Good news for tenants in budget 2018

KevinCavan

I would be for landlords having more rights regarding evicting tenants, let’s say 3 months rent goes unpaid results in eviction. I would also be for some incentive for landlords to leave the market, increasing the numbers of houses available for sale. Simultaneously though I would be in favour on much lower rental caps, say €700 per room in Dublin. €500 per room in all other major cities.

beauf

jay0109 wrote: »

The interest relief was happening anyways. It was announced last year it was going from 75% to 100% over 5 years. This is just speeding it up into 2 years.
Won't make any difference to supply of course

But the govt have diverted everyones attention from the govt. Look at the squabbling in this thread. Job done. Without actually doing anything meaningful.

beauf

KevinCavan wrote: »

I would be for landlords having more rights regarding evicting tenants, let’s say 3 months rent goes unpaid results in eviction. I would also be for some incentive for landlords to leave the market, increasing the numbers of houses available for sale. Simultaneously though I would be in favour on much lower rental caps, say €700 per room in Dublin. €500 per room in all other major cities.

I think you have to look how is played out in markets similar too ours. Like London. Its not unique to Ireland.

Fol20

KevinCavan wrote: »

I would be for landlords having more rights regarding evicting tenants, let’s say 3 months rent goes unpaid results in eviction. I would also be for some incentive for landlords to leave the market, increasing the numbers of houses available for sale. Simultaneously though I would be in favour on much lower rental caps, say €700 per room in Dublin. €500 per room in all other major cities.

Im glad your not running to be Taoiseach. You want to give an incentive to landlords by making it worse for them Where will all the renters live, not everyone can afford to buy a house. Rental caps that are that arbitrary in nature will make more rentals leave the market and ll will never do any maintenance on a property, sure why would you when you dont see any financial benefit.

KevinCavan

Fol20 wrote: »

Im glad your not running to be Taoiseach. You want to give an incentive to landlords by making it worse for them Where will all the renters live, not everyone can afford to buy a house. Rental caps that are that arbitrary in nature will make more rentals leave the market and ll will never do any maintenance on a property, sure why would you when you dont see any financial benefit.

Landlords should be given a window of, let’s say the next five years, in which to sell their houses and pay less capital gains tax. Get more houses on the market, calming house prices. This would in turn reduce rents as people wouldn’t be scrambling as much for rental properties.

Topgear on Dave

KevinCavan wrote: »

Landlords should be given a window of, let’s say the next five years, in which to sell their houses and pay less capital gains tax. Get more houses on the market, calming house prices. This would in turn reduce rents as people wouldn’t be scrambling as much for rental properties.

What?

People would not be scrambling to find rentals when you have just given landlords notice to get rid of their gaffs! LOL


More residential construction is what is needed for this, your just moving around the current supply of housing, giving it to buyers and screwing renters.

AlmightyCushion

KevinCavan wrote: »

Landlords should be given a window of, let’s say the next five years, in which to sell their houses and pay less capital gains tax. Get more houses on the market, calming house prices. This would in turn reduce rents as people wouldn’t be scrambling as much for rental properties.

We need more properties available for the residential market. Moving a property from a rental to a PPR or back doesn't fix anything.

Fol20

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

We need more properties available for the residential market. Moving a property from a rental to a PPR or back doesn't fix anything.

Your right, i really hope the news of affordable housing with discounts to purchase up to 50k is wrong. 5 or 6 discounts of that value would purchase a permanent house that can be let out for decades instead of short term win for the government. People really need to get away from the fact that owning a house is a right. Its a luxury to own depending on your own work ethic and ability. Its a right to have a roof over your head and that why social housing should be a built in large scale so that people who cannot afford to buy are given the ability to rent long term at reduced rates. This way the government will eventually make back the cost of the property and at the same time, retain ownership so that in a generation's time, it can be relet for new people on the food chain.

davindub

Fol20 wrote: »

davindub wrote: »

Phone call = a few cents or dont most people have free calls as part of their packages. But yes you can claim actual expenses.

Most people dont bother tax returns are to the closest euro so a few cents wont make muxh difference.

