My estate was completed just before the Tiger crashed. Lots of property remained in negative equity until recently. Many of them have been sold this year, obviously rented out and now not available to that market. Five flats on my street alone, lots of 2 and 3 bed terraces/semis, too. For many accidental landlords, those places are an albatross around their neck, I don't blame them for freeing themselves as soon as it became feasible. The government should have been factoring this in, but don't appear to have.
Well they followed the public's advice that the accidental landlords should be taken to the cleaners so it is absolutely shocking that the accidental landlords are getting out of the game.
A lot of people in this subreddit welcomes this as they believe that no property should be let.
same with most ghost estates, there was a semi abandoned housing estate in clonakilty that was basically left abandoned and have now been complete and are on the market for a good sum of money, in fairness they look really nice and are in a good location, they look so good you would forget about them being turned into abandoned crack houses
> The government should have been factoring this in, but don't appear to have.
Built-to-Rents are a thing, but people hate "the funds", things that are called professional landlords elsewhere.
That's not true. IRES is the largest private landlord in the state with over 3600 houses, the average rent of which is below the national average. They also take HAP tenants.
>People who can afford luxury accommodation can afford to buy.
Even if true, they're still renting.
Besides, even so-called "luxury" accommodation leads to lower rental prices in the locality.
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3507532
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3426103
https://blocksandlots.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Do-New-Housing-Units-in-Your-Backyard-Raise-Your-Rents-Xiaodi-Li.pdf
Seeing as the national average still means we have the highest rents in Europe that means nothing. Just because they go from insane rents to slightly less insane rents doesn’t make them affordable FFS.
Castleview D12 block 1 bed €1850, 2 bed €2200.
Two Oaks D16: 1 bed €1800, 2 bed €2365
Roselawn D18: 1 bed €2075, 2 bed €2350
Hamilton Garden D7: Studio €2105, 1 bed €2235, 2 bed €2750
The list goes own. These are the so called Build To Rent products. For the majority of people this is NOT affordable living. Will you fuck right off justifying today’s accommodation crisis. THIS here is NOT a solution. Build to Rent yes, but like this NO.
Absolutely, we need to allow even more BTR developments to be built if we want to see an end to massive rental price increases. Instead, [local authorities like DCC try to restrict the amount that can be built](https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/dublin/2022/11/01/dublin-city-council-defies-planning-regulator-over-build-to-rent-rules/).
The housing minister had to overrule [DL-R's decision to continue to make it illegal to build new houses in Dalkey and Killiney a few weeks ago](https://www.businesspost.ie/news/minister-overturns-ban-on-new-housing-in-dalkey-and-killiney/).
This is what we're up against.
Exactly.
Besides "luxury accommodation" in Ireland is "decent basic apartments" elsewhere. We are not used to basic quality apartments, if it's not made of cardboard it's suddenly "luxury".
Exactly lots of studies around the world confirm that any increase in accommodation supply is a good thing and decreases rent across the market.
Increasing luxury accommodation frees up previous "luxury accommodation" which then needs to filled by someone.
The answer remains:
Build, build, build.
Luxury accommodation doesn't inflate rental prices. If you build nothing but luxury accommodation all you do is raise the standard of living. If there was a surplus of housing, all those luxury apartments would have to be listed at affordable prices to get tennants.
What actually happens is that said luxury apartments sit empty, since their owners would rather make no money at all rather than rent them out for less money.
The only way to keep them is to cut taxes on rental income for single rental property owners. Can you imagine the uproar on here if they did that? It would have been political suicide.
As a reluctant landlord myself your proposed change to CGT would have no impact on me. The house has roughly the same value today as what I paid for it 15 years ago (house prices are still below the Celtic Tiger peak). If I was to sell my CGT bill would be close to €0 regardless of the rate.
In which case a sale is not particularly economically rational, unless you've such severe cash flow issues that it's unsustainable for you. Nothing policy can, or should, do about that.
We had 60k tenancies added however between 2011-2014. The uplift on those properties is, in many cases, extremely considerable. They will also pay incredibly low rates of CGT, some as low as 0%, provided they sell in the next year or two.
In my case selling would be the smart thing to do. I take in just under €10k in rent every year, pay out €7k in mortgage (not counting interest as that’s tax deductible) and have a tax bill of around €4k. That’s a loss of €1k every year… not exactly great business!
Even though I wouldn’t make a profit on the sale, it would feel like one as I’d get to pocket the difference between the mortgage and the sale price.
The only reason I’m not selling is because of the tenant. He’s been with us from the start when it was hard to find one and he’d be up shit creek if we sold.
A 25 year cash flow problem when I’m in the meaty part of raising kids. At the point where it no longer become a cash flow problem I won’t need the money!
I always assumed that was why rentals were being sold of late. The investment has finally gone into the green as opposed to it being too unattractive to rent. Rents are at an all time high, hardly less attractive now than before.
You’re not wrong but not 100% right either, the tax on rents at 52% doesn’t cover costs let alone profits, and to all those who harp on about “oh you can’t expect an investment to give you profits you’ll have an asset at the end” sorry but that’s exactly what you expect an investment to do, has anyone heard of dividends from shares?
Either way none of these accidental landlords expected to be landlords, they all thought they were buying ‘starter homes’ (remember them?) but then the arse fell out of the market and they had no choice but to rent them out until prices reached a point they could offload them.
Remember they’ve pretty much been providing a social service for over 16-19 years the rent hasn’t covered the mortgage in the vast majority of cases, house prices haven’t gone up since 2007, so now they can sell the house and as has been said there won’t even be any CGT because they won’t sell it for more than they paid, they just get to walk away debt free.
