Boards.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more x
Post Reply  
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
21-07-2019, 13:57   #76
MrMusician18
Registered User
 
MrMusician18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Posts: 1,341
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1874 View Post
is it a shakedown? how does that price compare to elsewhere? it is a service provided, you don't know the apartment size suits that though? you're saying it in a way that sounds like you want it to be provided for free? Im all for fair and reasonable, but I'm not convinced 2 euro is a rip off, maybe it should be a washing machine with a larger load capacity or a small one costing less, maybe the OP should bring it up with the landlord or management company if so, but you can hardly expect it for free!
No one is expecting to use the machine for free but It absolutely is a shakedown. It's somewhere between 5x and 10x the cost of running a machine in your own apartment. And to be honest if the apartment isn't big enough to have a washing machine, it not big enough for human habitation. But if it is big enough and the landlord provides a communal machine at €2/wash this is just another revenue opportunity, another chance to fleece the tenants.

If the charge was 20-50c/wash I'd be saying fair enough
MrMusician18 is offline  
Advertisement
22-07-2019, 14:23   #77
1874
Registered User
 
1874's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 960
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMusician18 View Post
No one is expecting to use the machine for free but It absolutely is a shakedown. It's somewhere between 5x and 10x the cost of running a machine in your own apartment. And to be honest if the apartment isn't big enough to have a washing machine, it not big enough for human habitation. But if it is big enough and the landlord provides a communal machine at €2/wash this is just another revenue opportunity, another chance to fleece the tenants.

If the charge was 20-50c/wash I'd be saying fair enough

The same reason a sandwich you buy is dearer than one you can make yourself, and you suggest you'd want that service at the absolute minimum cost you could provide it yourself for, well go demand a sandwich in a shop at the cost you can provide for it yourself?? Even after all your posts, you have a figure from x (20c) to 150% greater than x (50c), you cant even pin that down, just being unrealistic, thats the only way you are looking at it.
That there's regulation to have to provide white goods at all is ridiculous, a standard that is not present in Europe or elsewhere as far as Im aware, the much hyped European standard/set up everyone wants to go is prevented here by legislation. In that situation there would be nothing to prevent a tenant having all their own stuff (as is common on the continent) The legislation here hamstrings landlords and tenants in numerous ways, blinds tenants to this and is rabidly anti landlord.

A property too small for a washing machine in each unit is not necessarily too small for habitation and a communal washing machine is easily the logical result, the fact that the outcome is worse for tenants (and landlords) proves that the legislation (legislation written and led by clueless morons like the current minister in charge of dealing with such issues,ie an out of touch idiot) forces the landlord to provide the minimum standard and then due to the way things are here, the landlord provides that and only that, the absolute minimum.
1874 is offline  
23-07-2019, 15:32   #78
MrMusician18
Registered User
 
MrMusician18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Posts: 1,341
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1874 View Post
The same reason a sandwich you buy is dearer than one you can make yourself, and you suggest you'd want that service at the absolute minimum cost you could provide it yourself for, well go demand a sandwich in a shop at the cost you can provide for it yourself?? Even after all your posts, you have a figure from x (20c) to 150% greater than x (50c), you cant even pin that down, just being unrealistic, thats the only way you are looking at it.
That there's regulation to have to provide white goods at all is ridiculous, a standard that is not present in Europe or elsewhere as far as Im aware, the much hyped European standard/set up everyone wants to go is prevented here by legislation. In that situation there would be nothing to prevent a tenant having all their own stuff (as is common on the continent) The legislation here hamstrings landlords and tenants in numerous ways, blinds tenants to this and is rabidly anti landlord.

A property too small for a washing machine in each unit is not necessarily too small for habitation and a communal washing machine is easily the logical result, the fact that the outcome is worse for tenants (and landlords) proves that the legislation (legislation written and led by clueless morons like the current minister in charge of dealing with such issues,ie an out of touch idiot) forces the landlord to provide the minimum standard and then due to the way things are here, the landlord provides that and only that, the absolute minimum.
No, when there is no machine provided in apartment it is more like saying that you can't make a sandwich at home because I won't prove the equipment, you can only hire the equipment from me though at extortionate rate or be more inconvenienced by getting one from a third party.


