What do we expect from the new Minister for Housing?

hometruths

So our new Minister for Housing is Darragh O'Brien.

Judging by his previous comments on airbnb I'd expect him to try and hit the ground running with a clamp down on short term lets.

If for any reason he does not, then I think the theory that Irish governments prioritise maintaining high house prices above all else holds true.



Mod Note

Thread Split

nerrad01

They need a vacant property tax asap, letting all these apartments it empty to maintain an artificially inflated rent level is scandalous

Hubertj

schmittel wrote: »

So our new Minister for Housing is Darragh O'Brien.

Judging by his previous comments on airbnb I'd expect him to try and hit the ground running with a clamp down on short term lets.

If for any reason he does not, then I think the theory that Irish governments prioritise maintaining high house prices above all else holds true.

Is the issue not that there is already legislation in place but councils are not enforcing it? Something about lack of resources to investigate? Something would have to be done in conjunction with revenue to make it more effective - if it is a stl property enforce planning and also check if a tax return has been made on the rental income.

hometruths

Hubertj wrote: »

Is the issue not that there is already legislation in place but councils are not enforcing it? Something about lack of resources to investigate? Something would have to be done in conjunction with revenue to make it more effective - if it is a stl property enforce planning and also check if a tax return has been made on the rental income.

If a minister wishes to enforce it, it is easily done. There is no issue with enforcement other than the political will to do so.

awec

It'd be easy to introduce enforcement options now given the volume of short term lets is so small at the moment.

Make them all require a licence, and then put the onus on AirBnB and co to ensure that all their users have said license.

Jizique

nerrad01 wrote: »

They need a vacant property tax asap, letting all these apartments it empty to maintain an artificially inflated rent level is scandalous

Agree; huge issue in other large cities globally, but particularly the UK

c.p.w.g.w

Jizique wrote: »

Agree; huge issue in other large cities globally, but particularly the UK

I think vacant retail lots should be heavily taxed...

A buddy of mine was looking for a premises and the quotes he got were outrageous...on the same street 7 vacant premises...all quoting the same price...this was 3 years ago 5 of the 7 units have remained vacant over the 3 years, the other 2 units have 5 different business's between them in the same period...

His focused his business almost entirely online as a result and it's still going strong...along with market stall at certain markets

Pkiernan

nerrad01 wrote: »

They need a vacant property tax asap, letting all these apartments it empty to maintain an artificially inflated rent level is scandalous

I agree.
Let's also introduce a vacant spare room tax for people who could rent a room out too.

dickface

Pkiernan wrote: »

I agree.
Let's also introduce a vacant spare room tax for people who could rent a room out too.

Let's not

antimatterx

Pkiernan wrote: »

I agree.
Let's also introduce a vacant spare room tax for people who could rent a room out too.

That's bs. You are quite entitled to live alone in more than a 1 bed if you can afford it. If I can afford a 3 bed on my own in a few years I'm going to have 1 bedroom, 1 study, 1 home gym.

Pkiernan

antimatterx wrote: »

That's bs. You are quite entitled to live alone in more than a 1 bed if you can afford it. If I can afford a 3 bed on my own in a few years I'm going to have 1 bedroom, 1 study, 1 home gym.

But we're in the middle of a homelessness crisis.

Thats seems sufficient to make up any retro active laws we want.

perfectkama

just Tax more, Reg, license, and ban any evictions from private LLs, that should increase the the rate of exit of these freeloaders

screamer

More of the same, the same as we should expect from any new minister, new faces same old track. Look they left Pascal Donohue where he is, why? My guess is the fiscal policies are not going to change so no point changing there, we are still following an imf/eu mandated fiscal policy from which there is very little room for manoeuvre

NIMAN

I expect nothing to change.

Rodney Bathgate

perfectkama wrote: »

just Tax more, Reg, license, and ban any evictions from private LLs, that should increase the the rate of exit of these freeloaders

By freeloaders you mean HAP recipients?