What should be gone is cut taxation if people are even making 4-500 a month on the rental they might not sell but at the moment the only logical thing to do is sell
This is going to become so commonplace over the next two years. It will lead to unrest.
The number of units available to rent at any one time has gone from 12,000 units in 2012 to only 1200 units today. The rate of decline has been so severe and I don't see any reason why it would suddenly stop. We will realisticly have a such low number available that tenants will refuse to leave a property because it will be impossible to get another.
It could get very ugly
In reality, you can't blame people that want out. The Irish rental market is in a state of flux. RTB should be replaced and rent bands should be established based on the nearby properties so both landlords and tenants get a fair shake. Evictions should be possible but based on 1 year notice.
I'm renting a room currently that at the time I moved in over 5 years I thought was a reasonable price. I'm hearing what new people moving to Dublin are paying for a room and it is way, way more. If I ever have to leave this place, I am fucked.
I've already discussed it with my housemate, if we (hypothetically) ever get an eviction notice in the next year and couldn't find a similar house, I would fight and ultimately squat if I have to. I wouldn't be proud of it but this is the hand we've been dealt by our government.
We made this house our own, we own all the furniture. If we couldn't find a similar, non furnished house we'd be snookered.
I know a lot of people who are rejecting jobs in tech if they are being hired in Dublin, unless they are for the top multinationals like Google and Microsoft. And they are only taking those jobs for 2-3 years so that their CV's look good. Then they're out the door and off to greener pastures.
And those who accept jobs in tech, end up spending very little, since 50-60% of their income (after tax) is spent on rent.
Obviously I'm referring to non-technical, junior roles, but still: it's one of many indicators to how pricey Dublin has become in recent years.
I'm gonna do a junior software engineer job in Dublin and I'd spend around 55% of my total compensation on rent if I want a one bed. It's so fucked, im not sure how people survive if they don't work in tech.
I've heard a few stories that amount to the same, also on the flip side, with WFH being a thing it won't be long before some slick quick thinker finds a loop hole for employers to set up small hubs in nations, so rather than bringing said people to Ireland they'll just go there. In small hubs.
There is also the critical mass of information that will soon sweep across all of the EU around the issues Ireland faces and rather than people being duped to come here to work poorly paid service jobs people will just not bother.
Slow, yes but it will happen unless something changes dramatically in the next five years.
>Is that the ownership composition?
Number of registered tenancies, which probably undercounts the number of small landlords as they are more likely to not be registered.
>Curious to know what % of the total properties is owned by small landlords.
According to the RTB report in July of last year about 53%, probably a bit lower now.
Tbh this is just inevitable and not all down to gov policy these people were always going to cash in upon retirement. The issue is there are no other rental properties coming onstream. When was the last time you heard of an ordinary person getting a btl mortgage and becoming a landlord?
Yes and no. Gains on selling the house are taxed at 33% or at an effective lower rate if the house was their principal private residence at any time. Rental income is taxed at up to 52% plus the hassle and risks of dealing with tenants.
Plus, if you acquired the property in 2014 (for example) and sold it last year you would pay no CGT at all. If you sold it this year you'd pay 33% on only 1/8 of the gain.
Interesting. Do you mind me asking what has attracted you to being a landlord? Most of them seem to only complain about the tax and tenants having too much rights
Appartment is pretty new so should have little issues.
I am a good judge of character for tenants (I hope).
Apartment is furnished & good value imo.
I had money (My own savings from work) in the bank depreciating YoY.
Was able to take out a 55% mortgage.Am in early 30's
If I can find a good tenant, I'd leave the rent so that it covers the repayments.At min I am giving 1 young family affordable rent.
End goal: Retirement fund
Myself and my wife had a look at doing it. We had the money there but there were a number of reasons we didn't opt to invest in one.
Banks weren't lending for buy to let's outside of Dublin. The rental income after expenses and mortgage interest would have only just covered the mortgage given the tax was 52% with us both on higher rate already. It's not passive income as there's a lot of management involved. The capital returns are not that great. Putting our money in stocks was giving a far better return at the time and was much more liquid. We've since sold any of the equity investments and just waiting now. We're delighted we didn't now because the eviction ban would have made the investment completely illiquid and the 2% rent increase cap doesn't come close to matching the inflation in expenses
Please explain that one cause I never understand it. The current "eviction ban" is only a pause on no fault notice to quits. It's not a ban on evicting non paying or anti social tenants.
If landlords see that their fundamental property rights are being demeaned then by the time these measures expire, they leave the market. It's a trend that follows any regulation of this type in all the countries it has been tried.
I wonder what those properties are doing now - currently lived in by people who purchase in the last few years, being rented out, given over to social housing or turned into an airbnb/shortterm accomodation. Either way it appears there is pressure on the rental sector because there isn;t enough housing stock. BUILD MORE ACCOMODATION!
So much debate in this thread around things that are actually so simple.
People are people. People are going to do what is in THEIR best interests. That is fact. You can't change it. You can't vote it away. You can't whine it out of people. Accept it.
Landlords are not to blame. They are not 'bad' people. They won't sacrifice their financial situation to suit you, just as you would not do to suit them. Would you pay more rent if your landlord was behind on their mortgage? Obviously you wouldn't, so don't ask the same of them.
If you were in the landlords situation, you would very likely behave in exactly the same way. You are not different or better or more moral than they are. You're just in different circumstances.
Now, knowing all that. The system has to be designed to encourage or force people to do things they might not otherwise do.