The ability to wash your clothes is a fairly basic need that's why extortionate prices are immoral even if not illegal. Metered washing machines that are costing the user 5 to 10 times it what it costs the landlord to provide the service should be considered to not meeting the minimum standard. They are certainly against the spirit of the law.

This is not about being anti landlord. Rents are at all all time high, and some landlords not happy with this see laundry as a way to gouge further and keep their costs down.
MrMusician18 is offline  
26-08-2019, 13:05   #79
1874
Registered User
 
1874's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 960
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMusician18 View Post
No, when there is no machine provided in apartment it is more like saying that you can't make a sandwich at home because I won't prove the equipment, you can only hire the equipment from me though at extortionate rate or be more inconvenienced by getting one from a third party.


The ability to wash your clothes is a fairly basic need that's why extortionate prices are immoral even if not illegal. Metered washing machines that are costing the user 5 to 10 times it what it costs the landlord to provide the service should be considered to not meeting the minimum standard. They are certainly against the spirit of the law.

This is not about being anti landlord. Rents are at all all time high, and some landlords not happy with this see laundry as a way to gouge further and keep their costs down.
Rents are high, and so are taxes, you seem to think its all going into the landlords pocket, more than half goes to the State, should remember that, the landlord has to fund everything out of the balance and the write off from tax is small to make allowances for white goods, the allowance for writing off white goods is over 8 years, a washing machine these days might be lucky to last 4 or 5, depending on the use or abuse it gets, in a multi unit place thats got to be less. Added to that, so long as the service is provided there is nothing to stop anyone going elsewhere if the cost is significantly less, Ive already mentioned why, but landlords typically provide the cheapest products and in my direct experience this is because tenants generally treat landlords property poorly either through negligence or abuse and then complain when it isnt working. The legislation limits the opportunity and incentive to provide a better service.
1874 is offline  
26-08-2019, 13:35   #80
TheChizler
Registered User
 
TheChizler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 7,377
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1874 View Post
Rents are high, and so are taxes, you seem to think its all going into the landlords pocket, more than half goes to the State, should remember that, the landlord has to fund everything out of the balance and the write off from tax is small to make allowances for white goods
Only if the landlord is earning at the higher rate of tax, that and the rest go for any other self employed business.
TheChizler is offline  
Advertisement
26-08-2019, 17:15   #81
1874
Registered User
 
1874's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 960
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheChizler View Post
Only if the landlord is earning at the higher rate of tax, that and the rest go for any other self employed business.

what does that even mean? that and the rest? I think you're confusing the issue here,
A big problem about upgrading facilities is that after tax take in a lot of cases there isnt enough (or anything) left to fund anything but the least costly options, with the stroke of a pen, the Govt could have landlords apply for lower tax if it mean returning that benefit back as reduced rent/better facilities/structural upgrades for energy efficiency in set proportions, but there is simply not a benefit (even when you can offset the cost) against current tax, and there may not even be a possibility to fund it by a landlord, added to that legislation which places strict conditions on landlords has very weak conditions and limited or no enforcement when a tenant fails to uphold their obligation (such as paying rent), that landlords dont want to take the risk.



You seem to be saying there are different rates of tax for self employed and PAYE workers? if thats the case can you show that, I thought they were all the same.
I would say most landlords make little or nothing month to month from renting and its more likely they are in the red and are employed in some way like everyone else, either PAYE or self employed. I dont believe taxation of landlords is treated like taxation of self employed, I dont see why you are mixing it into things? there are differences between PAYE and Self employed, but Im fairly sure the rates are still the same, I still dont think its relevant,



I would say the majority of landlords are PAYE likely in line with the percentage of employed people that are PAYE and Self Employed,
You seem to be suggesting there is some preferential tax treatment of landlords??

Im not self employed, but my understanding is self-employed are taxed on profits,
landlords are taxed on income.
1874 is offline  
26-08-2019, 18:47   #82
TheChizler
Registered User
 
TheChizler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 7,377
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1874 View Post
what does that even mean? that and the rest? I think you're confusing the issue here,
Maybe it's just me but I think quite often on here things come across like landlords have it much worse than the rest of us when it comes to tax, as if there's a special landlord tax of >50% on all related income.

I'm making the point that a non-landlord self employed person, or even a PAYE person on the upper rates of income tax, USC and PRSI would already be paying similar rates on equivalent income. Also if all someone does for income is rent out one or two properties they could be paying very little tax.
TheChizler is offline  
Thanks from:
27-08-2019, 10:17   #83
1874
Registered User
 
1874's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 960
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheChizler View Post
Maybe it's just me but I think quite often on here things come across like landlords have it much worse than the rest of us when it comes to tax, as if there's a special landlord tax of >50% on all related income.

I'm making the point that a non-landlord self employed person, or even a PAYE person on the upper rates of income tax, USC and PRSI would already be paying similar rates on equivalent income. Also if all someone does for income is rent out one or two properties they could be paying very little tax.

You seemed to imply there is a difference in taxation rates or some differences for self employed and landlords previously, now you are agreeing they are the same, which is what I stated,

What you seemed to have missed that I was suggesting is, that at no cost to anyone the State could with the stroke of a pen, offer private landlords the opportunity of lower tax rates (for rental income) if they passed that on in rent reductions (such a suggestion would benefit the tenant, it will no doubt raise peoples shackles, but if potential landlords are to be encouraged to stay in or enter the market there has to be some incentive, this offers the landlord the opportunity to pass on the tax reduction as a rent decrease).
Percent reductions of tax paid could be given for rent reductions, general upgrades, thermal efficiency upgrades.
IF the State was in anyway concerned about how much rent tenants were paying they could think outside the box a little and rents could actually fall, with no one losing out except the State, they already offer such incentives to REITS, significant incentives.
The State (Revenue) might realise a paltry reduction in income tax incoming but the potential benefits are enormous, and as Ive already suggested
I think that landlords are treated differently from self employed and businesses for tax in that they are taxed (USC and PRSI too) on income, ie the lot, which means this causes commensurate increases for tenants rents, because somewhere along the line (usually at the beginning) the mortgage and other costs have to be paid immediately on a regular basis and taxes not long after that, annually on a regular basis.
Whereas businesses have better protections from rogue customers and criminals, and pay tax only on the profit after costs, which seems to present the opportunity for a much lower tax bill.
Note* the greater the tax bill, the greater the need to have the rent at a level that pays all costs.



I doubt very much many people who rent a property or two could manage to live on the rental of two properties all their potential working lifetime and foot their bills, when all costs have to be paid also (mortages, tax, USC, PRSI, Insurances, maintenance, etc etc), what you're suggesting is if they have no costs, which isnt realistic for the entire duration of ownership, thats more an exception than the rule. I'd say its more typical that landlords have to supplement what is coming in from rent to cover the costs.

Last edited by 1874; 27-08-2019 at 10:23.
1874 is offline  
27-08-2019, 13:43   #84
davindub
Registered User
 
davindub's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 1,052
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1874 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheChizler View Post
Maybe it's just me but I think quite often on here things come across like landlords have it much worse than the rest of us when it comes to tax, as if there's a special landlord tax of >50% on all related income.

I'm making the point that a non-landlord self employed person, or even a PAYE person on the upper rates of income tax, USC and PRSI would already be paying similar rates on equivalent income. Also if all someone does for income is rent out one or two properties they could be paying very little tax.

You seemed to imply there is a difference in taxation rates or some differences for self employed and landlords previously, now you are agreeing they are the same, which is what I stated,

What you seemed to have missed that I was suggesting is, that at no cost to anyone the State could with the stroke of a pen, offer private landlords the opportunity of lower tax rates (for rental income) if they passed that on in rent reductions (such a suggestion would benefit the tenant, it will no doubt raise peoples shackles, but if potential landlords are to be encouraged to stay in or enter the market there has to be some incentive, this offers the landlord the opportunity to pass on the tax reduction as a rent decrease).
Percent reductions of tax paid could be given for rent reductions, general upgrades, thermal efficiency upgrades.
IF the State was in anyway concerned about how much rent tenants were paying they could think outside the box a little and rents could actually fall, with no one losing out except the State, they already offer such incentives to REITS, significant incentives.
The State (Revenue) might realise a paltry reduction in income tax incoming but the potential benefits are enormous, and as Ive already suggested
I think that landlords are treated differently from self employed and businesses for tax in that they are taxed (USC and PRSI too) on income, ie the lot, which means this causes commensurate increases for tenants rents, because somewhere along the line (usually at the beginning) the mortgage and other costs have to be paid immediately on a regular basis and taxes not long after that, annually on a regular basis.
Whereas businesses have better protections from rogue customers and criminals, and pay tax only on the profit after costs, which seems to present the opportunity for a much lower tax bill.
Note* the greater the tax bill, the greater the need to have the rent at a level that pays all costs.



