TheSheriff wrote: » Serious question; Are you Neutralguy?
bubblypop wrote: » Just one little example, in 1998 I started my career in Dublin, a house could be bought for approx twice the starting salary, a 3 bed semi. Now, a 3 bed semi costs over 10 times the starting salary. So, it is hardly comparable
Deleted User wrote: » If I could stand in Dublin city center in 2007 ant tell everybody that next year for many of you will be worst in your life !? Nobody would not believe me.More,everybody would call me sick and stupid. Same here again. People are blind and never learn.
cnocbui wrote: » Spare me. You can buy apartments in limerick for 60-70K. FTBs in capital cities of countries have never had it particularly easy. If you can't afford capital city prices, consider moving to somewhere cheaper. FTB's wanting turn-key new-builds in a capital city whinging about un affordability should maybe do a rethink. I'll bet none of them own a mobile phone thats older than 3 years.
Unaffordable' Auckland forces teacher out.....He said they began looking in places like Dunedin and realised there were homes that were affordable for them in the regions - just not in Auckland. "I'm lucky I have the option of being a teacher that I can move from city to city and retain my pay rate. Most individuals who work in Auckland have no option." A study by Massey University Institute of Education tutor, Graham Jackson, found an existing problem of older teachers nearing retirement and low numbers of new teachers joining the profession to replace them was being exacerbated in Auckland by young teachers moving out of the city because it's unaffordable.
London Mortgage Affordability Across all eight chosen public sector professions (NHS GP Doctor, Firefighter, Police Officer, Social Worker, Secondary School Teacher, Primary School Teacher, NHS Nurse (Registered Nurse), and Military Soldier) none were able to afford a mortgage in London. Even though the London weighting allowance was added to our front-line heroes, they were still unable to buy a London property. However, the OnlineMortgageAdvisor team understood that mortgages are usually achieved with a second income. Finding the average London salary of £34,473, they used this to determine the potential for a joint mortgage and still it proved unattainable.
Key workers will be first in the queue for thousands of new homes being built across London, the mayor of London has said. NHS staff, police officers, firefighters, transport workers and teachers will be given priority access to buy or rent homes below market rates. London mayor Sadiq Khan said recognising the “service and sacrifice” would allow key workers to “put down roots” and was the “very least they deserve”.
Deleted User wrote: » If I could stand in Dublin city center in 2007 ant tell everybody that next year for many of you will be worst in your life !? Nobody would not believe me.More,everybody would call me sick and stupid. Same here again. People are blind and never learn. In 2016 I came trough the company name Seatek .This is commercial company which getting paid by government for employing people on job seeker benefit.They does not care what you want they simply take your jobseeker alowance of once you refuse job offer That how Ireland came to full employment before Covid. My social welfare alowance been canceled because I refuse job offer for minimum wage half of which I had spend for travel.I got job very quick and was working without day of because got one more . Due with money shortage and high level of unemployment this gonna repeated again.There will be massacre ! Many people will leave houses because will not have money for rent.That one of the reasons why prices will down.
Hubertj wrote: » So can anyone advise on the accuracy of the construction costs calculator on the SCSI? Rough calculation to add in 10% margin for error?https://scsi.ie/consumer/build/ This could be lovely.https://www.myhome.ie/residential/brochure/ref-929-site-at-ohermong-caherciveen-kerry/4490431
cnocbui wrote: I didn't mean to suggest that every FTBer could or should move. If a certain proportion did so it would take pressure off the constrained supply and should help reduce demand and prices.
cnocbui wrote: » Remarkable. I hope you snapped one up In 1998 In 1998 we had trouble finding something to buy near Limerick, choices were few and the market was hot.
Villa05 wrote: » I thought we had established that on this thread. Buyers are competing against a government using their money plus investment trusts who pay no tax on profits. Buyers are cannon fodder There is no fair market This is banana rebublic yet again
Marius34 wrote: » Look at FTB buyers view, who stuck paying high rents. 2019 it was worth to wait because of lots of uncertainty around Brexit. 2020 it was worth to wait because of Recession. 2021 it still is worth to wait because of low supplies. You see the problem? Sometimes you just need to make a move, we don't know if it will get any better any time soon.
fliball123 wrote: » I would be looking at taxing big companies who earn more than say 1 million a year paying 50% of it back to the country.
