Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Is nobody concerned at all about the amount that the government gets from their rent?

24

Comments

  • #52
    Fol20
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,625 ✭✭✭Fol20


    Speaking from a ll point of view. I believe the tax should be treated the same as every other form of income.

    The items I don’t like however is you can’t expense several items such as lpt, flat rate expenses for petrol and phone bill. All expenses should be treated like a business and mortgage interest should be 100pc deductible. I don’t like the fact the income is non reckonable income either so you cant send some of the funds to a pension. It’s far from a passive income and there is quite a lot of work in this job but they don’t see it that way


  • #53
    Magnatu
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 260 ✭✭Magnatu


    The government transfers hundreds of millions to landlords every year through the HAP schemeun order to keep rent levels high. This is significantly more than they receive from tax on rental income.


  • #54
    Fol20
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,625 ✭✭✭Fol20


    Grumpypants wrote: »
    I've always said the best rent control the government could put in place is a tax free allowance of 10k for a single, one property, landlord. Much like the 14k rent a room scheme. But have it so if you charge 10,001 you pay tax on it all.

    Over night rents would drop to 833 a month which is a fair price and a fair rental income.

    For me to earn 833 now i'd have to jack up my rent to 1,333. A 500 euro increase would cripple my HAP tenant and add her to the homeless list.
    What would happen if you had two properties. Does that mean everything would be taxed then if both were at the 833? The fairest way to implement this system is to have a threshold of 5k and anything above that is taxed. I don’t see why we should get that since it is just another form of income but it would be fairer


  • #55
    Little Less Conversation
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 189 ✭✭Little Less Conversation


    I'm paying very cheap rent where I am now and after doing the maths my landlord is only getting €500 a month for a four bedroomed house. That's nothing. I hope the government cops on and reduces their tax intake. There are decent landlords out there that aren't going to shaft their tenants either.


  • #56
    TheChizler
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,474 ✭✭✭TheChizler


    Little Less Conversation wrote: »
    I'm paying very cheap rent where I am now and after doing the maths my landlord is only getting €500 a month for a four bedroomed house.
    Does the landlord not have any other source of income? If yes how do you know how much it is out of interest?


  • #57
    GingerLily
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,767 ✭✭✭GingerLily


    TheChizler wrote: »
    Does the landlord not have any other source of income? If yes how do you know how much it is out of interest?

    He also gets to own a property at the end of it!


  • #58
    Grumpypants
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,926 ✭✭✭Grumpypants


    Fol20 wrote: »
    What would happen if you had two properties. Does that mean everything would be taxed then if both were at the 833? The fairest way to implement this system is to have a threshold of 5k and anything above that is taxed. I don’t see why we should get that since it is just another form of income but it would be fairer

    The idea is to give a fair return to the landlord AND control rents. Rents now are being jacked up because 60% of it is lost to the tax man. If you simply reduce the tax it won't get passed on.

    But if you offer a massive reward to charge a fair rent and a massive punishment to over charge it fixes it.

    70% of landlords in Ireland have 1 property. That's a huge chunk of rent control that is fair to both parties and simple to implement.


  • #59
    noodler
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,503 ✭✭✭✭noodler


    Monokne wrote: »
    As a landlord, I completely disagree. I am stuck with a property I can't sell and a business I don't want. If VAT was 20%, I'd reduce rent by a few hundred euro no bother.

    Don't believe this for a second.

    No offence.

    Landlords would have zero incentive to reduce the rent in the current Market under that scenario.


  • #60
    Grumpypants
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,926 ✭✭✭Grumpypants


    GingerLily wrote: »
    He also gets to own a property at the end of it!

    And when he sells it he pays a huge tax bill on that again.


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    Fol20
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,625 ✭✭✭Fol20


    artanevilla wrote: »
    Do you think if taxes were lowed the rents would come down too?

    It would just mean the LL gets more of a percentage.

    The rent will be what people are willing to pay.

