Older people to be offered incentives to downsize homes

Graham · 25-02-2019 4:51pm #1

From an article in the Irish Times this weekend:

Financial incentives will be offered to encourage older people to downsize from larger family houses to retirement home-type communities, under new Government plans, to be published in a report on Wednesday.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/older-people-to-be-offered-incentives-to-downsize-homes-1.3803765

I expect there will be quite some pushback from the proposals, maybe it will help that this appears to be a carrot rather than a stick.

TheBlock · 25-02-2019 4:54pm

Link Gone???

Graham · 25-02-2019 4:56pm

Also mentioned in the independent:

https://www.independent.ie/business/personal-finance/property-mortgages/property-revolution-government-to-begin-paying-older-people-to-downsize-37847132.html

Some other interesting snippets:

50pc of all new apartments and 30pc of houses should be suitable for older people and those with mobility issues.

property tax is "very low" in Ireland when compared to other countries.

He says there should be a debate about the rights of people who are "lucky enough" to own houses in good areas which have seen their value rise due to government investment and those struggling to find accommodation or paying sky-rocketing rents.

1hnr79jr65 · 25-02-2019 5:01pm

Also mentioned is a proposed change to CPO access to force these changes. I am not in favor of such proposals as it could push folks out of their communities. There are other options just government not willing to explore better options hoping a quick fix will solve a majority of its problems.

And are they going to force someone living in a house valued at 500k plus to sell up, how do they expect folks to be able to purchase this also as it would be out of most peoples range to be able to afford.

Graham · 25-02-2019 5:06pm

There's mention of CPO changes but not in the context of incentivising downsizing.

Mr Moran wants to examine the country's Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) powers as it is currently "too easy for people to drag out a process".

There's also no mention of forcing anything, 'incentivising' is the headline.

is_that_so · 25-02-2019 5:07pm

Sour Lemonz wrote: »

Also mentioned is a proposed change to CPO access to force these changes. I am not in favor of such proposals as it could push folks out of their communities. There are other options just government not willing to explore better options hoping a quick fix will solve a majority of its problems.

And are they going to force someone living in a house valued at 500k plus to sell up, how do they expect folks to be able to purchase this also as it would be out of most peoples range to be able to afford.

With anything like this it very much depends how it's done. The basic concept is not terrible but in actual planning and implementation is where stuff goes pear-shaped.

AlanG · 25-02-2019 5:10pm

Unless they change the rules on the Fair Deal Scheme any incentive is destined to fail. Currently if an older person wants to protect their kids inheritance (which most do) then the best thing they can do is buy a bigger house for their primary residence. If you downsize all your nest egg can be taken under Fair Deal. Money (70%) wrapped up in your primary residence is protected.

Graham · 25-02-2019 5:11pm

Another interesting tidbit.

The report comes as the recently appointed chair of the Land Development Agency (LDA), John Moran, says the new State body should focus on developing rental-only apartments in city centres

Rubberchikken · 25-02-2019 5:11pm

nothing, except death, will 'incentivise' me to leave my large home, with very large garden.

GreeBo · 25-02-2019 5:11pm

Are the huge property prices not incentive enough?

iamwhoiam · 25-02-2019 5:14pm

Rubberchikken wrote: »

nothing, except death, will 'incentivise' me to leave my large home, with very large garden.

Nor me ! Its not very large but I like space now to spread out , plus rooms when my tribe come to visit , plus room for the grandkids toys . I am going nowhere !

Spanish Eyes · 25-02-2019 5:15pm

I hope this doesn't sound offensive or anything, but I agree with the concept of those renting from the council whose house etc. is to large for their needs to be the first to be incentivised.

Seems crazy to me that a single or widowed person can remain in a three/four bed property for life, when their needs would be met with a smaller property. Iveagh Trust did this in Ballyfermot, very successful and now more three bed homes are available for those on the housing list.

One thing I feel has to be addressed though. If people are to be incentivised to move out of larger properties, the alternative property would need to be within the same community I think. Hard enough for people to move away from an area when young and starting out, but if you have lived in an area for maybe fifty/sixty years, it would be very difficult to start afresh somewhere new.

Just some thoughts.

Graham · 25-02-2019 5:15pm

AlanG wrote: »

Unless they change the rules on the Fair Deal Scheme any incentive is destined to fail. Currently if an older person wants to protect their kids inheritance (which most do) then the best thing they can do is buy a bigger house for their primary residence. If you downsize all your nest egg can be taken under Fair Deal. Money (70%) wrapped up in your primary residence is protected.

Very true, it will be interesting to see what (if anything) will be proposed to counteract the fair deal threat.

Graham · 25-02-2019 5:18pm

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

One thing I feel has to be addressed though. If people are to be incentivised to move out of larger properties, the alternative property would need to be within the same community I think. Hard enough for people to move away from an area when young and starting out, but if you have lived in an area for maybe fifty/sixty years, it would be very difficult to start afresh somewhere new.

There's a few nods towards that but very little in the way of detail yet..

"The objective is to ensure older people stay socially connected within their community and to provide essential care where needed."

rightmove · 25-02-2019 5:21pm

One thing they could do is look at all the small ll leaving the market .......oh no that would be just crazy. ...to look at the ppl actually providing the service currently

Claw Hammer · 25-02-2019 5:24pm

The Fair Deal scheme is ludicrous. It is keeping habitable dwellings from the occupied at the time of housing shortage. Houses under the fair Deal scheme which are vacant for 12 months should be sold.

1hnr79jr65 · 25-02-2019 5:24pm

Graham wrote: »

There's mention of CPO changes but not in the context of incentivising downsizing.

