Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Is nobody concerned at all about the amount that the government gets from their rent?

Options
1235

Comments

  • Options
    #122
    listermint
    Registered Users Posts: 33,737 ✭✭✭✭listermint


    _Brian wrote: »
    Not directly they wouldn’t.
    But, it would make it an attractive business again and bring many more investors who would bring more properties to the rental market. The high rents currently are being driven through lack of supply, if the supply increases it brings down rents through competition. It’s a win-win, I think even discounting 50% of the rent from tax consideration would have an effect. It would maintain a revenue stream for the government while alleviating tue market forces that are driving up rents.

    There’s something wrong with a rental market where a landlord has little incentive to rent a property as a result of excessive taxation.

    An attractive business......?


    You have developments being built with planning permission to sell and then went granted being turned around to build to let.


    It's already a poxy attractive business. Attractiveness is the core problem it itself'is driving up everything.


  • Options
    #123
    Kuva
    Closed Accounts Posts: 870 ✭✭✭Kuva


    Amirani wrote: »

    The solution to the rental issues is increasing supply.

    No, it's cut the population.


  • Options
    #124
    listermint
    Registered Users Posts: 33,737 ✭✭✭✭listermint


    Kuva wrote: »
    No, it's cut the population.

    Stagnation is not the answer.

    Ever

    Never has been never will be


  • Options
    #125
    Kuva
    Closed Accounts Posts: 870 ✭✭✭Kuva


    listermint wrote: »
    Stagnation is not the answer.

    Ever

    Never has been never will be

    Climate migration has started to take off in a big way in the US now.

    It'll be forced on us, the powers that be have failed.

    Company share prices coming before the rights of people and the environment will be after it.


  • Options
    #126
    Sleeper12
    Registered Users Posts: 16,927 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    Fol20 wrote: »
    The more negative impacts that are enforced on ll, the more ll will get out the market. So even small stuff like painting a house shouldn’t be forced on a ll. If the tenant doesn’t like the condition of the place, they can move somewhere else or if we go the European model, they can paint the room black for all I care as long as it’s back to it’s original condition once they leave or I have a real way of getting the money off them if it is not the same. If you are a landlord why do you accept they won’t do anything for us yet you want to endure more “pain”/ hassle in further anti ll legislation? The paint on a wall is literally like a first world problem and would be at the bottom of a minimum standard. It’s aestetics that serve no function but to look nice and clean. If you wanted to, you could have an unpainted grey wall which would be equally as good




    I disagree with that in bold. That's what the tenement landlords used to say & to be honest what the industry needs to get away from. Remember we are talking little changes like painting in exchange for changes in the law making it easier to evict problem tenants. Give & take. It's easier to get something from the government if you seem to be improving standards too.



    Done properly painting costs very little. My painter uses Clean Extreme Magnolia paint on all the wall in all of the properties. Once this is done painter or handyman goes in between every letting & paints what needs to be painted. Paint is exact same colour as paint on the wall so he can just do bits. Often this takes less than an hour for a whole house yet gives the impression that the whole place has been painted. Cost 150 euro but looks like thousands was spent. Also there is new paint smell for viewing


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #127
    Wanderer78
    Registered Users Posts: 28,920 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    listermint wrote:
    Stagnation is not the answer.


    Project Continual growth is working out well, isn't it?


  • Options
    #128
    Sleeper12
    Registered Users Posts: 16,927 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    handlemaster wrote: »
    Another way to look at it is.Does the government want all pensioners to be solely reliant on the state to.survive or would it be best that people during their working years invest so that they have some income in their old age ? All the while paying extra taxes for those investment s ?




    You get a free property after 20 odd years possibly worth half a million.A property paid for by the tenants. That's the minimum that might happen. You might actually show a profit during the twenty years.


    You need to stop looking short term in the property rental market.