    Yea I do think rents may come down in the long term. It won’t come down initially as ll will get a higher percentage of cash flow and income and they will like to maximize this(as a business should). The reason why it will come down as it will make it more attractive to current landlords to stay in the market and attract more ll to it. It’s basic economics and the more supply and options you have, prices will come down. Its not because ll want the price to come down. It’s just a natural affect of more supply and the only way to fix the rental crisis is not my crippling ll more and more but by either making it more lucarative for them thus increasing supply or by physically building btl properties in mass. The latter might be difficult unless government run as more ll are getting out of the market and wouldn’t have an interest in buying them privately.


  • #62
    Sleeper12
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,156 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    Little Less Conversation wrote: »
    I'm paying very cheap rent where I am now and after doing the maths my landlord is only getting €500 a month for a four bedroomed house. That's nothing. I hope the government cops on and reduces their tax intake. There are decent landlords out there that aren't going to shaft their tenants either.


    You can't know what your landlord is getting after tax unless you know his mortgage & expenses.



    He does NOT pay over 50 percent on the rent you pay him. He pays 50 percent on the profit. This could be as low as 15 percent of the rent going on tax


  • #63
    Fol20
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,625 ✭✭✭Fol20


    Sleeper12 wrote: »
    Many landlords will be happy for you to believe that the government tax all of your rent but this simply is not true. Your landlord only pay tax on the profit after expenses



    Here's an example given by a landlord on another thread:



    https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057909222&page=16


    The example above shows that the tax take is actually around 33 percent. This can differ from one rental to another.



    The only was any landlord can pay 50 percent or higher in tax is if they own the property outright, don't insure it & spend zero on maintenance accountant, advertising, phone, stamps etc.



    I have never heard of a landlord paying over 50 percent of the rent in tax & I can't see how it can be possible when expenses are fully tax deductible.



    It's a myth. Don't believe this nonsense

    EDIT: I think I made a mistake in calculations there. Paying 250 in tax is actually less than 17 percent of the 1500 rent

    17 percent is nowhere near the 50 percent some would have you believe.

    It is taxed on 50pc of your income as per the example I provided. I don’t care about what I initially take in as I have a bunch of expenses that I have to pay out and will never see this money.They tax what is left over and in the example, your left with 500 minus taxes so it is 50pc

    Why are you targeting specific errivalant figures that don’t show the entire story. If you are a PAYE then you have your gross and that’s your income. You would then use the total figure of 1500. If it’s a business you need to subtract whatever it costs to run the business first before you get to the business owners “PAYE income” this it’s 500


  • #64
    Franz Von Peppercorn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,070 ✭✭✭Franz Von Peppercorn


    Grumpypants wrote: »
    The idea is to give a fair return to the landlord AND control rents. Rents now are being jacked up because 60% of it is lost to the tax man. If you simply reduce the tax it won't get passed on.

    But if you offer a massive reward to charge a fair rent and a massive punishment to over charge it fixes it.

    70% of landlords in Ireland have 1 property. That's a huge chunk of rent control that is fair to both parties and simple to implement.

    The idea is rational enough - it’s how the rent a room works. Might reduce revenue though.


  • #65
    Little Less Conversation
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 189 ✭✭Little Less Conversation


    Sleeper12 wrote: »
    You can't know what your landlord is getting after tax unless you know his mortgage & expenses.



    He does NOT pay over 50 percent on the rent you pay him. He pays 50 percent on the profit. This could be as low as 15 percent of the rent going on tax

    Thanks for clearing that up.


  • #66
    Franz Von Peppercorn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,070 ✭✭✭Franz Von Peppercorn


    Fol20 wrote: »
    It is taxed on 50pc of your income as per the example I provided. I don’t care about what I initially take in as I have a bunch of expenses that I have to pay out and will never see this money.They tax what is left over and in the example, your left with 500 minus taxes so it is 50pc

    That’s tax on profit not income. Besides that there’s no specific 50% tax on landlords. In fact some landlords pay 0%, some pay 20% and some pay 50% marginal. Those that pay 50% marginal have other jobs.
    Why are you targeting specific errivalant figures that don’t show the entire story. If you are a PAYE then you have your gross and that’s your income. You would then use the total figure of 1500. If it’s a business you need to subtract whatever it costs to run the business first before you get to the business owners “PAYE income” this it’s 500

    But why don’t PAYE workers get to reduce mortgage interest for instance. That used to happen.


