The_Conductor wrote: » Its a matter of time before the REITs will be gently informed they have to supply X amount of social housing- and they'll tell the Minister to take a hike- and it'll end up in court. The absolute number of properties to let- is falling- as the new units coming onstream by the REITs and other large landlords- are insufficient to offset those exiting the sector. Your analogy about sawing the branch you're standing on- is very very apt.
Eric Cartman wrote: » There is just no way to put 'mixed housing' or 'providing social housing' on your investment prospects and not completely sour potential clients.
The_Conductor wrote: » However- its the road they're traveling. The platitudes they used on small scale landlords- simply aren't going to cut it with large corporate entities. People are just going to have accept that the old expression about being careful what you wish for- came from someone who was both wise, and had had a bitter experience. The private sector should never have shouldered the burden of providing for social and mixed tenancies- and now, as its going tits up because of supply falling at an increasing velocity- the Minister is going to play mindgames and blame the private sector for not stepping up to the plate and providing all those social housing units that he made it impossible for the private sector to run. We need a mature discussion on housing in this country- in a similar manner to the discussion we need on social welfare, the contributory and the non-contributory old age pensions- and a myriad of other matters that are being allowed gently fester in the corner- and woe betide anyone who mentions them. The regulatory regime for letting property in Ireland is toxic- plain and simple- and the suggestions are that its going to get a whole lot worse before it gets any better. The irony is- as the system is failing- the selfsame landlords are being blamed for not going along with it. The Minister is probably biding his time- there will be an election before too long- and then it'll simply be someone else's problem.
myshirt wrote: » The REITs and large home builders are not telling the Gov to go take a hike though. They are delivering the units like they have to. Everyone else in the development covers any lost margin. Basically they chip in to cover the cost of the social house. Now I haven't looked into it in any great detail, but you hear this pub talk of developers offering all the units in off-site locations. Donabate for example is becoming a dumping ground for social housing, be it direct supply to the Council or via supply to a REIT for onward HAP rental to the State. These units would be better spread across the actual developments, though I take the point that it's in both the councils interest and the developers that the Part V given over is affordable. Council would prefer 10 units at 300 a piece rather than 5 at 600 a piece.
coolshannagh28 wrote: » The Govt has tried to achieve in a less than a decade what has taken tens of decades even centuries in other countries ; a large scale stable, institutional rental market mainly at the behest of our bailout partners and the US .
hmmm wrote: » If it is a deliberate strategy (convert the rental market to one where large corporates dominate), I think it is the correct strategy. We've debated it a million times on here, but we've heard endless complaints about the Irish "amateur landlord" and their cavalier attitude towards the rules and their clients. A landlord with 400 units to rent can bring you a really great rental experience (although expensive). The right way to do that was to ease the amateurs out of the market over time, but they've dropped the hammer almost out of the blue. This suggests to me that it isn't a proper strategy, they are hopping from short term fix to short term fix, and are completely clueless as to how their actions are impacting on the market. Unfortunately the alternative political parties are even worse.
voluntary wrote: » Unless they offer some other value, like cheap accommodation for whoever cannot afford the excellent penthouses with receptions and security and gym and swimming pool on site and all the expensive shiny extras?
Yurt! wrote: » This article strikes a cautious tone. I doubt we'll ever see a collapse on the scale of post-2008, but the signs are a significant correction could come in the next year or so, particularly once Brexit complications make themselves known to the wider economy. As the article hints at, labour and materials haven't increased significantly, the price (hope value) of land has gone a bit haywire, driving up the cost of new builds and ultimately stretching borrowers. Wage inflation is probably all maxed out as well. EDIT: Forgot to include link...https://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/opinion-ireland-s-property-rush-risks-repeat-of-crisis-1.3845318?fbclid=IwAR0k2C3Ecrq0H6nt90NQs7FJmrelfsPAMSpbSD3ju8jN06OLVsPt3P4Ub3c
Bluefoam wrote: » Article is behind a paywall... care to give us some insights?
Askthe EA wrote: » Ya, like houses. The REITs have no interest in houses as they require too much managing. If you want a garden then its going to be a private landlord you need.
tomfoolery60 wrote: » IRES just bought a load of houses from Glenveagh complete with gardens that they are going to rent : https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2019/0325/1038393-glenveagh-ires-deal/
voluntary wrote: » Revenue.ie website: "REITs are companies who earn rental income from commercial or residential property. They are generally exempt from Corporation Tax (CT) on income from their property rental business only. Also they are generally exempt from chargeable gains made on the disposal of assets of their property rental business only." Private landlords: 50% tax/prsi/usc on rental income. Irish people accept that?
beauf wrote: » I assume this is what happened in the UK. Was it on the same scale as it's happening here. It feels like there's shift in ownership not simply in housing but in land ownership in Ireland urban and rural.
voluntary wrote: » Two obvious solutions to rapidly increase rental properties supply: 1. Opt-in tax treatment on private rental income. Maybe 8-10% on rent collected (no expenses allowed). Opt-in, as landlords could still opt for a regular income tax. 2. Address the trouble making or non-paying tenants issue. If the State wants landlords to keep non paying tenants in their houses, then maybe State should also pay their rent?
The Student wrote: » The opt in tax treatment would be unfair as it would act as a disincentive to make repairs/improvements as it could not be written off against tax. I have suggested extending the rent a room scheme to the Minister via the housing forum last year. At its most basic level you pay no tax on any rent up to €1000 (for example) anything above that you pay tax on the whole amount. This way tenants who are currently paying €2000 will only have to pay €1000 (as this is what the landlord is taking after tax etc so no difference for the landlords. The tenant has €1000 (€2000 - €1000) extra each month to either spend or save. If they are saving this will go towards a deposit so its a win win for both the tenant and the landlord and eventually the State as the tenant will be able to purchase their own property and not be relying on the State to house them. I completely agree with dealing with the troublesome tenants but no politician will touch this topic as it would be political suicide.
AlmightyCushion wrote: » You're leaving out that REITs must distribute at least 85% if their income to shareholders. Those shareholders will then pay tax/PRSI/USC on those dividends.
awec wrote: » Government won't do this, because what's most likely to happen is the tenant's rent stays at €2000 and the landlord just pockets the extra €1000. Giving landlords a tax break and then expecting them to pass it all on to tenants is naive.
voluntary wrote: » If they were tax residend in Ireland then maybe. But are they?
Cryptopagan wrote: » They are subject to Dividend Withholding Tax whether they are resident in Ireland or not.
voluntary wrote: » I don't like quoting SF sources, but it came up first in the google:"Foreign REIT investors paid between 2% and 3% effective tax on €238 million of property profits in 2015 – Doherty" “The only tax paid by foreign REIT shareholders is Dividend Withholding Tax (DWT), when dividends are paid to them. The rates of DWT for foreign investors vary from 20% to 15% to 0%. " “It is a scandal that foreign investors in REITs earned €238 million in profits from their Irish property holdings in 2015, but in the same year, these investors only paid €5.27 million tax to the State, an effective tax rate of 2%. “Furthermore, foreign investors are not liable to Capital Gains Tax on the disposal of REIT shares"https://www.sinnfein.ie/contents/45147 Would the above be factually incorrect?
jay0109 wrote: » For years we listened to Commentators and Politicians calling for the 'professionalisation' of the Irish landlord, that there was too many amateurs in the market renting out 1 house each. Well, be careful what you wish for