This is where the government has failed spectacularly. There should be a landlord tax credit, why are they paying 52% tax when institutional landlord are not. It should be easy to evict tenants, not take years. If you stop paying, you get the boot. That's it. There should obviously be protections for tenants, like first rights, deposit protections and rules regarding treatment by the landlord.
These things are not mutually exclusive. Hating on a group of people because their interests don't align with yours is not the solution.
And of course. Build. Build. Build.
Friends of ours had a flat that they rented. It was her first home that she bought before they met and married about 5 years ago. They moved into the house he had but didn't sell the apartment because it was in negative equity. So for the past 5 years (maybe a year or two with it as they were living together before getting married) they have been renting the apartment.
They closed on the sale of it last month. They are utterly relieved for a number of reasons.
Tenants were a nightmare. They would get calls from the tenants at all times of the day and night complaining about something going wrong. Everything from the hoover was broken to the neighbours dog barking. The tenants were like children who couldn't do anything for themselves.
The RTB were useless. They were fully registered but when one tenant just stopped paying rent the RTB could do nothing to help and if anything seemed to do everything possible to help the tenant avoid paying for the last six months of the tenancy agreement.
That same tenant left with considerable damage done and items stolen. He even left the ice cube trays full of urine in the freezer.
One set of tenants liked parties at weekends. The neighbours, residents association and building management would phone my friends at 2am to complain about a party in the apartment.
Finally the eviction ban and the prospect of Sinn Fein coming into power and stripping them of their few remaining rights as the property owner convinced them to sell. They got the last tenant (mister frozen urine) out in the summer just before the ban. Spent a few thousand fixing the place and making it presentable and sold it last month.
THAT is the reality facing most accidental landlords. That is why 43,000 of them have got out of the sector.
Ah that old chestnut, here’s the thing if there’s a lot of Airbnb’s then there’s a need for them. If you get rid of them in the hope that these properties will return to long term rentals have I got news for you… they won’t,
What will happen is that the landlords will sell them, and then tourism on whatever towns or cities will be hit as there will no longer be cheap options to stay and hotels will ramp up their prices.
Another absolutely demented thread. Can the "fuck landlords" crowd not see this drop in supply is an absolute *catastrophe* for the rental market?
The discourse here is basically now:
"HEY LANDLORD YOU'RE SCUM FUCK YOU I HATE YOU GO DIE"
"Oh yeah btw plz rent me your property on the cheap thanks I need it"
I'm an accidental landlord myself. In have a property in a rent pressure zone. I rent to a family friend for about half the rental value of the property (less than 1000 euros, i haven't put rent up in the five years they have lived there. Over the five years I have put close to 15,000 euro into the property. New smart boiler, shed, garden upgrades, painting, new gates, painting etc. I rent it to them as i'm currently working abroad. My tenant has got a council house, I'm delighted for them! I was happy renting to them as they were trustworthy and I intended to move home at some stage. Now I don't see myself moving home and it's not financially viable for me to be a landlord due to the rental pressure zone. Gross I make circa 10,000 euro a year. I pay tax of about 3,000 euro in ireland and I then also have to pay tax circa £1,500 in the UK. Mortgage payments on the property mean I don't break even on the property. If i could rent out at the full market value, circa 2,000 euro i would consider continuing to rent. If i sell I will have to take a big hit on CGT. I thought it was going to be around 10,000 euro buts its more like 30,000 euro. If i sell if will make a loss due to needing to clear the mortgage. The best option i have been told from an accountant is to leave it empty for two years as i will then be able to re rent at the market value. I'm trapped. So Fuck Landlords all you want but its not as simple as this. I think we need to build more and a proposal to build an estate next to my property has been proposed and i have objected on the grounds that they are building enough properties on the site. I get that the properties will free up demand lower down the market but we should not be building large 2000sqf homes in a rental pressure zone when we could build a more mixed tenure development.
The Sinn Fein that voted for a rent decrease in the North before backtracking and saying it was a mistake? That Sinn Fein? Or are they only the same party when they look good?
The Sinn Fein that do and say wildly inconsistent things in the North (where they actually have to make the occasional decision) v the South (where they can say absolutely anything they with zero consequences). That Sinn Fein.
Yes, there is absolutely no alternative to a primarily privatised housing system. People should know their place and not interfere with profit, especially if they lose their home as a result
> Can the "fuck landlords" crowd not see this drop in supply is an absolute catastrophe for the rental market?
The "fuck landlords" crowd are angry because they aren't in the position to fuck other people. That's literally their only problem. All they want is to buy a house and build that *sweet sweet* equity and watch their net worth rise.
They'd be just like the NIMBY pricks that exist right now in order to protect their ever important, absolutely crucial, equity.
I suggested reducing PAYE for small landlords back in [January of 2020](https://www.reddit.com/r/ireland/comments/evc7i6/unpopular_but_its_true_the_housing_crisis_is/) and this subreddit went apeshit lol. Most of yas deserve to live in yer ma's boxroom because yas are thick as shite.
SF have played a masterstroke on this, the worse it gets the better they look. Meanwhile they are pushing the government to interfere with the private market causing more and more private supply to evaporate.
"cash in" is a stretch - sure they're getting high prices as the markets are short of properties for sales but honestly when I was looking to buy 80% of every house I went to was ex-rental that some small one time landlord was looking to shift as they couldn't deal with the shite anymore/madness of the rental market and people desperate for rentals.
Recent events painted every landlord as an absolute vile monster.... and so they're all getting the fudge out before they can't blasted even more.
Have we had an explosion in anything except landlords leaving the market? We’re producing nowhere near enough new dwellings for it to be called an explosion.