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    Sleeper12
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,156 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    Fol20 wrote:
    It is taxed on 50pc of your income as per the example I provided. I don’t care about what I initially take in as I have a bunch of expenses that I have to pay out and will never see this money.They tax what is left over and in the example, your left with 500 minus taxes so it is 50pc

    No. Totally untrue. You pat 50 percent of the profit & not 50 percent of the income of the property


  • #68
    Grumpypants
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,926 ✭✭✭Grumpypants


    Sleeper12 wrote: »
    You can't know what your landlord is getting after tax unless you know his mortgage & expenses.



    He does NOT pay over 50 percent on the rent you pay him. He pays 50 percent on the profit. This could be as low as 15 percent of the rent going on tax

    I hate when people say you can write of expenses as if it is free money.


  • #69
    TheChizler
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,474 ✭✭✭TheChizler


    Grumpypants wrote: »
    Rents now are being jacked up because 60% of it is lost to the tax man.

    A: that 60% figure is entirely incorrect, and B: Tax has more or less been unchanged for years yet rents have doubled in places. Quite simply rents have gone up because there are more people looking to rent than availability so people are willing to pay more.

    You won't make a dent in prices without restricting the price legally or increasing supply. Or maybe having a system where it's tax free up to a certain point but tax on the full amount over that as someone else suggested, but I have no idea what the unforseen effects of that would be.


  • #70
    GingerLily
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,767 ✭✭✭GingerLily


    Grumpypants wrote: »
    And when he sells it he pays a huge tax bill on that again.

    Tax if the asset increases in value, and only on the increase? Or am I wrong?


  • #71
    twowheelsonly
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,270 ✭✭✭twowheelsonly


    Ronaldinho wrote: »
    And how do you propose to fill the hole in Govt's tax take that your plan will result in?

    Significantly reduced HAP payments would help for a start.
    It's a vicious circle at the moment so something radical needs to be done.


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    TheChizler
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,474 ✭✭✭TheChizler


    Grumpypants wrote: »
    I hate when people say you can write of expenses as if it is free money.

    My brother bought an iPhone X thinking he could just deduct it from his sole trader tax bill to Revenue, he had a nasty shock after talking to an accountant...


  • #73
    Franz Von Peppercorn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,070 ✭✭✭Franz Von Peppercorn


    Grumpypants wrote: »
    And when he sells it he pays a huge tax bill on that again.

    On the capital gains yes. Why wouldn’t he?


  • #74
    Fol20
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,625 ✭✭✭Fol20


    Sleeper12 wrote: »
    No. Totally untrue. You pat 50 percent of the profit & not 50 percent of the income of the property

    I won’t start these symantecs again with you. A landlord and everyone only care about their bottom line and what they have in their pocket. When you do your taxes. They don’t tax the total 1500, they tax the 500. If they taxed the 1500 and they only took 250 off you. Then yes, it’s not 50pc tax but in reality they are only taxing the 500 as per my example.


  • #75
    Sleeper12
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,156 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    Grumpypants wrote:
    I hate when people say you can write of expenses as if it is free money.


    They are business expenses & you can right them off. That's it. You are investing in the upkeep of you business.

    OP needs to change the thread title as apart from it not being true but it's causing a lot of confusion.

    No landlord pays over 50 percent or the rent in tax.

    Landlords like all other businesses only pay tax on the profit and not the income


  • #76
    Samuel T. Cogley
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,684 ✭✭✭✭Samuel T. Cogley


    Skipped most of this to say welcome to ther forum OP if you've never heard anyone give out about income tax on rent! So I'm sorry if I'm repeating what has been said already.

    Tax reductions should not be given to LL's they should, in concert with caps, be given to tenants. Everybody wins. People didling the system will get only the worst of tenenants, tenants will get some much needed relief and the tax take stabilised by bringing people not paying into the system.


  • #77
    Samuel T. Cogley
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,684 ✭✭✭✭Samuel T. Cogley


    Ahem, they tax the income not the profit, it's called income tax. While it doesn't make a huge difference in common scenarios, it does there the LL has low expenses.