I doubt very much many people who rent a property or two could manage to live on the rental of two properties all their potential working lifetime and foot their bills, when all costs have to be paid also (mortages, tax, USC, PRSI, Insurances, maintenance, etc etc), what you're suggesting is if they have no costs, which isnt realistic for the entire duration of ownership, thats more an exception than the rule. I'd say its more typical that landlords have to supplement what is coming in from rent to cover the costs.
There is absolutely no way a reduction in tax would be passed on to tenants.

Businesses have less protection and also pay Vat, Emp Prsi, Rates etc etc..

Income is tax adjusted profit, if LL's don't want to pay down their finance, they can source interest only mortgages. Then they can stop feeling that they are being victimised by not deducting capital repayments.
davindub is offline  
Advertisement
27-08-2019, 16:30   #85
1874
Registered User
 
1874's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 960
Quote:
Originally Posted by davindub View Post
There is absolutely no way a reduction in tax would be passed on to tenants.

Businesses have less protection and also pay Vat, Emp Prsi, Rates etc etc..

Income is tax adjusted profit, if LL's don't want to pay down their finance, they can source interest only mortgages. Then they can stop feeling that they are being victimised by not deducting capital repayments.

The technology exists to support that easily, ie computerisation,
Easy to record it, flag it automatically, highlight complaints, search and check what has been paid.
Businesses have more protection in terms of dealing with customers who go become criminals and steal, landlords dont.
There are no doubt unscrupulous landlords but the people who tenants (and landlords) have to thank for the mess that exists are politicians, who have made an ass of circumstances and compounded problems for good tenants and good landlords by not having a fast track to deal with non paying tenants, this and poorly thought out legislation has hamstrung landlords and cost tenants more in the short and longterm. Non payment is the thing I'd say that concerns landlords most followed by serious damage or deterioration due to vandalism or poor care of a property. There is no way a business would tolerate that once it started happening.


There were already landlords passing on reductions through recognising good tenants, the legislation to limit rent increases isnt a bad thing, but some aspects of it forced landlords to increase to the maximum they might achieve or they would never be able to increase it in anyway other than the set percentages.
1874 is offline  
30-08-2019, 18:12   #86
MrMusician18
Registered User
 
MrMusician18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Posts: 1,341
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1874 View Post
The technology exists to support that easily, ie computerisation,
Easy to record it, flag it automatically, highlight complaints, search and check what has been paid.
Businesses have more protection in terms of dealing with customers who go become criminals and steal, landlords dont.
There are no doubt unscrupulous landlords but the people who tenants (and landlords) have to thank for the mess that exists are politicians, who have made an ass of circumstances and compounded problems for good tenants and good landlords by not having a fast track to deal with non paying tenants, this and poorly thought out legislation has hamstrung landlords and cost tenants more in the short and longterm. Non payment is the thing I'd say that concerns landlords most followed by serious damage or deterioration due to vandalism or poor care of a property. There is no way a business would tolerate that once it started happening.


There were already landlords passing on reductions through recognising good tenants, the legislation to limit rent increases isnt a bad thing, but some aspects of it forced landlords to increase to the maximum they might achieve or they would never be able to increase it in anyway other than the set percentages.
There is absolutely no way that tax reductions would be passed onto tenants, because it's not the taxes that determine rents but the market. And when you introduce controls and interference in the market other ways for landlords to attain the real market rent state to arise.

So you see that when we have controls and interference in the market like now landlords seek other ways to maximize the rent. So the carpark space no longer comes with the house or the tenant is charged an extortionate amount to wash their laundry.
MrMusician18 is offline  
Thanks from:
Post Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Remove Text Formatting
Bold
Italic
Underline

Insert Image
Wrap [QUOTE] tags around selected text
 
Decrease Size
Increase Size
Please sign up or log in to join the discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



Share Tweet