The_Conductor wrote: » I'd be looking at treating rental income wholly separate to any other income. I'd disallow any deductions, at all. I'd tax it at a reasonable rate across the board (say 25% of gross rental income) and the landlord covers their costs and any profit resides in the other 75% The whole concept of allowing the cost of borrowing against income as an allowable cost for landlords- is one of the concepts that I have most issues with. However, I don't think it should be allowable as a cost for anyone. If you have borrowing- that is your business, however, it shouldn't be an allowable cost (for any sector). The most equitable manner of looking at rental income- is to ringfence it separately from other 'unearned income' and treat it in an entirely different manner (such as a straightline tax with no allowable deductions whatsoever). We seriously need to think outside of the box on this one.
fliball123 wrote: » I would only do this with Vultures and REITS if their profit is over 1 million and a lot are I would tax their profit at 50%.
The_Conductor wrote: » I'd do it across the board- and I'd also do it with commercial landlords, I wouldn't restrict it to the residential sector. I wouldn't have any minimum or maximum associated with it- and I would insist on some manner of stripping the effect of borrowed funds out of the equation (which is partially why I'd suggest a flatrate tax on the gross income with no allowable deductions). Our tax system is being abused to legitimately avoid generating taxable cashflows. We need to see where we are leaking taxable income- and plug the holes.
fliball123 wrote: » The only thing I will say about that is a lot of smaller landlords will be paying 50% on profits already and they can only write off the interest of the loan or any expense that is attached to the rented property, are they then been double taxed?
The_Conductor wrote: » No- flatline the tax at a reasonable rate- which will also act as an encourage to pay down debt (this revolving debt facility is nuts). If rental income was flatlined at a straight 25% of gross rental income- the landlords can use the residual 75% to pay all and any costs- including servicing debts. It would also act as an impetus to pay down debt (other than at the moment, when the cost of debt is low). There is an irrational incentive to load debt on property (and other assets) this irrational incentive *has* to be hit on the head.
fliball123 wrote: » The only thing I will say about that is a lot of smaller landlords will be paying 50% on profits already via the income tax model and they can only write off profits on the interest of the loan or any expense that are attached to the rented property, are they then been double taxed? Or Triple taxed with property tax or quadrupled taxed when you add in stamp duty. Is this not one of the reasons we are seeing small landlords vacate the rental market and now we have big companies who are so big that they are able to leave apartments empty for long periods of time so that they dont have to ask for lower rent. I think your proposition has a lot of unintended consequences that have shown this is the wrong way to do things.
PropQueries wrote: » But does it really matter if a landlord leaves the market. It's not like the house disappears with him. As long as it's occupied, then it's being used and a significant stick on ensuring such properties are occupied would ensure there's no removal of stock from the market. Whether someone buys it or rents it, it's still being occupied and solving the problem. If an electrician leaves Ireland because of high taxes, we are actually down an electrician and that's a problem. If a landlord leaves the market, we still have the house. It's not really a problem. Either way, taxes on all types of property owners (owners, investors etc.) are only going one way i.e. up as those assets can't leave the state (unlike an electrician who actually can take his asset (i.e. his skill) with him when he leaves the state) and it's an easy win from a Government revenue viewpoint IMO
awec wrote: » Yes I have never really bought the argument that Ireland suffers when it loses it's small, amateur landlords. This was an argument thrown about all the time, particularly when the AirBnB rules were being discussed. "Don't do this or we'll sell!" Ok, great. Please do.
fliball123 wrote: » Well it does if you leave the big players there as then they have the power to keep rents artificially high as they can afford to leave property vacant. So what in effect is happening is the small landlord is losing a huge % of overall rental property market in the country and REITS and vultures are gaining a larger % of the rental market. As I have pointed out there is already a quadruple tax on small landlords what your looking for will allow the big guys to get a bigger foothold on the market and rents will not be coming down any time soon. As this is what is currently going on. I think there needs to be some kind of threshold where the big guys pay more
Mad_maxx wrote: » i know the Limerick city market well , bar circa 2014 at the latest , you could not buy apartments in Limerick city for 70 K anywhere bar the dumps on the Dock road around mount kennet and those are 100 k today.
PropQueries wrote: » Well, at least the big players are also adding to the supply of housing. Yes, they're outbidding regular people but the actual supply of housing units is increasing because of them. A small landlord is just taking a house that is already built, outbidding regular people and adding nothing to supply. I really don't see how giving small landlords preferential tax treatment helps increase actual supply.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://www.boards.ie/applications/dashboard/design/images/banned.png)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w6.vanillicon.com/v2/6b0748b4741870baaad828fe92174b3c.svg)