  • #78
    Grumpypants
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,926 ✭✭✭Grumpypants


    Sleeper12 wrote: »
    They are business expenses & you can right them off. That's it. You are investing in the upkeep of you business.

    OP needs to change the thread title as apart from it not being true but it's causing a lot of confusion.

    No landlord pays over 50 percent or the rent in tax.

    Landlords like all other businesses only pay tax on the profit and not the income

    You spent that expense, that money is gone. The way you make it sound is landlords are writing off their tax bill and profiting. Spending 2k to reduce your tax bill by 400 is still a loss of 1600.


  • #79
    Senature
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 349 ✭✭Senature


    A lot of people here don't seem to be able to tell the difference between Income/profit and cashflow. Tax rates have nothing to do with cashflow, landlords are taxed on profit, the same as any other business and self employed individual. Accidental landlords have my sympathy here. Anyone else has just made a investment that has turned sour/unsustainable. Not up to other taxpayers to bail you out via reduced income tax rates etc.


  • #80
    Sleeper12
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,156 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »
    Ahem, they tax the income not the profit, it's called income tax. While it doesn't make a huge difference in common scenarios, it does there the LL has low expenses.


    I'm sorry but you are mistaking terms. In bold is not true



    The income of your property is the rent. You do NOT pay tax on this at this stage



    You have expenses, Mortgage interest, maintenance, insurance etc. These are deducted before you pay any tax.


    What you have left is called profit. You only pay tax on your profit & not the rent.



    Why several landlords on this thread continue to play semantics. I do believe it is to try confuse the truth.


    you will only ever pay tax on your profit in any business. Call the profit income if you want but it is NOT the income of the property or business. The income of the property is called rent. What you have left after expenses is profit (not income) and this is what is taxed.


  • #81
    Grumpypants
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,926 ✭✭✭Grumpypants


    Sleeper12 wrote: »
    I'm sorry but you are mistaking terms. In bold is not true



    The income of your property is the rent. You do NOT pay tax on this at this stage



    You have expenses, Mortgage interest, maintenance, insurance etc. These are deducted before you pay any tax.


    What you have left is called profit. You only pay tax on your profit & not the rent.



    Why several landlords on this thread continue to play semantics. I do believe it is to try confuse the truth.


    you will only ever pay tax on your profit in any business. Call the profit income if you want but it is NOT the income of the property or business. The income of the property is called rent. What you have left after expenses is profit (not income) and this is what is taxed.

    You pay USC and PRSI on it all. You can't claim against those.

    You can expenses some items but only at the 20% rate, and you can't claim back the VAT in the same way a business can. So you pay 13.5 or 23% VAT on those costs, to save 20% income tax. That's why we don't count it in the same way a business can. Businesses can claim loads more when compared to landlords. It's not comparable.

    To say otherwise is being disingenuous.


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    Old diesel
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,821 ✭✭✭Old diesel


    Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »
    Why would reducing taxes on certain types of amateur landlords (with another job) reduce rental prices? Corporations can already pay just 12.5% so corporate landlords are already in that position.



    The problem is we are not building enough houses. The problem isn’t that there is a glut of houses to sell and still a problem with homelessness. In that case you might consider taxation policies that encourage landlordism.

    If there were more landlords in the present environment houses would be even harder to buy for first time buyers and there would still be a rental crisis.



    Ok, so no regulations at all then.

    People are becoming homeless directly as a result of landlords selling up.

    It then costs the state a LOT more then the tax take from a landlord to house the newly homeless family in a hotel or HUB.

    Re standards - I'm saying the government could support upgrades needed to a property to meet standards via grants etc.

    If the local authority inspector decides that a perfectly okay for many people property needs 20 k worth of work to meet HAP standards - then the state could pay the 20 k for the work to be done.

    Makes more sense to me then horsing the same amount into a hotel in about 4 months.


  • #83
    Corben Dallas
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,600 ✭✭✭Corben Dallas


    Agree with OP 100%.

    Its a disgrace that the Government takes 50% of rent from private landlords.
    On a basic level its just another example of our highly geared government taxation policy ... nearly across the board.