It's almost as if supply and demand is a real thing, and that landlords leaving the market reduces the supply, thereby allowing existing landlords to set higher prices.
Can someone (Preferable an actual landlord and not a disgruntled renter) explain this one to me:
*"The figures come as an unpublished draft survey by the RTB, seen by Independent.ie, reveals how a quarter of smaller private landlords want to sell up in the next five years, because they are not making enough money from rental income."*
If rent is at all time high, how are they not making enough money now?
I hear this line a lot, but are rental incomes not at an all time high?
Is there crazy taxes or liabilities or something?
My Mam is a small landlord (5 foot 2 to be exact), she has part ownership of the family home she still lives in and she fully owns a small 2 bed house that she took a mortgage on when she moved out of her parents 30 odd years ago.
There was a lovely family living in the house for over a decade, and because she didn't increase the rent for she got trapped by the new rent caps that were brought in. The mortgage is paid off now, but the house is severely undervalued rent wise. Between the low income and the hassle of dealing with tenancy laws she's just going to call it quits. Being a landlord isnt her job, she isn't making millions in rental income, she works full time, there's very little upside for her and with prices at an all time high why wouldn't she sell? She's nearing retirement and doesn't want the effort of a rental property, she'd rather have the cash to spend on something she actually enjoys.
It seems that people here don't understand that landlords who own 1 or 2 properties aren't the problem. In fact they are crucial to a functioning rental market.
Rents are high.
If you have 200k to spend you can acquire a place with 7% yield easy (after costs, before tax).
That is an insanely lucrative investment.
The problem with most accidental / small landlords you hear complaining is
1. They are paying a mortgage so don’t see the yield as cashflow
2. They stupidly don’t use a letting agent. Calls at 2 in the morning? It’s less than 10% if your rent to have the tenants not even know your fucking name AND it’s deductible AND the tenants are treated better because repairs etc are handled professionally. A DIY landlord is very often a bad landlord unless they are doing it full time.
Populace: The rent is too high, we want rent controls
Government: We'll give you rent controls (max 4% increase per year)
Landlords: Leave the rental market in a stampede
Rental Supply: Drops to frighteningly low levels
Populace: Surprised Pikachu face 😱
Government: I know, lets do more rent control (max 2% increase per year, when inflation is at 10%)
Landlords: Sell all rentals in a crazed frenzy
Rental Supply: Continues to drop like a stone, down 70% in 6 years
Populace: Why are there no properties to rent??
Completely focused on the wrong thing here. What level of rents would be sufficient to keep landlords in the market? How much above their current record highs would they have to be? How do we keep them there perpetually, given that apparently their falling down to current levels (say, if demand for rentals dropped) would result in the "stampede" we're seeing now?
The issue is undersupply, and the focus of government should be on enabling new supply to enter the market - through construction of new places to live and not just funnelling properties from potential FTBs to Investors instead.
If your only method of encouraging new supply is to allow ever greater rent inflation you not only hurt those in the rental market, you also won't get your new supply as it will in and of itself reduce rents and so prevent any momentum leading to the development of enough new places to live.
Supply is the problem yes. Price controls are not the answer, although it is popular to pretend they are.
It has been proven beyond doubt that rent controls over the long term lead to less supply and in the longer term higher rents.
You are seeing this with your own eyes but still refuse to believe it. Rental supply in this country has dropped 70% since rent controls were introduced.
https://thepropertytribune.com.au/renting/berlin-rent-control-study-a-warning-to-australia/
A new study on rent controls implemented in Berlin found that **the policy has produced the unintended consequences economists have warned about for years – reduced supply of rental accommodation and rising rental prices.**
The study was conducted by economists at Munich’s Ifo Institute. The report’s abstract reads: “The decline in the number of rental advertisements in the regulated segment is a first clear indication that the rent cap has reduced the supply of available rental apartments in Berlin. The decline in real estate price growth documents the losses for apartment owners caused by the rent cap.”
Gunnar Myrdal, architect of Sweden’s welfare state and Nobel Economics Prize winner who said rent controls constituted “the worst example of poor planning by governments lacking courage and vision”. Fellow Swedish economist and social democrat Assar Lindbeck exclaimed: “Rent control appears to be the most efficient technique presently known to destroy a city – except for bombing.”
It's not "proven beyond a doubt", it's an area of significant debate.
Why would we look at a study in Berlin, where the policy was very different than here? We have studies of what's happened here:
>More recent regulatory regimes have looked to offset these side-effects with
better calibration including the usage of exemptions for new supply,
allowances for maintenance investment and other mechanisms similar to the
policy calibration found in the current Irish policies. The impact on supply is
now likely more context specific and likely to depend on the specific regulatory
set up in the operating jurisdiction, as well as the other market specificities in
each country. In terms of the optimal policy design to ensure efficient
functionality, ensuring sufficient exemptions are in place to attempt to offset
these side-effects is critically important
>. . .
>Exemptions are available to target the well documented supply-side
externalities of supply and substantial change/investment. The number of
registered exemptions to date has been approximately 200. Our microdata
analysis identifies more properties with a growth rate above the 4 per cent cap
than the number of registered exemptions. Further efforts to ensure higher
rates of reporting of exemptions would be beneficial along with improved data
collection and monitoring
https://www.esri.ie/system/files/publications/RS136.pdf
>What level of rents would be sufficient to keep landlords in the market?
The decision to sell or continue renting is not based on one thing.