Claw Hammer

Hubertj wrote: »

Is the issue not that there is already legislation in place but councils are not enforcing it? Something about lack of resources to investigate? Something would have to be done in conjunction with revenue to make it more effective - if it is a stl property enforce planning and also check if a tax return has been made on the rental income.

the legislation that is there is difficult to enforce. Some more refined and targeted legislation is needed.
There are difficulties catching people in the act, running prosecutions where the witnesses reside outside the jurisdiction, meeting the evidential burden required under the planning acts for a conviction.
New offences capable of being more easily detected and prosecuted are needed.
For example, an offence of having an external key box outside a house unless it is registered. Same for keypad access.

perfectkama

Rodney Bathgate wrote: »

By freeloaders you mean HAP recipients?

Just sarcasm,

deflection airbnb & LL = homeless,

many new reports V the absence of policy because there is no funds, plan to increase availability

mrslancaster

Claw Hammer wrote: »

....New offences capable of being more easily detected and prosecuted are needed. For example, an offence of having an external key box outside a house unless it is registered. Same for keypad access.

How would that work? who do you think the external keybox/keypad access products should be registered with?

perfectkama

mrslancaster wrote: »

How would that work? who do you think the external keybox/keypad access products should be registered with?

A new agency similar to the RTB once you have a database you can regulate it into oblivion

robinbird

antimatterx wrote: »

That's bs. You are quite entitled to live alone in more than a 1 bed if you can afford it. If I can afford a 3 bed on my own in a few years I'm going to have 1 bedroom, 1 study, 1 home gym.

Guess what I use my three bedrooms for.

lawrencesummers

If anybody wants to have a serious idea looked at then I think there should be a ban on the foreign ownership of property.

Of course there can be exceptions where a person has been an Irish person has been a tax payer Here in the previous ten years, Or a foreign person who has some connection like a employment orhas a Registered business employing people here etc.

If people want to invest in property then well and good, the economy needs investors, but it doesn’t need vulture funds buying up assets all over the place to flip them and make a quick quid

c.p.w.g.w

If a vacant bedroom tax was to be introduced, they would have to have a legal definition of what constitutes a bedroom...we have 3...

1 is our master bedroom
1 is guest room/makeup room for herself
1 is storage & my bike room as storing them in a shed isn't save(on the advise of local Garda)

Would find such a tax very unfair for privately owned property owners in their primary residence

robinbird

Easy solution. Abolish HAP. Use the billion euro a year saved for increased welfare payments and social house building.
Rents and property prices would collapse.

Hairy Japanese BASTARDS!

nerrad01 wrote: »

They need a vacant property tax asap, letting all these apartments it empty to maintain an artificially inflated rent level is scandalous

Controlling private property is something that'd happen in Nazi Germany. It's unconstitutional.

Pkiernan

Pkiernan wrote: »

I agree.
Let's also introduce a vacant spare room tax for people who could rent a room out too.

You want an extra tax on people who don’t want strangers in their house? Have a think about that, an elderly widow/widower gets taxed because they don’t want to let the extra bedroom in their house.

Pkiernan wrote: »

But we're in the middle of a homelessness crisis.

Thats seems sufficient to make up any retro active laws we want.

No, it really doesn’t.

wowy

robinbird wrote: »

Easy solution. Abolish HAP. Use the billion euro a year saved for increased welfare payments and social house building.
Rents and property prices would collapse.

And while waiting for all this extra social housing to be delivered, what happens to the thousands of tenants no longer receiving HAP who get evicted for non-payment?

Claw Hammer

mrslancaster wrote: »

How would that work? who do you think the external keybox/keypad access products should be registered with?

The local council. Anyone caught with an unregistered one would have it removed forthwith, followed by a summons to the District Court.

Hairy Japanese BASTARDS!

It's the states responsibility not private citizens

Why don't we just build a 30 storey block in every urban area, one in Swords for Fingal, one in Dún Laoighre for SCD one in the city centre, one in Galway, Cork etc.

These will be means tested and rent will be payable based on your needs and stopped at source.

If you turn down the offer, you will be deemed to be not "homeless".

Claw Hammer

Hairy Japanese BASTARDS! wrote: »

It's the states responsibility not private citizens

Why don't we just build a 30 storey block in every urban area, one in Swords for Fingal, one in Dún Laoighre for SCD one in the city centre, one in Galway, Cork etc.

These will be means tested and rent will be payable based on your needs and stopped at source.

If you turn down the offer, you will be deemed to be not "homeless".

That kind of thing was tried time and again over the last 80 years. It didn't turn out well.

Fred Cryton

Stop talking about new taxes.

If someone pays €100 million for a vacant site - think about it, if nothing is built here someone is going to take a huge loss. Developers will want to develop. There are a lot of other factors - namely getting planning permission (which can take years), making sure the product fits market demand, raising financing for construction - this is both equity and debt, then trying to get contractors on site which was very difficult pre-Covid.

Adding a tax onto all of this simply because there's' no construction boots on the ground right now is such a typically irish stupid populist response to a complex problem. The tax will be simply added onto the cost of the project, delaying things further. And will be passed onto the end consumer - us.

Hairy Japanese BASTARDS!

Claw Hammer wrote: »

That kind of thing was tried time and again over the last 80 years. It didn't turn out well.

High rise didn't turn out bad because it was high rise, it turned out bad because if the vermin in it.

Introduce proper zero tolerance justice along with it.

Jimi H

They definitely need to look at all of the empty properties. As an aside, I was speaking to a nursing home owner this week. He was saying the fair deal scheme prohibits the patient in the nursing home from renting his/her house and he reckoned there were thousands of empty houses because of this.

Yurt2

Hairy Japanese BASTARDS! wrote: »

Controlling private property is something that'd happen in Nazi Germany. It's unconstitutional.

Only a person with an extremely limited understanding of the constitution would trot such a thing out.

Many modern liberal democracies have limiting regulations on private property. No need to be silly.

"Property has its duties as well as its rights; to the neglect of those duties in times past is mainly to be ascribed that diseased state of society in which such crimes take their rise"

- Thomas Drummond

antimatterx

robinbird wrote: »

Guess what I use my three bedrooms for.

The very same.

Claw Hammer

Hairy Japanese BASTARDS! wrote: »

High rise didn't turn out bad because it was high rise, it turned out bad because if the vermin in it.

Introduce proper zero tolerance justice along with it.

High or low rise. It didn't turn out well. Why 30 storeys anyway? Massively expensive to build and maintain.

mrslancaster

Claw Hammer wrote: »

The local council. Anyone caught with an unregistered one would have it removed forthwith, followed by a summons to the District Court.

I have seen lots of homes with keypad access units and they are not airbnb's or rented properties. I cant see how it would work to register every keypad with the local council - what about apartments blocks, car parks, offices etc.

Yurt2

lawrencesummers wrote: »

If anybody wants to have a serious idea looked at then I think there should be a ban on the foreign ownership of property.

Of course there can be exceptions where a person has been an Irish person has been a tax payer Here in the previous ten years, Or a foreign person who has some connection like a employment orhas a Registered business employing people here etc.

If people want to invest in property then well and good, the economy needs investors, but it doesn’t need vulture funds buying up assets all over the place to flip them and make a quick quid

There is some wisdom to this idea although it probably could not be done for European nationals* due to EU rules. You could probably (carefully worded) do it for non EEA nationals but there would be so many loopholes it would be next to useless. Anecdotally, from people I know working in the industry, there has been a lot of Chinese and Middle Eastern money injected into residential property in Ireland via special purpose vehicles and funds over the last few years. I'm not sure even policy makers realise it.

*Denmark is the exception to this as they negotiated an exemption from EU rules on the foreign ownership of property. Only permanent residents (for EU citizens I think one must have been a taxpayer for X amount of years and you have to prove strong links to the country) and citizens may own property, with exceptions for German nationals in certain parts of the country for historical reasons.