    Meaning they sit down and plan to extract the maximum take (50% LOL) from rental income..... and then wonder why rents are so high. Same with petrol, Cigs, Wine any " Luxury Goods" etc.
    without considering they are taking money (spending power) out of Joe Public's pocket and the Irish economy.

    They would class Toilet Paper as a Luxury Good if they could get away with it.
    I'm not naive enough to think that if u reduced it to say even 30% they LL would pass it on to their tenants... ( it would be kept by LL) but if this is also paired with rent controls ( Rent agreement backed by the govn. which reduces rent by 18/20% over a fixed 3/5yr. term) u would actually see rents reduced and more property available by encouraging LL's back into the rental market.
    (maybe even from existing housing stock)

    Govn. takes way too much tax and then proceeds to waste your tax Euro in Government spending.


  • #84
    Senature
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 349 ✭✭Senature


    Grumpypants wrote: »
    Sleeper12 wrote: »
    you will only ever pay tax on your profit in any business. Call the profit income if you want but it is NOT the income of the property or business. The income of the property is called rent. What you have left after expenses is profit (not income) and this is what is taxed.

    You pay USC and PRSI on it all. You can't claim against those.

    You can expenses some items but only at the 20% rate, and you can't claim back the VAT in the same way a business can. So you pay 13.5 or 23% VAT on those costs, to save 20% income tax. That's why we don't count it in the same way a business can. Businesses can claim loads more when compared to landlords. It's not comparable.

    To say otherwise is being disingenuous.
    Grumpypants, I think you are misinformed, or misunderstand VAT. Businesses who are registered for VAT can claim back VAT on expenses, but they also have to charge VAT on their sales, and pass this on to revenue. I'm pretty sure this avenue is open to landlords also. This would mean charging 23% on top of the rent, and then passing it on to the government, less any VAT paid on expenses. Doesn't sound as appealing now does it?


  • #85
    Sleeper12
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,156 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    Grumpypants wrote: »
    You pay USC and PRSI on it all. You can't claim against those.

    You can expenses some items but only at the 20% rate, and you can't claim back the VAT in the same way a business can. So you pay 13.5 or 23% VAT on those costs, to save 20% income tax. That's why we don't count it in the same way a business can. Businesses can claim loads more when compared to landlords. It's not comparable.

    To say otherwise is being disingenuous.




    We all understand that. Do you think you are unique?



    You can't claim the VAT back because you don't charge VAT. If you charged VAT rents would increase yet another 13.5 percent.



    Many small tradesmen aren't VAT registered as their turnover is too small. They can't claim back VAT either.



    Do you not realize that every self employed person in this country have to pay the same taxes. Every business owner pays the same taxes. USC and PRS. Everyone pays these.


    Here's the hard truth:
    Many, many small landlords don't understand their business. They don't understand that it is a long term investment. Eventually they own the property freehold. When did this get rich mentality crept into the business, I really don't know. It wasn't there 20 or 30 years ago.


    If you buy Google stocks for 500,000 euro & the dividend is 80K per year then that is your profit. The fact that you had to borrow the money for these shares doesn't mean that you didn't make 80K profit. The loan services the buying of the shares & after a period of years you wont owe any money on the shares.


    Too many landlords are getting confused. If you have to borrow to buy a house then it is a long term investment. Even if you don't make a penny for 20 years (you will though) its still a good investment as your tenants are in effect buying the property for you.



    You will notice landlords with several properties or landlords in the business 30 years or more don't comment here. Landlord with a lot of properties are happy with the way things are. There is more profit in renting now than at any point in the last 50 years.



    If small landlords continue to look at the short term view they will never be happy. Unless you pay cash then its a long term investment & it will only depress you looking at the profit & loss over a 12 month period.


  • #86
    Samuel T. Cogley
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,684 ✭✭✭✭Samuel T. Cogley


    The tax is on INCOME, you then DEDUCT the expenses to allow for RELIEF. It's an INCOME tax the clue is in the name.


  • #87
    Senature
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 349 ✭✭Senature


    It's very simple...

    Income minus allowable expenses = profit.

    Profit is what is taxed.