Not every package has unlimited phone calls, even if they did, its not the point. its a legitimate expense where a percentage of your bill or just a flat rate should be expendable.

Flat rate expenses are generally for paye workers.

The point is that phone / travel expenses arent high enough nor frequent to be bothered about for most, why be bitter that you can claim but only if you count them up properly and maintain the records along with the tax return?

beauf

KevinCavan wrote: »

Landlords should be given a window of, let’s say the next five years, in which to sell their houses and pay less capital gains tax. Get more houses on the market, calming house prices. This would in turn reduce rents as people wouldn’t be scrambling as much for rental properties.

That's got nothing to do with renting. It would make that worse But everything to do with someone wanting to buy a place.

beauf

davindub wrote: »

...The point is that phone / travel expenses arent high enough nor frequent to be bothered about for most, why be bitter that you can claim but only if you count them up properly and maintain the records along with the tax return?

I like that way people fixate on the critical issues. A handful of phone calls or Viber messages and emails.

piplip87

Say a Landlord owns the place in Dublin. Renting out for 2000 a month. Would a be correct in saying that 1000 a month of this would be paid on tax.

12,000 a year in taxes.

What if the government said that if he kept the rent to 1400 a month he could 2000 a year tax on the property. This could be adjusted nationwide. The government would take a hit on taxes but it would reduce rents overnight. It would also bring more landlords back on the market.

It would also allow people to save more money and get a place of Thier own therefore reducing demand on the rental sextor

EnzoScifo

Fol20 wrote: »

Its a luxury to own depending on your own work ethic and ability.

or inherited wealth.

AlmightyCushion

piplip87 wrote: »

Say a Landlord owns the place in Dublin. Renting out for 2000 a month. Would a be correct in saying that 1000 a month of this would be paid on tax.

12,000 a year in taxes.

A landlord with no mortgage on the property and no other expenses then yes. But when you have a mortgage and other expenses the amount of tax paid will be reduced.

piplip87 wrote: »

What if the government said that if he kept the rent to 1400 a month he could 2000 a year tax on the property. This could be adjusted nationwide. The government would take a hit on taxes but it would reduce rents overnight. It would also bring more landlords back on the market.

It would also allow people to save more money and get a place of Thier own therefore reducing demand on the rental sextor

For a start that would be a nightmare to administer and police. Also, how does that work if the landlord charges more or less than 1400 a month for rent?

beauf

piplip87 wrote: »

Say a Landlord owns the place in Dublin. Renting out for 2000 a month. Would a be correct in saying that 1000 a month of this would be paid on tax.

12,000 a year in taxes.

What if the government said that if he kept the rent to 1400 a month he could 2000 a year tax on the property. This could be adjusted nationwide. The government would take a hit on taxes but it would reduce rents overnight. It would also bring more landlords back on the market.

It would also allow people to save more money and get a place of Thier own therefore reducing demand on the rental sextor

The shortage has nothing to do with landlords.

Its supply of housing stock and increasing population, immigration.

pwurple

How limited people's perspectives are...

Incentivising removal of landlords. Why would you want that market churn, converting all rentals to Pprs? When I worked in Limerick for a few years, I didn't want to buy there, I wanted to rent. When I worked in New York, Boston, France, ditto. Units were available, I paid the market rate and behaved myself by not wrecking them, like an adult. Work forces are mobile, transient.


Do the next generation now want to leave school or college and buy a 3 bed semi in the same town as our parents? When did this lack of ambition happen, or are these posters solely thinking of their own circumstances instead of society at large?


Say, you do buy what was a former rental house, do you then want it to be excruciatingly painful to rent it out if you go away for a few years to see the world?


It's just a service. Like any other. No need to cripple service providers for the craic.

Bob24

lawred2 wrote: »

The ones enjoying the highest rents in the history of the state?

What would you like to do for them?

As far as I know both landlords with and without mortgage are “enjoying the highest rents in the history of the state”... no deference there.

Sleeper12

Javier Fancy Graphite wrote:

The average for the year is meaningless the question is what was the lowest interest rate ever available in Ireland and the answer is 1% trackers not the rates available today. I really don't know why you are wasting your time incorrectly arguing otherwise.