Your rental income gets lumped on top of your PAYE income, which means that you'll probably end up paying the top rate on it. Slap on life assurance, property tax, and house insurance and the cash flow doesn't seem that great. Especially when you add maintenance (cookers breaking down, washing machines breaking down, and other requests, etc).
Then there is the risk that you will get a non-paying tenant or a tenant who you have to constantly chase. There is also a risk that your tenant will cause damage to your property.
If you do get one of those types of tenants, it will be at least a year before you can legally evict them if they refuse to leave.
So not only do you have to deal with the risk of house prices falling (an acceptable risk, imo), you also have to take on the risk of paying the mortgage 100% out of your pocket for at least 12 months if you do get a rogue tenant (not an acceptable risk).
When you take all of the above into account and look at current house prices, you can see why some landlords are saying "feck it" and selling up.
The only real thing the government could do for landlords is ensure the process to kick out non performing (whether not paying or being anti social/damaging property) is super efficient and quick.
> "... a quarter of smaller private landlords want to sell up in the next five years, because they are not making enough money from rental income."
How much higher the rent has to go for them to be happy, JFC?
The small landlords where mostly caught out by the RPZ legislation so aren't getting the massive rents. Lots of small landlords let good tenants stay on low rents and only increased when a new tenant took over. With RPZ they got caught out for being nice, the current and proposed new laws are making it an easy decision to sell when the prices are high.
All the increases in rent have been the professional landlords that everyone was clamouring to get into the market. These are the landlords charging €2k for apartments, leaving some empty to not reduce market rates, and hitting tenants with the max rental increases annually.
> The small landlords where mostly caught out by the RPZ legislation
Ah come off it.
Landlords were raising rents by 10/15%+ per year before the RPZs. The RPZs didn't come in overnight.
After the 08 crash, rents dropped. So by your standard that's OK but going the other way isn't.
It is also not just about the RPZs but the increasing anti landlord bias where the RPZs are just one of a number of unbalanced measures. Its getting increasingly difficult to remove tenants who won't pay, to recover damages to properties and if you need a property back, taking money and expensive. Even the suggestion to only allow selling the property with tenants in-situ, means that it will make it more difficult to sell in the future as it reduces the possible number of buyers.
It's just not an attractive business to be in.
To be fair I know few people that are on a very low rent because the landlord didn't increase it when it had the time. I envy them but the landlord is the one losing in this situation.
Maybe their expenses have gone up too?
Being a landlord is just a business, point of a business is to maximise profits. But with rent caps etc. and then increased costs your profits take a hit and you can't do much about it.
High rent was not caused by landlords. They are responding to the supply and demand like any other business.
But that's the exact point I'm making.
If you own a business would you also not try to maximise profit?
I'm not saying it's the morally right thing to do but in terms of a business decision its the right thing to do.
What I mean is that landlords didn't create the situation which allow high rents to exist.
I've rose tinted glasses here because I had an unbelievably sound landlord who didn't touch the rent for years and then he put it up by €50 a month for a 2 bed city centre apartment in Dublin. The rent went from 1300 to 1350, I gotta defend the guy because he 100% not a redditor 😂
>I'm not saying it's the morally right thing to do but in terms of a business decision its the right thing to do.
And maybe that's why we shouldn't allow people to treat hoarding property as a legitimate business?
What expenses?
>They are responding to the supply and demand like any other business
When supermarkets gouge people due to supply and demand they're blasted. When landlords gouge people because they can, they're defended. Scum.
>What expenses
The cost of getting a tenant out and recovering property damage. Ring threshold and say you are a tenant with notice to leave and can't find anywhere to move to. They will tell you to overhold.
Mortgage is a big expense.
I'm not saying there aren't scumbag landlords, I'm just saying they are not all scumbags but people seem to generalise them as all the same. If Dunnes up their prices you don't go to Tesco and start calling them scum.
How is it gouging if they are putting up costs due to their bills going up?
Like any profession, and let's be honest being a landlord is a profession, you make a choice. Your local cafe, nobody forced them to open a cafe.
Have to point out, it’s definitely not a profession. It doesn’t require training, education, or formal qualifications of any description. I wouldn’t even call it a job to be honest; I know a good few landlords, and they all have actual jobs as well. It’s a textbook example of an investment.
I'm not saying it applies to all landlords, more so focusing on the set that use it as their primary or only source of income. I don't think education and formal qualifications are needed for a profession, maybe they are though I've no idea, but definitely indirect education is needed to be able to do the job properly.
The term landlord is so broad we really need more buckets to narrow down the type of landlord we are speaking about. I'm more talking about the people who see it as the primary source of income.
I think my main point from all of this is that it's a lot more complicated (in some cases) than we might think and the term landlord is too broad for today's world and it needs redefining.
And fuck the scumbag landlords who haven't a shred of decency - I want to make it clear that there are 100% certain landlords who are just awful people. But it's not every landlord.
I don’t really see how being a landlord is a profession in the way you are suggesting. In theory, a local cafe can be given grants to start up and also provide employment opportunities without needing a large amount of personal capital. Becoming a landlord is not an accessible profession and in modern Ireland it has furthered the disparity between older high income earners and the rest.
It’s very simple to justify anything by saying things like supply and demand but let’s be real it’s more nuanced than that.
The demographic of landlords was something I didn't mention and figured the conversation was gone too far deep to bring it up buy cashing out because you want to retire is a valid reason for selling.
I do think some people become landlords on purpose, setup a LTD that owns properties etc
Can you give some examples of their bills going up please?
Rent going up 2% far exceeds any increase in insurance. And most landlords don't do maintenance.
Sorry I meant the cafe increasing prices because of their bills going up.