  • #88
    Samuel T. Cogley
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,684 ✭✭✭✭Samuel T. Cogley


    Senature wrote: »
    It's very simple...

    Income minus allowable expenses = profit.

    Profit is what is taxed.


    It's very simple..

    Income is taxed, deductions made which result in the net profit, which isn't taxed at all.

    Income is what's taxed under income tax.


  • #89
    Senature
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 349 ✭✭Senature


    Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »
    It's very simple..

    Income is taxed, deductions made which result in the net profit, which isn't taxed at all.

    Income is what's taxed under income tax.
    Em, this makes no sense to me....


  • #90
    Samuel T. Cogley
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,684 ✭✭✭✭Samuel T. Cogley


    Sleeper12 wrote: »
    If small landlords continue to look at the short term view they will never be happy. Unless you pay cash then its a long term investment & it will only depress you looking at the profit & loss over a 12 month period.


    Tax aside there is where I agree with you, but the fact remians that unless a short term break even cash flow can be established, the vast majority of LL's (the ones that own two or less properties) will not remain in the sector and rents will continue to rise.


  • Advertisement
  • #91
    Samuel T. Cogley
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,684 ✭✭✭✭Samuel T. Cogley


    Senature wrote: »
    Em, this makes no sense to me....


    If you look at how the calcualtion is done you'll get it. It's not done the way you're suggesting.

    I did the two side by side in aonther thread the net result is within a few % of each other but they're not identical, furthermore one is the right way to do the claculation and the other, taxing the profit, is not. You start off by taking the tax against the gross and working from there, not deducting the expenses from the gross.


  • #92
    Samuel T. Cogley
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,684 ✭✭✭✭Samuel T. Cogley


    I'm off to find a spell checker.


  • #93
    riclad
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,184 ✭✭✭riclad


    My friend is a landlord, she pays maybe 5 per cent tax , she claims for 75 per cent interest on her morgage, service charge,s 1000, expense,s
    etc her loan is 160k, she rents in a rural area.
    She makes only a small profit after paying all expenses,s on the apartment.
    Another person i know has the money to buy a house,
    his accountant said you,ll have to get a mortgage ,otherwise you,ll
    pay high tax and make a tiny profit on it.
    He wanted to buy a house for 140k and rent it out.
    At the age of 60 he probably would not get a 25 year loan from a bank.


  • #94
    Senature
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 349 ✭✭Senature


    Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »
    If you look at how the calcualtion is done you'll get it. It's not done the way you're suggesting.

    I did the two side by side in aonther thread the net result is within a few % of each other but they're not identical, furthermore one is the right way to do the claculation and the other, taxing the profit, is not. You start off by taking the tax against the gross and working from there, not deducting the expenses from the gross.
    From revenue.ie

    How do you calculate your taxable income?

    You must work out how much tax you owe on your 'net rental income'.

    You need to deduct allowable expenses and any allowances from your rental source or sources. This will calculate if you have profit or a loss.

    The net rental income is the total profits less the total losses.


  • #95
    Franz Von Peppercorn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,070 ✭✭✭Franz Von Peppercorn


    Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »
    The tax is on INCOME, you then DEDUCT the expenses to allow for RELIEF. It's an INCOME tax the clue is in the name.

    It’s a tax on profits after expenses. The clue is not in the name, which is misleading because a fair chunk of income tax in the PAYE sector is taxed at 100% of income. Business revenue isn’t.

    If you see your rent take as business revenue do you think that you pay 50% on the revenue? No. Of course not.


  • #96
    c.p.w.g.w
    Registered Users Posts: 4,994 ✭✭✭c.p.w.g.w


    Well if the government introduced a scheme were landlord didn't need to pay tax on the first 8 grand per property I'd reckon your'd see rents around the country drop.


  • Advertisement
  • #97
    Sleeper12
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,156 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    Senature wrote: »
    From revenue.ie

    How do you calculate your taxable income?

    You must work out how much tax you owe on your 'net rental income'.

    You need to deduct allowable expenses and any allowances from your rental source or sources. This will calculate if you have profit or a loss.

    The net rental income is the total profits less the total losses.




