Rent pressure zones beyond 2019

Minister for housing is on record stating he will “strengthen RPZ” rules. Very vague but one can assume, it will be lengthen at the detrement of both renters and ll. I know that might be a biased logic since i am a ll but without incentives for ll and you keep hitting us with stuff. More will leave thus decreasing supply and increasing costs for renters. Even on the statement he made, he noted that rent is decreasing but when you look into it, it decreased by 13e per annum so basically the price of 2 big macs over the course of an entire year. Thats some improvement!

Ray Palmer wrote: »

According to the legislation it cannot be extended past 3 years. They will have to bring in new law.
I suspect they want to bring in more restrictions on landlords about selling property as a reason to evict and any other reason too.

I read on RTE over past few days that Eoghan said he cant force ll to leave tenants in situ while selling as it would devalue the property. Cant find exact quote though.

Who knows what will happen though as it could be a knee jerk reaction.

Ray Palmer wrote: »

Fol20:
He did say that and it is very accurate. Him saying means it was on the agenda. If they brought it in I know I would move into my own rented properties and then sell them as ppr.

The UN report is also pretty damaging to keeping the REITs going. There is a lot more to the housing crisis than many consider.

Even if you sell, its pro rata if you have any capital gains due.

Yea im not sure what to make of the UN report. On the one side, it makes sense as they have an unfair advantage of small time ll. On the other end, if the the government do a 360 on REIT's they may leave the market or stop investing. I would like to see them incur some taxes as the government will further shoot themselves in the foot by forcing ll that pay 50pc on rental profit while they pay nothing.

On an unrelated side note about the report is if the EU force Ireland to change OUR tax laws. It should be decided in house what we want to charge. Its a major incentive for foreign investment and i want this to continue without foreign EU orders. If that was the case, i would not feel easy knowing Germany and France have more control over smaller nations like ourself.

Ray Palmer wrote: »

Fol20:
The objective wouldn't be to avoid capital gains but to be able to sell property without tenants. As said 20-30% reduction of price with sitting tenants is the effect on value.
They will have problems closing the need for personal use over anything else. I can see them restricting are removing the grounds for people to be given notice but not the personal use clause.

Ah good point, I wasnt thinking about it from that point of view.