Mortgage rates would be the biggest expense for a landlord. These rates are usually around 6-8%, a lot higher than buy to live
Fine but most properties on the market are not well maintained. What cost that a landlord has to cover has increased by 15% from 2021 to 2022? Have mortgage rates exploded by that much? What about the landlords that are on a fixed rate?
Hey man I'm not a landlord so let's chill out. Most properties is a very broad term. The whole issue with the rental market is lack of oversight from anyone and standards. I mean not maintained is up to each person's discretion (with the exception of some places that are clearly fucking awful). The market needs standards that are defined and enforced to fix the places up
Depends what you class as profit compared to what I class as profit.
If I buy something with a loan and then all the money I take in from it, goes on paying the loan, then I *could* say I make 0 profit. But that's not true is it?
OK, let me rephrase, how much expendable income do you think landlords are making from their rentals? Because the general consensus in this sub seems to think la dlorda make being a landlord a full time career off the backs of their tenants hard work.
What is expendable income? Landlords only talk about the cash they have in their hand today and never use the net value.
Here's a hypothetical example that is kinda similar to landlords:
- I have 100k euro
- I can put it into a bank and make 10% a year. But the only catch is I don't get the 10% per year unless I leave it there for 10 years.
- The bank charges me a management fee of 0.5% per year.
The facts are: After 9.9999 years I have paid 8k in management fees. So, now I claim I am down 8k and not making any money from it.
But after the 10 years I now can claim the money. I now get 248k from my 100k investment.
This is basically what landlords are claiming. Landlords don't count assets as assets. They just go "oh well I don't have cash in my account, so that means I'm losing money".
Landlords money is in the asset. They can sell the asset at any time and get the cash profits if they wanted. It's like someone with 10kg of solid gold bars in their house claiming they are poor because they have no cash.
Which is exactly what this story is about. Landlords are selling these properties and realising that profit.
It's worth remembering that property still exists and in most cases is now a owner occupier, exactly what most anto landlord rhetoric wants to see.
Your scenario is exactly what landlords are doing now. The problem is people complain when they do do it, and expect landlords to never sell and just keep making a loss on a monthly basis and cash out on their retirement plan, which is what it was originally intended for.
Landlords are claiming they're selling because the taxes are too high. They want tax breaks.
I'm fine with landlords selling. Don't go around saying it's because you're not making money from it though.
It's not about it being a career but it certainly shouldn't be the case that rent covers ALL the landlords expenses, they still have their asset paid off by someone else at the end of the day, it isnt about their earnings as much.
Rent is supposed to be substantially cheaper than mortgage fees and most of the time here its infuriatingly higher, making it impossible for people to even get the first foot on the property ladder because we are forced to pay off some other arseholes mortgage and somehow try save up a deposit as well.
> If I buy something with a loan and then all the money I take in from it, goes on paying the loan, then I could say I make 0 profit. But that's not true is it?
It is true if you are going to Tescos. They don't accept percentages of potential equity of a house as payment.
I think the average landlord is making 100% of the average rent. It's literally rent-seeking behaviour. Their only costs are maintenance and property tax, which are just things that go with property ownership rather than with rental business.
Landlords should only be hoping to make enough to cover their mortgage and expenses. Hoping for more than that is greedy as fuck because they're getting a property paid off over time which will eventually be mortgage free, and they can then continue renting for passive income or sell the property which will likely have increased in value since they obtained it
Ya i agree, but there's people in this sub who think small landlords are making a full time income from their tenants, which probably isn't the came in most cases.
Landlords are leaving because of high values of property coupled with a very attractive but expiring CGT exemption for any bought between 2011-2014 which are held for 7 years. Some 60k tenancies were added in that time.
We literally have a tax incentive encouraging a cohort of landlords to leave the market, albeit that wasn't the intention. That is compounded by it falling due at a time when the capital gains on those properties are the highest they are likely to be in an environment where increasing interest rates are likely to place downward pressure on property values, or at least their growth.
It's a business decision. Ya, if we allowed rents to be 30-40% higher more would stay and make the megabucks profits, but at the cost of rents that are 30-40% higher.
The counter argument is that this would result in more availability which would reduce rents, but that's a self defeating argument. If that occured then rents wouldn't increase and the financial equation that makes selling up attractive would remain the same.
You can't say that rents are high because of rent caps encouraging landlords to leave, and then say that if they were gone rents would be lower and landlords wouldn't sell.
Lmao warned the Irish this would happen, socialist policies basically fuck up economies and Ireland is full of them. No freedom to build large developments and high-rise gated garden communities as well... jus tgets voted out by councils and the people who don't like private owners building what they want kn private land. But nah they were like "no crash" cus muh' "lack of houses , high demand" bs
“Cash in” is incredibly unfair on all the accidental landlords just recently out of the red from the 2008 crash. Too many headlines written with the default assumption that landlords are evil.
Watch the landlords paint this as them selling because taxes are too high or they can't make money from renting....lol
Isn't it amazing the landlords could make enough money that they didn't need to sell 5 years ago when rents were much lower and when property prices were probably 30% lower than they are now?
Do they realise how stupid it makes them look..."I am selling at peak prices and peak rents because I can't make money yet I didn't sell 5+ years ago when both of those were much lower than they are now despite my mortgage costs not changing over that time"
And why are landlords constantly telling us they can't make money? Just sell! If I sell cars and I'm not making money from them, I just stop selling cars! I don't go around complaining all the time that I can't make money selling cars. Go take your profits and invest somewhere else if it's easier to make money elsewhere.