    This is very basic stuff. So many small landlords here don't understand it. They are getting muddled in their thinking & as a result they seem to feel that the whole tax system is stacked against them.


    If it were a partnership owning the property you'd do profit & loss accounts. The end result will be the same doing profit & loss or calculating it on your personal tax return.


    I think by declaring your profit & loss on your tax return the way revenue want you to could leave a landlord feeling like expenses are coming out of their own pocket.


    I honestly believe many landlords here would benefit with a visit to a business manager, accountant etc to explain it properly. Just for their mental well being if nothing else. I have been involved in many different business over the decades, including commercial & residential property. I have never seen any other business where the business people complain so much & I genuinely believe it's because they don't understand their business model or their investment.You need to be able to see the big picture. Borrowing to buy a property is a long term investment. You should not expect to see big returns till you own the property outright or at least till near the end of the mortgage.



    We throw money into our pension week after week without expecting a weekly return till it matures. Why should an investment property be any different? If an investment property pays for itself over a 20 or 30 year mortgage then you have gotten an investment worth maybe half a million without putting a penny into it. Please someone tell me another investment that costs you nothing for 20 or 30 years yet is worth half a million at the end.



    You should only look for short term gains on property if you are paying cash mortgage free. Even then thinking short term is risky. Prices might be stagnant or drop short term & this makes it risky


  • #98
    Sleeper12
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,156 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    c.p.w.g.w wrote: »
    Well if the government introduced a scheme were landlord didn't need to pay tax on the first 8 grand per property I'd reckon your'd see rents around the country drop.




    I doubt it. Judging by posters on this thread & other threads they would feel keeping the rent higher to claw back for how hard done by they are. They'd be thinking about the time someone did 5K worth of damage to their property, or 10K or even 45K. I can't imagine too many small landlords thinking it sensible to reduce the rent. professional landlords defiantly wouldn't drop their rents. Landlords with only one property are only a tiny part of the market


  • #99
    Sleeper12
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,156 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    Grumpypants wrote: »
    You spent that expense, that money is gone. The way you make it sound is landlords are writing off their tax bill and profiting. Spending 2k to reduce your tax bill by 400 is still a loss of 1600.


    The mind boggles.


    When you invest in your property you either increase it's value or protect it's value by spending this money on the property.



    If you buy a brand new house fully fitted & didn't spend a penny on it over 30 years what sort of property would you have? Would it have burnt down die to bad electrics etc?



    Spending money on the upkeep of the building is investing in your property.



    This is the same in any business. You need to put money in regularly to keep it up to date. This money doesn't come out of your pocket. It comes out of the income/rent & is tax deductible.



    I have a shower repair business. My expenses are tax deductible. I offset Insurance, accountant. Van upkeep, website costs etc against tax. That doesn't make me sound like
    are writing off their tax bill and profiting.
    . It makes me sound like I am running a legitimate business claiming legitimate business expenses.



    It's the same for you as a landlord. Like it or not you are running a business & offsetting legitimate expenses. There is nothing wrong with that & you shouldn't feel guilty about doing so


  • #100
    Monokne
    Registered Users Posts: 3,952 ✭✭✭Monokne


    noodler wrote: »
    Don't believe this for a second.

    No offence.

    Landlords would have zero incentive to reduce the rent in the current Market under that scenario.

    How wonderfully arrogant of you.

    I currently rent my property to a couple for €100 less than they were willing to pay, because I liked the people which is more important to me than profiting given I own a business I never wanted and can't rid myself of, and I believed allowing them a few bob off the rent (they're both in reasonably low income jobs) would engender good will in the relationship and make it a lot easier to deal with issues when they arose. Whether that's the reason or not, we've gotten along well and they're heading into their third year shortly. From my vantage point, dealing with reasonable folk and having secured income rather than potentially dealing with fussy people and having to worry about preparing the place for rent is great.

    Perhaps think before you categorise everyone in a given group as the same next time?


  • #101
    Graham
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,642 Mod ✭✭✭✭Graham


    Sleeper12 wrote: »
    Landlords with only one property are only a tiny part of the market

    Somewhere around two thirds of all landlords own a single property.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement