Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Rent a room 14K tax free scheme to be extended to SW recipients

13»

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 595 ✭✭✭CrookedJack


    Ah there we go, this is just another thread to bash social housing recipients. Absolutely nothing to do with the announced changes to disregard the rent a room income in means testing.

    How can you say you made it abundantly clear when you thread title and first post explicitly says the opposite? And you had to lie to make the claim.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 595 ✭✭✭CrookedJack


    Nope, wrong. Rent controls only came in in 2016, so not 12 years ago. Private rentals grew by 4.7% between 2011 and 2016, and has grown steadily for the past 20 years - so that's a net increase in landlords. Even if that were not true, 'Alot' is not all, so all landlords did not sell.

    You're not even a little bit right here - neither of you.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,891 ✭✭✭StupidLikeAFox


    1. You claim there is no incentive to work, despite working working hard and having two houses (at least one mortgage free) yourself
    2. Anybody can avail of this tax free scheme, you are perfectly entitled to claim this in your own home if you want, no need to sell your second property
    3. The "14k" you keep banging on about is a maximum, not a target. It's unlikely you would get 14k for one room in most parts of the country for a house share, so unless you want to live in a 3 way house share you likely won't get that
    4. If I bought shares, a business or had any other source of passive investment I would have to pay tax on any additional income - I don't see why rental income should get any special treatment
    5. You have a fully paid up asset, the value of which is at an all time high -price wise and rent wise

    No offence but its hard to have any sympathy for you op



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,735 ✭✭✭Yellow_Fern


    For the millionth time, rental and dividend income is not taxed as income. It is taxed more punitively under the bizarre Revenue category 'unearned income' and doesn't qualify for social benefits despite incurring PRSI. The State was warned about the consequences of increased regulation and rent controls, while deregulating entry into the country but they ignored warnings and now we are all paying the price.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 116 ✭✭YipeeDee


    First you falsely claim someone else has partially paid for my property.

    Then you falsely claim I’ve been either directly or indirectly subsidised by the tax payer.

    Then you falsely claim I want to rent my property tax free! And you knit into that falsehood that somehow YOU would be paying for home I purchased 25 years ago to give to my children. 😂

    Your delusions are quite entertaining really.

    Now you’re claiming I deliberately lied about something … what is that?

    If you are referring to my misinterpretation of the category of SW recipients eligible to receive the 14K tax relief.

    Two people kindly informed me of my misinterpretation.

    And TWICE I have stated on those two different responses that I stand corrected on that.

    But no surprise you missed those, you’re so busy running your mouth off to notice, no doubt.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 116 ✭✭YipeeDee


    Not looking for your sympathy Stupidlikeafox.

    Simply highlighting the inequitable residential tax system for people renting out accommodation.

    Yes I’m aware, I can avail of the tax allowance renting rooms in my own home and I’m also aware I don’t need to sell my second property. Thank you for reminding me.

    As already stated my intention when my current tenants leave at the end of their tenancy, is to simply quit renting it out altogether.

    Its a mug’s game and I shall be relieved to get out of it.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,002 ✭✭✭handlemaster


    So the welfare family can now afford to purchase a property?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,830 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    That could still be less landlords but those that remain have more properties. Never been able to get total number from the RTB reports.

    Also what was the population growth in that time. Probably around 50k each year. Number of rentals is only half the issue. The other side of what's the demand.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,830 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    Having failed to keep landlords in the market and still not wanting to be landlords themselves. Since that's why they outsourced it to the private market in the first place. They now want to make tenants landlords.

    If it works great. But I wonder how it will work. Who administers it. The landlord, the tenant, the sub tenant, the local authority. Who polices the bad sub tenant. Sounds a nightmare.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 595 ✭✭✭CrookedJack


    Exactly, they were wrong and hyperbolic when they said all landlords left the market 12 years ago. As was the second poster who suggested that things that happened 6 years ago somehow caused all landlords to leave the market 12 years ago



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 595 ✭✭✭CrookedJack


    Yep - I made some incorrect assumptions about your situation, you corrected me, I accepted that. no problem there.

    Your aggressive posting style does not deflect from the fact that you opened a this thread under false pretences. You claimed that social welfare tenants were now able to rent rooms in their council houses. That was the whole point of the thread. Which is patently untrue. Not one news outlet, nor the actual briefing itself ever mentioned that as a possibility.

    When informed of that, you didn't edit the OP to correct your mistake, you didn't say you were wrong and the thread can be closed. You didn't ask for the thread title to be changed to something actually true. You didn't even really accept you believed you were wrong. Instead you said you were still unsure because people on "social media" were saying other wise. a very mealy-mouthed semi-acceptance at the very most - not an abundance of clarity. And then went on to continue the real point of your thread - a rant against people in council houses.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 116 ✭✭YipeeDee


    My original post was edited, perhaps you missed it.

    As the inequities in the tax system for people renting residential properties still stand, I see no reason to remove my entire post. I have acknowledged my misinterpretation of the article multiple times and I appreciate the individuals that informed me of same.

    However, if you feel my post violates publishing on this platform, feel free to report me to the relevant moderators and have my post removed.

    Have a nice day.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,830 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997



    A bit exaggerated perhaps. But a lot have left the RTB reports show that at least. If you look at houses for sale and talk to estate agents, a high % of their business is rentals selling up. But its death of thousand paper cuts. Its the cumulative effect of all these things. All are significant.

    The critical metric is rental availability you can't rent if there's no availability. Will this measure change that. Unlikely.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 595 ✭✭✭CrookedJack


    Well now you're just splitting hairs. Hyperbole is exaggeration, you just don't want to use the same word as me.

    You anecdotes are all well and good but the actual data disagrees with you, there are much more people renting now than 12 years ago so what ever the cumulative effect it's not less rental properties.

    You might be talking about rental availability, but the post you were defending, and the OP i replied to was talking about ALL landlords leaving the rental market in 2010. Which is not true.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,830 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    Hyperbole - "exaggerated statements or claims not meant to be taken literally."

    You don't have to take anyone's word for it. You have stats from RTB the Govt and places Daft and MyHome.

    Around 20,000 landlords have left the rental market since 2016, according to Department of Housing officials.

    There were 320,000 landlords in 2016 and recent figures show there are currently just over 298,000.


    You could have 2 landlords who with 4 properties and one comes in with 500. But that also depends if they actually rent them.


    Then the number of rentals needed increase due to net population growth.

    The CSO’s 2021 data does point to a marked slowdown in the pace of population growth. The annual change in the year to April 2021 was 34,000, the smallest gain since 2014 and notably lower than 56,000 increase recorded in the previous year.


    The critical metric is what can you rent.


    I think arguing about splitting hairs is largely missing the point. It anyone wants to a LL or sub let. Good luck to them. They'll need it.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,359 ✭✭✭JimmyVik


    Im waiting for the legislation change that says a tenants renting a room cannot evict the person they are renting the room to :)



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,830 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,735 ✭✭✭Yellow_Fern


    I don't think so. I think is taxed under PRSI class K9 with no benefits accruing- https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/question/2017-11-07/1189/

    Seems mad to me

    Post edited by Yellow_Fern on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,242 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    People want social housing, minimum wages, public services etc but no one wants to manage inward migration.


    The approach to that is free market libertarian.



  • Advertisement
Advertisement