Irish Property Market chat II - *read mod note post #1 before posting*

The stats tell us we are the best in europe. Improvement still needed, of course.

Agreed, but SF would skew this even further. Rent freezes and the like, all proposed by SF; they will push landlords out of the market and make the problem even worse.

Yep & pushing the homes into the sales market is good for buyers, but does little to populate the rental market with properties, which means rental prices continue to rise, against the backdrop of a growing population with an increased spending power.

The most impactful factor in the housing game is supply and FFG will deliver the most homes over the next 5yr term; that's the reason they are still the best option we have, if we want to alleviate the housing crisis.

If we can coincide the projected increase in housing supply under current govt policy, with a decrease in immigration that is not employment linked, we will see improvements in the housing market, slowly but surely.

Let's hope the European champions don't rest on there laurels as by this data dump, it would take 20 years for ireland to reach Europe's average level of stock per person based on building 50k units per year, 18 years for urban areas (all)

What you say is true in principle, but doesn't account for the 100k annual population increase.

The number of rental properties needed 2 years ago is lower than the number we need today. The number of rental properties we will need this time next year is higher than the number we need today.

If rental stock doesnt increase, irrespective of what happens in the sales market, rent prices will continue to rise, as demand outstrips supply in the rental sector.

I agree with you that vacant properties should be taxed and not left idle. I said as much. I would much rather see an ex-rental property that is now lay as an idle asset, forced into the sales market thtough punitive vacancy taxation.

However, my central point is that supply of both rental & sales properties still has to increase, especially when the population is so rapidly increasing; regardless of how we configure out existing housing stock.

in all fairness the civil servants don’t just do as they are told to follow policy. They even have roles to lobby a new government on decisions and dictate a lot. Furthermore they know that no matter what the outcome is they will still have there job despite the fact that if they were in the private sector they would be given marching orders for bad decision making. There are 100’s of examples out there including the famous bike shead. Issue is that nobody is accountable and despite who gets in power that is highly unlikely to change

It's already been said and everyone already knows this but who cares? The majority of folk are property owners who are happy enough about these measures and will vote back in the exact same shower. There's no credible alternative for those directly affected as SF would possibly be even more inflationary.

And i agree with you the vacancy rate should be tackled, I have said that constantly.

However, it wont stop rents rising if the population keeps growing as it is and new home completions dont rise significantly.

Fair points, but I dont buy this "inflate prices at all costs" theory.

HTB enables thousands of folks to get on the ladder, young couples who wouldnt be able to buy a home otherwise in many cases.

It may have a moderatley inflating effect on prices, but if it means FTBs can buy their first home, rather than that home being snapped up by an investor to leave it empty or by a council to reclassify it as social housing, I am ok with that.

More homes being built is what will slow and stabilise the price growth, and the current govt have a better strategy to deliver homes than SF do; not a perfect strategy of course, but the best of 2 options and 2 options is all we have.

Every new build is a council home prior to being sold when you factor in the subsidies es to developers and grants to FTB. When it is sold it becomes a private speculative asset

There is 0 return for the taxpayer and the system becomes much more costly for the next person/taxpayer. Council housing is no longer for the bottom 50% but for the top 50%.

Consider a person on median salary paying taxes so that there manager supervisor or business owner can buy a highly speculative asset and in doing so locking themselves out of housing permanently.
current system requires this outcome until it becomes unsustainable and collapses, at which point everybody looses

Peopel forget that this was why the government was so keen to on widescale forbearance on mortgage arrears

Is it too much to ask that said government be aware and act on the risks when prices are going up as well as down.