Claw Hammer

mrslancaster wrote: »

I have seen lots of homes with keypad access units and they are not airbnb's or rented properties. I cant see how it would work to register every keypad with the local council - what about apartments blocks, car parks, offices etc.

No reason they can't be registered. When investigating suspected short term letting the first thing to look for would be an unauthorised keybox or keypad. I have yet to see a private home with keypad access through the front door. some posher houses are using them at the front gate but not to get in the door. i doubt if the insurance would allow it in any case.

mrslancaster

Hairy Japanese BASTARDS! wrote: »

High rise didn't turn out bad because it was high rise, it turned out bad because if the vermin in it..

Terrible way to speak about people.
I dont know as much as others about the issues in some high rise developments but from what I read, the council and wider social conditions contributed in a large way to the problems faced by many residents.
eg Ballymun and other flats complexes in dublin had high levels of unemployment, lack of maintenance by the council, lack of basic social amenities, poor bus services, drug problems etc etc.

It strikes me as strange that so many are calling for high rise developments again when they have nothing good to say about the ones that were demolished.

the_syco

Hairy Japanese BASTARDS! wrote: »

High rise didn't turn out bad because it was high rise, it turned out bad because if the vermin in it.

Ballymun failed because the council stopped having money to fix problems in it.

Jimi H wrote: »

They definitely need to look at all of the empty properties. As an aside, I was speaking to a nursing home owner this week. He was saying the fair deal scheme prohibits the patient in the nursing home from renting his/her house and he reckoned there were thousands of empty houses because of this.

The Fair Deal scheme gets X amount from the sale of the house. Who'd look after the tenants should it be rented? The OAP in the home who is there because they can't even look after themselves??????

mrslancaster wrote: »

It strikes me as strange that so many are calling for high rise developments again when they have nothing good to say about the ones that were demolished.

I call for private high rise developments that the people who own them pay annual costs to maintain the places. As I stated above, Ballymun failed as there was no money to maintain them, so they were left alone.

Pkiernan

Dav010 wrote: »

You want an extra tax on people who don’t want strangers in their house? Have a think about that, an elderly widow/widower gets taxed because they don’t want to let the extra bedroom in their house.




No, it really doesn’t.

Guys,

I'm vehemently opposed to vacant property taxes.

I was being sarcastic.

The arguments that far left ultra loons use for vacant property taxes could just as easily be applied to vacant rooms.

Those with their hands constantly out will come looking.

lawrencesummers

Yurt! wrote: »

There is some wisdom to this idea although it probably could not be done for European nationals* due to EU rules. You could probably (carefully worded) do it for non EEA nationals but there would be so many loopholes it would be next to useless. Anecdotally, from people I know working in the industry, there has been a lot of Chinese and Middle Eastern money injected into residential property in Ireland via special purpose vehicles and funds over the last few years. I'm not sure even policy makers realise it.

*Denmark is the exception to this as they negotiated an exemption from EU rules on the foreign ownership of property. Only permanent residents (for EU citizens I think one must have been a taxpayer for X amount of years and you have to prove strong links to the country) and citizens may own property, with exceptions for German nationals in certain parts of the country for historical reasons.

Those special purpose vehicles as far as I’m aware are just another word for tax avoidance schemes, they are unnecessary as the housing market doesn’t need that kind of investment and they just go to increase the wealth of funds mainly.

London has a huge problem with Russians buying and not living in properties. We should make it a lot harder for people who have no civic or taxation ties to Ireland to buy property, and investment should only be allowed by funds that are based here, at least that provides jobs on the other side.

After that an exemption should be given for the value of a principle private residence property that is left to family members in wills. The idea that you inherent the family home and have to sell it to satisfy revenue demands is disgusting. Family homes are bought and paid for out of taxed income over a persons lifetime. Maybe a cap Of 700-800k should be on it to stop wealthy fiddling the system.