There's also no mention of forcing anything, 'incentivising' is the headline.

Yes they want to incentivise, however if they don't get their way they don't want challenges and want to be able to force a change in their favor.

I think there is an extremely sneaky agenda here.

Spanish Eyes · 25-02-2019 5:28pm

Claw Hammer wrote: »

The Fair Deal scheme is ludicrous. It is keeping habitable dwellings from the occupied at the time of housing shortage. Houses under the fair Deal scheme which are vacant for 12 months should be sold.

I don't understand why this is. There are three houses on my road empty for the past two/three years now because of FD.

Family says it is just too much bother to rent them out and pay the taxes, register for Income Tax and all that jazz. Plus the income from rent reduces the FD subvention. I think I have that right.

Trampas · 25-02-2019 5:31pm

Claw Hammer wrote: »

The Fair Deal scheme is ludicrous. It is keeping habitable dwellings from the occupied at the time of housing shortage. Houses under the fair Deal scheme which are vacant for 12 months should be sold.

Why should they be sold. How about allowing them to be rented out and that’s the only cost to the person so really they pay nothing bar renting their property

Claw Hammer · 25-02-2019 5:34pm

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

I don't understand why this is. There are three houses on my road empty for the past two/three years now because of FD.

Family says it is just too much bother to rent them out and pay the taxes, register for Income Tax and all that jazz. Plus the income from rent reduces the FD subvention. I think I have that right.

What happens is, if the house is rented out, the income is considered to be that of the owner of the house. After this income is taxed, the Nursing home can avail of it towards the cost of the care. From the point of view of the family, it is a zero sum game. They will be renting out the house, taking risk and getting no benefit for themselves or the elderly person in care. It is absolute madness. The house could be sold and the money kept in trust until the elderly person dies.

25-02-2019 5:34pm

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

One thing I feel has to be addressed though. If people are to be incentivised to move out of larger properties, the alternative property would need to be within the same community I think. Hard enough for people to move away from an area when young and starting out, but if you have lived in an area for maybe fifty/sixty years, it would be very difficult to start afresh somewhere new.

Just some thoughts.

Nail on head. People get used to their shops, pubs, bingo, neighbours, parks, supermarkets, bus routes etc. It would want to be a pretty big incentive to convince someone to move out of their gaff of 30+ years and start afresh.

I wouldn't hold my breath. Asking someone in their 60s or 70s to up sticks and move house for the sake of a few bob is grand, in theory, but doomed to failure, in my opinion.

Spanish Eyes · 25-02-2019 5:35pm

Trampas wrote: »

Why should they be sold. How about allowing them to be rented out and that’s the only cost to the person so really they pay nothing bar renting their property

I don't think there is any impediment to renting them out, apart from taxes, registration with RTB, standards and so on. Oh, and the FD will take the income into account also.

I could be wrong though. Interesting feature of the proposals just the same.

Claw Hammer · 25-02-2019 5:37pm

Trampas wrote: »

Why should they be sold. How about allowing them to be rented out and that’s the only cost to the person so really they pay nothing bar renting their property

There allowed to be rented out as it is. There is absolutely no incentive for the elderly person or their family to do so and quite a few downsides to renting out. If the family the house occupied then it wouldn't be sold.

AndrewJRenko · 25-02-2019 5:44pm

Rubberchikken wrote: »

nothing, except death, will 'incentivise' me to leave my large home, with very large garden.

That's a great argument for increasing property taxes.

AndrewJRenko · 25-02-2019 5:45pm

AlanG wrote: »

Unless they change the rules on the Fair Deal Scheme any incentive is destined to fail. Currently if an older person wants to protect their kids inheritance (which most do) then the best thing they can do is buy a bigger house for their primary residence. If you downsize all your nest egg can be taken under Fair Deal. Money (70%) wrapped up in your primary residence is protected.

That's a great argument for capping the value of the family home protected under Fair Deal.

Graham · 25-02-2019 5:45pm

Low property taxes also mentioned in one of the articles....

Carrot & stick???

tayto lover · 25-02-2019 5:54pm

Get your beady eyes of our homes.
We struggled to pay for them through several recessions.
The Govt should be building houses rather than trying to grab ours.
We have lives and friends where we live now.
Feck off.

Idbatterim · 25-02-2019 5:54pm

Just increase the next to non existent lpt...

25-02-2019 6:06pm

When you can get any sort of neighbour when moving, why would anyone who is settled and happy in their location want to up sticks and move? some may want to for many reasons, but its a lot of hassle and stress moving, never mind the cost.
I dont think most people want it. Sounds like just moving the deck chairs around by those that are trying to distract from the fact that the ship is sinking. Of course, point the finger at those who might not retaliate, I recal this was brought up before by some politician/civil servant and rightly it was shot down. So they may have some extra space, so space for family if they visit, no hassle dealing with people taking over unallocated parking, or are they allowed own cars?
Maybe they have it all set up as they like it, are near shops, the area is mature and as few gurriers around as they've all grown up or moved on.

Graham · 25-02-2019 6:08pm

1874 wrote: »

why would anyone who is settled and happy in their location want to up sticks and move?

Hence the incentives, whatever they may turn out to be.

Spanish Eyes · 25-02-2019 6:11pm

Bedroom tax like in the UK should be first on the list, and rightly so, provided tenants can stay in their area following downsizing by the Council.

Might make a lot more sense to incentivise large private home owners to convert their properties into two. You know, an upstairs self contained unit, and a downstairs for the owners. No one has to move, but space is maximised. I cannot see many really doing this, but might be worth exploring just the same.

Older people to be offered incentives to downsize homes

Comments