  • Options
    #129
    Fol20
    Registered Users Posts: 3,624 ✭✭✭Fol20


    I highly doubt your a ll sleeper now. Every comment I have read from you over the past few weeks is anti ll. People do not shoot them self in the foot which you have constantly shouted for with more legislation against ll or very anti ll sentiment. You may work for ll but I highly doubt you are a ll.

    Painting a house doesn’t improve the standard of a house, it makes it aesthetically more pleasing to look at. That is all. Painting a house can cost a serious amount of money and even if it is small. It should be optional depending on condition.

    Yes it’s give and take and for the past 5 years, it’s been take take and more take. I think it’s time for ll to get something and sadly I highly doubt we will get anything. Do you really think they will change the eviction laws for some extra painting legislation. I highly doubt it, even our minimum standards are higher than other eu countries. Why is it manadatory to provide a microwave. Why is it mandatory to have a 4 ring cooker when other countries can have 2? If anything they are looking at too much short term legislation which is having a negative impact on the ground. Eg removing bedsits. There was some guy on the news recently that was put in the gov latest housing deployment saying he was made homeless after these were banned. Other countries have apartments that are 7-9msq. Yes it’s small. Yes i wouldn’t like to live in it long term however it can provide accommodation for the poorest in society, it can be used as a starter home so people that would prefer not to rent can start on one of these affordable homes and move up as they choose and wouldn’t be paying those pesky ll however with all of the legislation we have, it blocks a ton of different opportunities that could have helped.


  • Options
    #130
    handlemaster
    Registered Users Posts: 6,003 ✭✭✭handlemaster


    Sleeper12 wrote: »
    handlemaster wrote: »
    Another way to look at it is.Does the government want all pensioners to be solely reliant on the state to.survive or would it be best that people during their working years invest so that they have some income in their old age ? All the while paying extra taxes for those investment s ?




    You get a free property after 20 odd years possibly worth half a million.A property paid for by the tenants. That's the minimum that might happen. You might actually show a profit during the twenty years.


    You need to stop looking short term in the property rental market.


    Labour is free now? Half million properties are not the standard rental property in ireland even after 20 years it s not going to an average rental property price. In order to survive to the long term a profit needs to be made year on year. Do I need to point out issues like non paying tenants , damaged property. If the letting game is so good why arent more people jumping into it ! Reality is its easy to vilify the landlord's but try living it the stress can be killer literally


  • Options
    #131
    Sleeper12
    Registered Users Posts: 16,927 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    Fol20 wrote:
    I highly doubt your a ll sleeper now. Every comment I have read from you over the past few weeks is anti ll. People do not shoot them self in the foot which you have constantly shouted for with more legislation against ll or very anti ll sentiment. You may work for ll but I highly doubt you are a ll.

    I'm anti bad landlords and landlords that don't know what they are doing. Many landlords here didn't even know how to value their property or business. Many landlords here over the last few days didn't know that they only pay tax on the profit and not on the rental income. I find this very frustrating. Many single property landlords really shouldn't be in the business at all. Many of these landlords are realising this & want out of the business.

    A professional landlord can (doesn't always) provide decent quality accommodation and done right it doesn't cost them much. I've already explained how we keep our properties freshly painted for a pittance for example. Believe it or not many professional landlords are making more money now than ever before. Once you own the property freehold without loans its a tasty business to be in. Anyone getting into the business thinking of making a decent profit in the first half of the mortgage has been sold a pup.

    Maybe when I talk about rentals you picture your own rental. I'm sure your own rental is a nice place to live so when I say many rentals need updates or are out & out slums I not talking about your property. There is no need to be defensive. I'm not talking about anyone's property here. If fact most single property landlords here I'm betting the property was only built 10 to 20 years ago. Most of these properties would be OK ish standard even if nothing was done since being built.

    The world is bigger than boards.ie and its members. I see slums at least once a week. Threadbare carpets, some with burn marks with a rug thrown over the burns. Landlord might have stopped the cost of a new carpet out of the deposit yet just but down a manky 2nd hand rug. Yellow paint that used to be white 25 years ago. Little or no ventilation. Mould everywhere even a stinking dank smell from what's left of the carpet. Windows that do not open or windows that do not close properly. A gas boiler that hasn't been serviced in 10 years or outright dangerous electrical wiring.