You've just made that up!

If you go back and read the thread then you'll find I brought up interest rates by stating that they are historically lower now than ever before. I posted CSO figures from 1975 to 2017 to prove this fact. It's fact. You can contradict that all you want, without any links I might add but that do not change the facts that interest rates are officially at their lowest ever.

Some trackers were as low as a half percent by the way but that did NOT mean that Irish interest rates were a half a percent. Trackers today are still only 1 percent. They haven't gone up. The loss making product has been removed from the market. Just because it was removed from the market does not mean interest rates have increased.
If you can't provide any real links or data contradicting CSO data I believe that you don't have an argument

KevinCavan

The government should have started building significantly three years ago, when it was clear there was a housing crisis. The government needs to build houses for middle class people as well as the people on job seeker’s allowance. There is no real vision for housing, just all spin and bullsh1t.

beauf

I wish you both would stop.

Sleeper12

beauf wrote: »

I wish you both would stop.

There's actually three of us at it.


I'm done with it. I'll let them say what they want but unless they come back with anything better then their own imagination to debunk CSO figures there's not much point in me feeding them

beauf

KevinCavan wrote: »

The government should have started building significantly three years ago, when it was clear there was a housing crisis. The government needs to build houses for middle class people as well as the people on job seeker’s allowance. There is no real vision for housing, just all spin and bullsh1t.

Social and affordable housing.

No idea what middle class housing is or why the govt should build that.

I think if I was trying to get in the property ladder at the moment Id be very careful. The cost of housing is unsustainable long term for most incomes. Don't get caught out.

ted1

lawred2 wrote: »

You mean income tax like every other citizen in receipt of income pays?

What would you like to do?

Make a special subclass of income tax?

It’s a business. No other business pays USC on sales or income

lawred2

ted1 wrote: »

It’s a business. No other business pays USC on sales or income

but you pay USC on your income which is exactly what the rent post allowable deductions is no?

just like everyone else?

you want rental income to be exempt from tax?

Grumpypants

Sleeper12 wrote: »

You've just made that up!

If you go back and read the thread then you'll find I brought up interest rates by stating that they are historically lower now than ever before. I posted CSO figures from 1975 to 2017 to prove this fact. It's fact. You can contradict that all you want, without any links I might add but that do not change the facts that interest rates are officially at their lowest ever.

Some trackers were as low as a half percent by the way but that did NOT mean that Irish interest rates were a half a percent. Trackers today are still only 1 percent. They haven't gone up. The loss making product has been removed from the market. Just because it was removed from the market does not mean interest rates have increased.
If you can't provide any real links or data contradicting CSO data I believe that you don't have an argument

You are right, they are at their historically lowest point.

If you ignore all the other mortgages that were lower than the variable rate today. But that's like saying I'm the fastest man alive if you just ignore everyone who is faster.


The lowest rate of interest ever charged in Ireland was on a mortgage product that tracked 0.5% above the ECB rate.

ted1

ted1 wrote: »

It’s a business. No other business pays USC on sales or income

It isn't a business unless it is incorporated as a business, which would usually mean you pay yourself a salary from it (which you would pay income tax and USC on).

Until you do that then effectively you are a sole trader so pay income tax and USC on all your income, including rental income.

ted1

lawred2 wrote: »

but you pay USC on your income which is exactly what the rent post allowable deductions is no?

just like everyone else?

you want rental income to be exempt from tax?

No you pay USC on the income pre deductions

Sleeper12

Grumpypants wrote:

You are right, they are at their historically lowest point.

Thank you. Shame it took 5 pages to realise that fact

Fol20

ted1 wrote: »

No you pay USC on the income pre deductions

Isnt it post current expense and pre capital allowances?

lawred2

ted1 wrote: »

No you pay USC on the income pre deductions

urm I'd be rather surprised if that was the case.

Income Tax, PRSI and USC is usually only calculated on taxable income. That's rental income less allowable expenses and capital allowances.

I'm open to correction though.