Eric Cartman

Hairy Japanese BASTARDS! wrote: »

High rise didn't turn out bad because it was high rise, it turned out bad because if the vermin in it.

Introduce proper zero tolerance justice along with it.

its why FG basically gave cluid the mandate to house people, they had one thing the government couldn't have , a 'no criminal convictions' clause. It seriously helps clean up some issues and keeps the worst of the worst out.

Jimi H

the_syco wrote: »

The Fair Deal scheme gets X amount from the sale of the house. Who'd look after the tenants should it be rented? The OAP in the home who is there because they can't even look after themselves??????
.

It seems the average time an OAP is in care under fair deal is around 3 years. During that time, a lot of the houses remain vacant if not occupied by a relative. There may be cases where a relative has enduring power of attorney or ward of court orders but they would be unable to rent out the property during this time under fair deal. I don’t think vacancy is the best solution.

RobbieMD

Hairy Japanese BASTARDS! wrote: »

Controlling private property is something that'd happen in Nazi Germany. It's unconstitutional.

Weren’t you on about CPO’ing private property in car parks for bicycle parking the other day?

jrosen

Does anyone know why the shared ownership and affordable housing stopped?

I bought my first home years ago on the affordable housing scheme. As a single applicant on my salary I would never have been able to afford to buy otherwise. I know 2 other people who bought the same way. Both are still in their homes.

At the time I got my mortgage through the council. I believe it changed then and applicants applied through their bank of choice.
But I felt it was a great way for those on low incomes to actually be able to buy. There was a hefty clawback though to the council if you sold but at the time those who were willing to come off the council housing list and buy through these schemes were able to avail of a much lower clawback %.

I would really like to see better options to buy for those who want too, be they single people, families/couples on low incomes. We should be trying to get people off the housing lists imo.

Spanish Eyes

2nd refusal of State funded housing should kick you off the list.

I think it is 3 now, maybe I am wrong, but that is unreal. But I suppose I will be told they need to be near their mammies or their school. That is a luxury denied many who paddle their own canoe and buy/rent themselves. And fund all this nonsense.

Homeless my foot.

ispeakdatruth

I’d like to see the minister balance the landlord/tenant relationship.
Notice periods should be reduced, and Any non paying tenants should experience efficient evictions.

I think an education program for the general public that explains that not everyone will be in a position to own a house.
Pay attention in school, get a job, and work hard are all keys to home ownership. This should be drilled into the youth.

If these things are achieved, I think this minister will be deemed a success.

Marcusm

ispeakdatruth wrote: »

I’d like to see the minister balance the landlord/tenant relationship.
Notice periods should be reduced, and Any non paying tenants should experience efficient evictions.

I think an education program for the general public that explains that not everyone will be in a position to own a house.
Pay attention in school, get a job, and work hard are all keys to home ownership. This should be drilled into the youth.

If these things are achieved, I think this minister will be deemed a success.

Realistically, his focus will be on the delivery of a gross number of new housing units. There will not be any relief for landlords or a rebalancing of rights; there might be the odd party contribution from that area but realistically any relief for landlords would lose 10 votes for every one generated.

Spanish Eyes

Two offers or you are gone off the list.

Those buying off their own bat can only buy where they can afford.

I hope FF will take cognisance of the fact that those who contribute have no voice anymore as to where their taxes are going. But I suspect they won't, just like the previous Gov.

Spanish Eyes

ispeakdatruth wrote: »

I’d like to see the minister balance the landlord/tenant relationship.
Notice periods should be reduced, and Any non paying tenants should experience efficient evictions.

I think an education program for the general public that explains that not everyone will be in a position to own a house.
Pay attention in school, get a job, and work hard are all keys to home ownership. This should be drilled into the youth.

If these things are achieved, I think this minister will be deemed a success.

Unfortunately many tenants (not all) know they cannot be evicted without the LL having to take them to court and engage the Sheriff eventually. I know it doesn't always come to that, but those in the know, know this.