    The industry needs to improve its standards and public image. Any negotiation with the government in years to come will have to be give & take. Anyone already running a decent property will have nothing to fear from improving minimum standards because their standards will already be higher. I doubt anyone believes that the government will change legislation to make it easier to remove problem tenants without something in return. They will only be able to sell it to the voters by showing what they got in return. No more slums. No more sub standard buildings or fixtures & fittings.

    The most dangerous thing that damages the image I read here on threads all the time. "if a tenant doesn't like the condition of the property they don't have to take it or they can move elsewhere". Think about that statement made on boards.ie time and again. It's kills the reputation of landlords. It is exactly what was said in the old Dublin tenement buildings by the landlord.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #132
    Graham
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,642 Mod ✭✭✭✭Graham


    Sleeper12 wrote: »
    I'm anti bad landlords and landlords that don't know what they are doing. Many landlords here didn't even know how to value their property or business. Many landlords here over the last few days didn't know that they only pay tax on the profit and not on the rental income. I find this very frustrating. Many single property landlords really shouldn't be in the business at all. Many of these landlords are realising this & want out of the business.

    I've been knocking around here for quite a while and I think it's fair to say, the "many landlords" you're referring to are fairly few and far between.


  • Options
    #133
    Sleeper12
    Registered Users Posts: 16,927 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    handlemaster wrote:
    Labour is free now? Half million properties are not the standard rental property in ireland even after 20 years it s not going to an average rental property price. In order to survive to the long term a profit needs to be made year on year. Do I need to point out issues like non paying tenants , damaged property. If the letting game is so good why arent more people jumping into it ! Reality is its easy to vilify the landlord's but try living it the stress can be killer literally

    Whoever told you that you'll make profits year on year from the get go lied to you. I can't stress this enough, if you have to borrow to buy the property then it's a long term investment. If you pay cash & are mortgage free then profit starts straight away but even then it's a long term investment as the value of the property may be stagnant for a number of years or may actually drop in the short term.

    Interest rates are at the lowest ever. Ever. Rents are at their highest levels ever. Ever. Landlords that own the property outright are making a bigger profit now than at any other time. Landlords with a mortgage aren't making so much because they are buying a building at the moment.


  • Options
    #134
    Sleeper12
    Registered Users Posts: 16,927 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    Graham wrote:
    I've been knocking around here for quite a while and I think it's fair to say, the "many landlords" you're referring to are fairly few and far between.


    The problem is that it's a bubble here on boards. Almost all if not all are single property landlords with mortgages. I'm betting most properties were built within the last 20 years. This isn't the typical landlord or the typical property outside of boards.

    I don't hear landlords splitting a rundown Georgian building into half a dozen rooms, 70 year old houses in Crumlin. The posters here don't reflect the majority of landlords or properties outside of boards


  • Options
    #135
    Graham
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,642 Mod ✭✭✭✭Graham


    Sleeper12 wrote: »
    Almost all if not all are single property landlords

    As are two thirds of the private landlords in the country, it's hardly unrepresentative.


  • Options
    #136
    Sleeper12
    Registered Users Posts: 16,927 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    Graham wrote:
    As are two thirds of the private landlords in the country, it's hardly unrepresentative.


    Two thirds of private landlords don't still have a mortgage. Two thirds of private landlords don't have property 20 years or younger.

    Boards.ie isn't reflective of the property market. Cart Man gave statics pointing out that most private landlords have mortgages. I don't doubt his findings but it was another bubble. He conducted his survey in estates in West Dublin that were only 15 to 20 years old. If he asked private homes in the same ares he'd be hard pushed to find a house without a mortgage. The survey though accurate wasn't reflective of the rental market.

