultimately the market will decide. Where I live it's very much a renters Market as I'm outside the main urban centres. My ll should be thrilled to have steady tenants who pay their rent on time and cause no fuss, if he is foolish enough to play hardball on this at the end of my lease he will have a vacant property for the sake of proving a point, my belief is that nobody is that stupid. I will easily find a comparable property for the price I want. I appreciate this is not the case in every area however and undoubtedly some owners will get away with passing the charges on in one form or another.

daltonmd

mickeyk wrote: »

Ultimately the market will decide. Where I live it's very much a renters Market as I'm outside the main urban centres. My ll should be thrilled to have steady tenants who pay their rent on time and cause no fuss, if he is foolish enough to play hardball on this at the end of my lease he will have a vacant property for the sake of proving a point, my belief is that nobody is that stupid. I will easily find a comparable property for the price I want. I appreciate this is not the case in every area however and undoubtedly some owners will get away with passing the charges on in one form or another.

Completely agree. Landlords who think that they can pass these taxes onto tenants are living in a dream world.

These taxes will be raised every year - following on from the logic of some people here, that means that rents will rise?


That is a crazy notion -the fundemantals in the economy have not changed, tenants, like landlords have and will continue to have falling disposable income and rising costs of living.

This year it's 100 euro, what about when it reaches 600 per year? Do landlords think that they can continue passing these taxes on?

Ultimately this will force those accidental landlords who can to try and offload their properties, this will also effect house prices and investors coming into the property market will factor in these costs as well as buying property at a fraction of boom prices.
They will then rent them out undercutting those who are keeping the rental market artificially high, basing rents on mortgage repayments rather than market rates.

Fighting Irish

oceanclub wrote: »

I see Irish landlords already organising yet again to screw their tenants:

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2011/1215/breaking5.html



Hilarious. Of course, during the property bubble, landlords made vast profits with huge annual hikes in rent even while the mortgage on their properties went down due to interest rate cuts. Now, during the bust, it's time to screw tenants year again. There really is a need in this country for an Irish Property Tenant Association to fight these vested interests.

P.

Supply and demand, what do you expect? 99% of people want to make as much money as possible!!!

Ray Palmer

As a tenant you may get away with out getting this cost put on but eventually you will. It just proves that LLs are correct to increase their rent when they can. Always charge as much as you can becasue at any time costs could increase.

This household charge was meant to be for the household not the property as per the EU agreement. There is already a property tax expect it to be challenged at some point.


It is quite an unjust tax applied as it is.

People are under the misconception that every LL is new to the game and has a mortgage or bought in the boom. That is like assuming everybody who owns a house has a mortgage and bought in the boom.

daltonmd

Fighting Irish wrote: »

Supply and demand, what do you expect? 99% of people want to make as much money as possible!!!

And there's no harm in that whatsoever - but - if landlords during the boom were happy with market forces driving rents up where they profited, then they can't complain if the same market forces drive them down.

Damie

The landlord's issue is with the Government, not the tenant. This is the main point that is missed.

As stated, if your landlord tries to pass on this cost then either refuse or/and move, the market will sort itself out.

To Wildefalcon

"And it is a sore topic when I see people who took on massive mortgages whinge about it now.
Did your tenants, or the rest of us, ask you to take out a massive mortgage ?
Fair enough you have lost your jobs, but don't start blaming other people for the size of mortgage you signed up to."

I DIDN'T get a mortgage! I saved and bought a house I could afford, then I did it up myself = and I don't blame anyone else. I Just get angry when people whinge about having to pay for stuff they use.

Not to be facetious in any way, but your current, very unfortunate, situation proves you are wrong here.

It's much the same as this country paying millions to the bank bond holders, who took a risk:rolleyes: yet its plainly obvious that there was no risk at all!

You took a gamble by buying a property, like a lot of people, now the gamble is lost. I for one, am not paying for your gamble.

daltonmd

Damie wrote: »

The landlord's issue is with the Government, not the tenant. This is the main point that is missed.

As stated, if your landlord tries to pass on this cost then either refuse or/and move, the market will sort itself out.

To Wildefalcon
Not to be facetious in any way, but your current, very unfortunate, situation proves you are wrong here.

It's much the same as this country paying millions to the bank bond holders, who took a risk:rolleyes: yet its plainly obvious that there was no risk at all!

You took a gamble by buying a property, like a lot of people, now the gamble is lost. I for one, am not paying for your gamble.

Good point regarding where the landlords issue really lies, problem is that landlords, much like this government will take the soft route and try to pass the charge on.
This government has deliberately left all tenants to fight this issue for themselves, they deliberately worded it in such a way that landlords could draw their own interpretation from it and tenants theirs.

Lazy government.

Graces7

Ray Palmer wrote: »

As a tenant you may get away with out getting this cost put on but eventually you will. It just proves that LLs are correct to increase their rent when they can. Always charge as much as you can becasue at any time costs could increase.

This household charge was meant to be for the household not the property as per the EU agreement. There is already a property tax expect it to be challenged at some point.


It is quite an unjust tax applied as it is.

People are under the misconception that every LL is new to the game and has a mortgage or bought in the boom. That is like assuming everybody who owns a house has a mortgage and bought in the boom.

That is a shocking and very revealing way of thinking.

Mr. Presentable

"Household charge"

OP, you are the household, not the Landlord.