Who are buying all the new houses?

Last house I bought was for investment. New build. Day of sale ...alot of asian possibly Indians around looking at houses. Then I look at property price register to see...judging by the sold prices...that ALOT were bought by the state. Houses were priced north of 720k. Dublin area.

So to summarise...investors...some irish coupls...indians and the state. No matter the price.

yea the whole process is fcuked, its all geared to keep inflating prices, so thats whats gonna happen, until….

You put up stats for all sales. Not new builds. Calling an apple and orange doesn't make it an orange

Agreed. If FTBs accounted for 2/3 of total mortgage drawdown last year that's 8bn, and assuming half of that was on new builds that's 4bn. Placing a generous figure of 1bn spent by the state on new builds hey presto it's around 20%, exactly as allocated.

Below is from the budget last year, dunno if all the charities like mcverry etc are included in it. Thats 13000 houses alone.

Capital funding of €2.157bn (an increase of €257m on 2024) to deliver 10,000 new-build social homes (700 additional homes on 2024). under the Social Housing Investment Programme (SHIP), Capital Advance Leasing Facility (CALF) and Capital Assistance Scheme (CAS).

AHB delivery of 1000 Cost Rental homes via €300m provided under the Cost Rental Equity Loan (CREL) mechanism (a decrease of €135m on the 2024 revised estimate).

2,165 new social homes will be delivered through various leasing schemes (including Mortgage to Rent and Repair and Lease) delivered by local authorities and AHBs

But thats what we are seeing. In my area a number of new housing developments seem to have been bought on bulk by the council or housing associations. None ever coming on the market for members of the public.

There has also been an upsurge of second hand houses being bought by the council.

Sweet Jesus, can the last person who thinks this is sustainable please turn off the lights!

Its been said many times but the problem is that too much of the govt funding goes to social housing and not enough to affordable or cost rental.

Anyone earning an average salary is squeezed out from the market.

Sure some middle income families would be better off getting lower paid jobs so they can qualify for social housing.

12000 social homes planned by the state compared to just 1000 cost rental.

This is not encouraging mixed developments or social mobility.

It's been happening for years but the state,councils,AHBs are still buying up too much new private housing and converting it to social housing, instead of building its own social housing and leaving the private market to provide private housing.

As long as this keeps happening, new housing stock will barely reach the open market and that tiny supply means prices will keep rising.

Not enough builders about. If they're building social housing for the Government private houses still aren't getting built.

The key issue seems to be construction workers,plenty of planning already granted just waiting for someone to start them.

The developers have turned off the tap.

Lot of commencement notices last year were purely to avail of the development levy waiver.

Now putting massive pressure on government for tax breaks or better. And they'll get it.

Completions will be through the floor in 2025

If the govt paid big inflated wages to workers the private market would have to do same to keep them in the private market leading to even higher house prices.

The problem is in planning and objections to said planning. It is taking years, and money, to resolve. The people who call for more housing, including politicians, are then those who object to it.

Even if govt established a state building company there would be members of it objecting to it's own planning. The irony of nimbyism is people seeking to ease regulations for a dwelling in the garden for a son or daughter, whilst objecting to the development across the road.

They dont need to compete from the same labour pool is the point. The population growth & a cash rich govt allows us to increase the labour force, if the govt decided to do it.

Some of those 150k people could be labourers and some of the 100k people that arrive here each year could be also.

Even 1% of that 250k people would provide a few thousand extra staff and that population bank expands literally every day.

The govt is choosing not to do this and to take the easy option instead which is to cuckoo developments at the last minute from private developers, rather than establish its own funded social home building programme from an expanded labour force.

The LDA could be expanded and given stronger output targets, yet by the govts own admission, the LDA is expected to make only a "minor contribution" to the social housing targets.

This shouldnt be allowed happen and in the end the govt strategy constricts the number of homes that make it to the private market and in turn drives up prices.

The evidence of this is in the article.