    Don't forget single property landlords don't own a large proportion of the rental property in Ireland


  • Options
    #137
    Graham
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,642 Mod ✭✭✭✭Graham


    Sleeper12 wrote: »
    Two thirds of private landlords don't still have a mortgage. Two thirds of private landlords don't have property 20 years or younger.

    Source?
    Sleeper12 wrote: »
    Don't forget single property landlords don't own a large proportion of the rental property in Ireland

    Two thirds of all landlords own a single rental property. 86% of all landlords own 2 or less rental properties.


  • Options
    #138
    Sleeper12
    Registered Users Posts: 16,927 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    My mistake. You said two thirds of private landlords are single property owners. I agree

    What I had meant to reply was that not all of of the two thirds have a mortgage or a property older than 20 years or so. It's not reflective of the market.



    Graham wrote:
    Two thirds of all landlords own a single rental property. 86% of all landlords own 2 or less rental properties.

    You are getting hung up on the amount of landlords.

    How many units do you think this 86 percent own. What proportion of the overall amount of property do this 86 percent have. Would they have a quarter of the overall market? I doubt its as much as a third but let's say a third. If all posters here own only one or two properties & all of these seem to be under 20 years old property and again all seems to be mortgaged. And this type of landlord accounts for a third of the market then they are not reflective of the market. Its a bubble. Not irrelevant but not reflective of the rental market in Ireland.

    To be honest considering all or most posters seem to be mortgaged with young properties I'm not sure if they are even reflective of the 86 percent as most of these are mortgage free.

    I suggest that posters here reflect a sixth or less of the market. As I say not irrelevant but at the end of the day it's a bubble.


  • Options
    #139
    Graham
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,642 Mod ✭✭✭✭Graham


    Sleeper12 wrote: »
    To be honest considering all or most posters seem to be mortgaged with young properties I'm not sure if they are even reflective of the 86 percent as most of these are mortgage free.

    What's your source for the mortgage status of landlords/rental properties?


  • Options
    #140
    Franz Von Peppercorn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,070 ✭✭✭Franz Von Peppercorn


    Actually the fact that landlords here think that all landlords pay 50% on revenue (ignoring the revenue vs profit argument for now) is fairly telling.

    I know one professional landlord, as in he does nothing else. He lives in Dublin but rents out property he inherited in Mayo or somewhere. 3 appartments, all small. He has indicated to me his revenue is between 20-30k. That’s his entire income situation (ignoring the odd nixer). So he clearly never says, or believes he pays 50%.


  • Options
    #141
    Sleeper12
    Registered Users Posts: 16,927 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    Graham wrote: »
    What's your source for the mortgage status of landlords/rental properties?




    Lets keep this simple. Forget about a mortgage. Lets say all 86 percent have mortgage & a newish house. Lets say everything falls in your favour. No mortgage free rentals & nothing over 20 years old. That is still less than a third of all rental units. Its still a bubble & not reflective of the overall market. That is being super generous & it's only a third of all units. Not reflective at all. It reflects a small portion of the rental market


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #142
    Fol20
    Registered Users Posts: 3,624 ✭✭✭Fol20


    Sleeper12 wrote: »
    I'm anti bad landlords and landlords that don't know what they are doing. Many landlords here didn't even know how to value their property or business. Many landlords here over the last few days didn't know that they only pay tax on the profit and not on the rental income. I find this very frustrating. Many single property landlords really shouldn't be in the business at all. Many of these landlords are realising this & want out of the business.

    A professional landlord can (doesn't always) provide decent quality accommodation and done right it doesn't cost them much. I've already explained how we keep our properties freshly painted for a pittance for example. Believe it or not many professional landlords are making more money now than ever before. Once you own the property freehold without loans its a tasty business to be in. Anyone getting into the business thinking of making a decent profit in the first half of the mortgage has been sold a pup.

    Maybe when I talk about rentals you picture your own rental. I'm sure your own rental is a nice place to live so when I say many rentals need updates or are out & out slums I not talking about your property. There is no need to be defensive. I'm not talking about anyone's property here. If fact most single property landlords here I'm betting the property was only built 10 to 20 years ago. Most of these properties would be OK ish standard even if nothing was done since being built.