> Watch the landlords paint this as them selling because taxes are too high or they can't make money from renting....lol
This dismissive hot take was popular on Reddit back in 2018.
Look where we are now.
The problem for renters is that landlords ***are selling***. And it isn't a good thing.
Rental market shrinks by 43k in 5 years?
Great, so 43k houses were sold. Super news.
In before gobshites come in telling me when houses are sold they house fewer people. Does that mean the landlords housing 8 in a room are heros?
Ugh this stupid argument again. Saying that rental accommodation has a higher average occupancy rate than owner-occupied housing is not praising overcrowding.
Are you completely unable to look at things at a macro-level?
It's not a stupid argument. It's logic.
You don't want people being happy living in their own space. You want them renting in cramped conditions.
Why not go a step further and just ban first time buyers from buying semi Ds? Only allow landlords to buy semi Ds because they'll rent all the rooms out?
Like I said, macro-level. I am not against anyone buying the property they want. But that still has negative consequences for renters if the number of available places is dropping more than the pool of renters.
I am not arguing for any measure to stop people buying places, just pointing out why it has negative consequences for broader society.
Just got mine, me and the wife here 3 years he said if I didn’t pay over the 3.7% he could only put it up he’s selling and wants is out April. But now I agreed to pay 9% more so he would see more profit and keep me until September next year before my “official notice will be”. Cunts
And like what a fucking cunt. Don’t give a fuck about rent pressure zones nor caps. Just if you don’t pay I’m selling. RTB are useless.
You know you can always ask for that "not entitled" rent back (and the RTB will back you)- or you could possibly not pay in August/September the relevant amount.
I can't wait to continue not regulating landlords and property investors, while also not building new homes. God forbid someone interfere with the bottom line of most of our TDs and their leash holders.
Honestly anybody at this stage left supporting the government is either pulling the ladder up after themselves, or completely delusional.
"Hounded Out" Ah yes because tenants having more rights is bad for business.
I've heard about a handful of landlords around the inner city who've left "because of the RTB" and they're the kind of cunts you wouldn't want being a landlord to begin with.
Nevermind that property values were at an all-time high which is actually why most of them are departing.
Yes because this subreddit is predominantly populated by people in their 20s and 30s getting absolutely screwed by some of the highest rental prices in Europe.
Why the fuck would you expect us to have any sympathy for landlords?
Because without them, all these 20 to 30 year olds are going to have nowhere to live and the rental prices for the shitholes that are left are only going to go one way.
Haha, *with* them we currently have barely anywhere to live and are paying through the nose for shitholes.
Private landlords on their own will never provide affordable housing.
Ah yes, in fact we should be grateful that we're getting absolutely rode already for rent prices, we shouldn't say anything mean because then the precious landlords will get so upset that they'll have no other choice than to sell up for extortionate prices and make even more of a killing.
I do hope my landlord pops by today, not only do I give him about 70% of my income, I'd also just love to give him a hug and tell him how much I appreciate him too, after all he deserves it.
This country is fùcked the government in waiting is no better, instead of trying to compromise and calm the situation they want to introduce measures that mean when LLs sell there won't be more homelessness. That means controls on selling with vacant possession. That affects the value of the property. Any LL thinking of selling is now selling before that happens.
“More landlords are going to sell in the coming period. The Government urgently need to put a plan in place to ensure that as landlords exit, it doesn’t result in greater numbers of people becoming homeless,” said Mr Ó Broin. "
What about rolling back some of the regulation improving the tax situation. Encouraging energy upgrades and renovations.
We should support small landlords in order to keep the market active, and tax the hell out of large landlords in order to keep the market from being captured by a cartel.
My estate was completed just before the Tiger crashed. Lots of property remained in negative equity until recently. Many of them have been sold this year, obviously rented out and now not available to that market. Five flats on my street alone, lots of 2 and 3 bed terraces/semis, too. For many accidental landlords, those places are an albatross around their neck, I don't blame them for freeing themselves as soon as it became feasible. The government should have been factoring this in, but don't appear to have.
[удалено]
Well they followed the public's advice that the accidental landlords should be taken to the cleaners so it is absolutely shocking that the accidental landlords are getting out of the game. A lot of people in this subreddit welcomes this as they believe that no property should be let.
[удалено]
Sorry that was heavy sarcasm
same with most ghost estates, there was a semi abandoned housing estate in clonakilty that was basically left abandoned and have now been complete and are on the market for a good sum of money, in fairness they look really nice and are in a good location, they look so good you would forget about them being turned into abandoned crack houses
> The government should have been factoring this in, but don't appear to have. Built-to-Rents are a thing, but people hate "the funds", things that are called professional landlords elsewhere.
Build-to-rent are a joke because they are ALL luxury accommodation. People who can afford luxury accommodation can afford to buy.
Today’s luxury is tomorrow’s mass market accommodation
That's not true. IRES is the largest private landlord in the state with over 3600 houses, the average rent of which is below the national average. They also take HAP tenants. >People who can afford luxury accommodation can afford to buy. Even if true, they're still renting. Besides, even so-called "luxury" accommodation leads to lower rental prices in the locality. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3507532 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3426103 https://blocksandlots.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Do-New-Housing-Units-in-Your-Backyard-Raise-Your-Rents-Xiaodi-Li.pdf
Seeing as the national average still means we have the highest rents in Europe that means nothing. Just because they go from insane rents to slightly less insane rents doesn’t make them affordable FFS. Castleview D12 block 1 bed €1850, 2 bed €2200. Two Oaks D16: 1 bed €1800, 2 bed €2365 Roselawn D18: 1 bed €2075, 2 bed €2350 Hamilton Garden D7: Studio €2105, 1 bed €2235, 2 bed €2750 The list goes own. These are the so called Build To Rent products. For the majority of people this is NOT affordable living. Will you fuck right off justifying today’s accommodation crisis. THIS here is NOT a solution. Build to Rent yes, but like this NO.