    The world is bigger than boards.ie and its members. I see slums at least once a week. Threadbare carpets, some with burn marks with a rug thrown over the burns. Landlord might have stopped the cost of a new carpet out of the deposit yet just but down a manky 2nd hand rug. Yellow paint that used to be white 25 years ago. Little or no ventilation. Mould everywhere even a stinking dank smell from what's left of the carpet. Windows that do not open or windows that do not close properly. A gas boiler that hasn't been serviced in 10 years or outright dangerous electrical wiring.

    The industry needs to improve its standards and public image. Any negotiation with the government in years to come will have to be give & take. Anyone already running a decent property will have nothing to fear from improving minimum standards because their standards will already be higher. I doubt anyone believes that the government will change legislation to make it easier to remove problem tenants without something in return. They will only be able to sell it to the voters by showing what they got in return. No more slums. No more sub standard buildings or fixtures & fittings.

    The most dangerous thing that damages the image I read here on threads all the time. "if a tenant doesn't like the condition of the property they don't have to take it or they can move elsewhere". Think about that statement made on boards.ie time and again. It's kills the reputation of landlords. It is exactly what was said in the old Dublin tenement buildings by the landlord.

    Well, i would be hoping given current rental rates they would at least be breaking even however with all the new rental rules, some decent ll now stuck at a much lower rate and extra taxation, some maybe still not cash flowing the property.

    I keep all of my places in good condition not because i have to but because i want to attract a certain time of clientele. I have however seen and taken over some places where mould was everywhere, walls were half caved in, tenants didnt have a working shower for months and had to do it the old fashioned way. I have even lived in not so nice places when i was younger. At the end of the day, renting isnt long term and thats why i revert back to the fact that tenants can up and leave any time they want. I dont understand why you believe this statement is damaging the reputation of ll as its just a simple fact. If i go into a restaurant and i receive poor customer service or food, i will take my business elsewhere. Being a ll is about providing a service, and if people are not happy with it, go elsewhere.

    Where are you getting your stats that most properties are unencumbered. If you hold all of your properties unencumbered, it would be a foolish way not leverage your asset and bring down your taxation. Im not saying you go all out and borrow up to your hilt but some degree of debt can make your income much more tax efficient and productive.

    What source do you have that single individuals hold a small total market share of it. Yes REITs are starting to hold thousands of properties but private ll would still hold a large market share.Unless you can back it up with a valid source that private ll only hold a 6th of the market, i dont think its true.


  • Options
    #143
    LotharIngum
    Registered Users Posts: 210 ✭✭LotharIngum


    Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »
    Actually the fact that landlords here think that all landlords pay 50% on revenue (ignoring the revenue vs profit argument for now) is fairly telling.

    I know one professional landlord, as in he does nothing else. He lives in Dublin but rents out property he inherited in Mayo or somewhere. 3 appartments, all small. He has indicated to me his revenue is between 20-30k. That’s his entire income situation (ignoring the odd nixer). So he clearly never says, or believes he pays 50%.


    As I have clarified in the first post, we are talking about rent increases being taxed at 50% and we are also talking about cost neutral reductions to the landlord but with significant reductions to the tenant. There have even been some ,much better ideas than mine getting lost in the landlord bashing in the thread which all suggest that it would be very easy to lower rents significantly with no cost to the owners.

    People are just getting too caught up in the bash the landlord game instead of looking at ways to reduce peoples rents.

    And that's exactly where Leo wants them. At each others throats and overlooking the good that Leo has the potential to do with the stroke of a pen, but wont.


  • Options
    #144
    Sleeper12
    Registered Users Posts: 16,927 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    Fol20 wrote: »
    Well, i would be hoping given current rental rates they would at least be breaking even however with all the new rental rules, some decent ll now stuck at a much lower rate and extra taxation, some maybe still not cash flowing the property.

    I keep all of my places in good condition not because i have to but because i want to attract a certain time of clientele. I have however seen and taken over some places where mould was everywhere, walls were half caved in, tenants didnt have a working shower for months and had to do it the old fashioned way. I have even lived in not so nice places when i was younger. At the end of the day, renting isnt long term and thats why i revert back to the fact that tenants can up and leave any time they want. I dont understand why you believe this statement is damaging the reputation of ll as its just a simple fact. If i go into a restaurant and i receive poor customer service or food, i will take my business elsewhere. Being a ll is about providing a service, and if people are not happy with it, go elsewhere.

    Where are you getting your stats that most properties are unencumbered.

    What source do you have that single individuals hold a small total market share of it. Yes REITs are starting to hold thousands of properties but private ll would still hold a large market share.Unless you can back it up with a valid source that private ll only hold a 6th of the market, i dont think its true.


    Folo20 it's great to hear a different type of landlords view here.



    In bold is not quite what I was saying. I suggested that the proportion of single let landlords with a mortgage in a property less that 20 years is around a 6th of the market share. Obviously many single let landlords are mortgage free. Many single let landlords never bought the property in the first. Inheritance can be a wonderful thing. The 6th that I guessed at were only single let, mortgage & newish house.


    Graham says "Two thirds of all landlords own a single rental property. 86% of all landlords own 2 or less rental properties."

    Ive no reason to doubt him but that statistic is deceiving in that this 86 percent account for a 3rd or less of the rental units. I'm at pains to try to explain that this 3rd isn't reflective of the whole property market.


  • Options
    #145
    listermint
    Registered Users Posts: 33,737 ✭✭✭✭listermint


    Wanderer78 wrote: »
    Project Continual growth is working out well, isn't it?

    Yes actually it is. It would be going better if we didn't have landlords as ministers. But outside that yes our growth has people in real jobs all over.


  • Options
    #146
    Wanderer78
    Registered Users Posts: 28,920 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    listermint wrote: »
    Yes actually it is. It would be going better if we didn't have landlords as ministers. But outside that yes our growth has people in real jobs all over.

    i beg to differ, continual growth is wreaking havoc on this planet, particularly environmentally. David Graeber is making a stir regarding 'bull**** jobs'!


  • Options
    #147
    Eric Cartman
    Registered Users Posts: 26,282 ✭✭✭✭Eric Cartman


    Fanny **** wrote: »
    Over 50% of my bonus went to the govt too. As will next year's payrise (if I get one)

    Strangely I rarely if ever hear anyone give out about marginal tax rates for income other than rental.

    I do all the time, 40% IT existing at all is bad enough but it kicking in anywhere below 100k is just completely unfair.


  • Options
    #148
    handlemaster
    Registered Users Posts: 6,003 ✭✭✭handlemaster


    nice if posters could back up their posts with independent data linked. I am no the wiser after reading the difference in the comments


  • Options
    #149
    Eric Cartman
    Registered Users Posts: 26,282 ✭✭✭✭Eric Cartman


    handlemaster wrote: »
    nice if posters could back up their posts with independent data linked. I am no the wiser after reading the difference in the comments

    Taxes bad
    end of.


  • Options
    #150
    riclad
    Registered Users Posts: 8,184 ✭✭✭riclad


    The only landlords who pay 50 per cent tax are those who have all loans paid off and do not live in the rental property .
    landlords pay tax on the profit after all expense,s are deducted from the
    rental income.
    Rents are much lower in rural area,s outside dublin .


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #151
    Assetbacked
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,969 ✭✭✭Assetbacked


    The largest landlord in Ireland pays no tax on rental income. This is true of all REITs. Absolutely scandalous and implemented by the government of Noonan and Howlin at the time in 2012/2013.

    EDIT: Will include an IT article on Budget 2017 https://www.irishtimes.com/business/personal-finance/budget-2017-will-there-be-any-help-for-landlords-1.2820981


Advertisement