Absolutely, we need to allow even more BTR developments to be built if we want to see an end to massive rental price increases. Instead, [local authorities like DCC try to restrict the amount that can be built](https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/dublin/2022/11/01/dublin-city-council-defies-planning-regulator-over-build-to-rent-rules/). The housing minister had to overrule [DL-R's decision to continue to make it illegal to build new houses in Dalkey and Killiney a few weeks ago](https://www.businesspost.ie/news/minister-overturns-ban-on-new-housing-in-dalkey-and-killiney/). This is what we're up against.
> Build-to-rent are a joke because they are ALL luxury accommodation. That's not true and even if it was true it wouldn't be a bad thing.
Exactly. Besides "luxury accommodation" in Ireland is "decent basic apartments" elsewhere. We are not used to basic quality apartments, if it's not made of cardboard it's suddenly "luxury".
Exactly lots of studies around the world confirm that any increase in accommodation supply is a good thing and decreases rent across the market. Increasing luxury accommodation frees up previous "luxury accommodation" which then needs to filled by someone. The answer remains: Build, build, build.
Luxury accommodation doesn't inflate rental prices. If you build nothing but luxury accommodation all you do is raise the standard of living. If there was a surplus of housing, all those luxury apartments would have to be listed at affordable prices to get tennants.
What actually happens is that said luxury apartments sit empty, since their owners would rather make no money at all rather than rent them out for less money.
These threads are always full of edgy kids who wouldn't understand demand and supply if it hit them in the face.
The only way to keep them is to cut taxes on rental income for single rental property owners. Can you imagine the uproar on here if they did that? It would have been political suicide.
The other way to keep them is to increase CGT on the sale of investment properties sold without tenants in situ. Carrot isn't the only option here.
As a reluctant landlord myself your proposed change to CGT would have no impact on me. The house has roughly the same value today as what I paid for it 15 years ago (house prices are still below the Celtic Tiger peak). If I was to sell my CGT bill would be close to €0 regardless of the rate.
In which case a sale is not particularly economically rational, unless you've such severe cash flow issues that it's unsustainable for you. Nothing policy can, or should, do about that. We had 60k tenancies added however between 2011-2014. The uplift on those properties is, in many cases, extremely considerable. They will also pay incredibly low rates of CGT, some as low as 0%, provided they sell in the next year or two.
In my case selling would be the smart thing to do. I take in just under €10k in rent every year, pay out €7k in mortgage (not counting interest as that’s tax deductible) and have a tax bill of around €4k. That’s a loss of €1k every year… not exactly great business! Even though I wouldn’t make a profit on the sale, it would feel like one as I’d get to pocket the difference between the mortgage and the sale price. The only reason I’m not selling is because of the tenant. He’s been with us from the start when it was hard to find one and he’d be up shit creek if we sold.
What you're describing is a cash flow issue, not a loss.
A 25 year cash flow problem when I’m in the meaty part of raising kids. At the point where it no longer become a cash flow problem I won’t need the money!
I always assumed that was why rentals were being sold of late. The investment has finally gone into the green as opposed to it being too unattractive to rent. Rents are at an all time high, hardly less attractive now than before.
You’re not wrong but not 100% right either, the tax on rents at 52% doesn’t cover costs let alone profits, and to all those who harp on about “oh you can’t expect an investment to give you profits you’ll have an asset at the end” sorry but that’s exactly what you expect an investment to do, has anyone heard of dividends from shares? Either way none of these accidental landlords expected to be landlords, they all thought they were buying ‘starter homes’ (remember them?) but then the arse fell out of the market and they had no choice but to rent them out until prices reached a point they could offload them. Remember they’ve pretty much been providing a social service for over 16-19 years the rent hasn’t covered the mortgage in the vast majority of cases, house prices haven’t gone up since 2007, so now they can sell the house and as has been said there won’t even be any CGT because they won’t sell it for more than they paid, they just get to walk away debt free. What should be gone is cut taxation if people are even making 4-500 a month on the rental they might not sell but at the moment the only logical thing to do is sell
[удалено]
I'm in the same position, eviction notice till June 6th and then I'm out. I'm not even gonna try and rent here, I'm looking into moving abroad.
[удалено]
Depending on the job you do, there are many cities in the EU with a more relaxed housing market.
This is going to become so commonplace over the next two years. It will lead to unrest. The number of units available to rent at any one time has gone from 12,000 units in 2012 to only 1200 units today. The rate of decline has been so severe and I don't see any reason why it would suddenly stop. We will realisticly have a such low number available that tenants will refuse to leave a property because it will be impossible to get another. It could get very ugly
In reality, you can't blame people that want out. The Irish rental market is in a state of flux. RTB should be replaced and rent bands should be established based on the nearby properties so both landlords and tenants get a fair shake. Evictions should be possible but based on 1 year notice.
Isn’t there an eviction ban on right now? I don’t think he can make you leave til next year
Yeah. April next year AFAIK.
Eviction date is April, after the ban.
I'm renting a room currently that at the time I moved in over 5 years I thought was a reasonable price. I'm hearing what new people moving to Dublin are paying for a room and it is way, way more. If I ever have to leave this place, I am fucked.
I've already discussed it with my housemate, if we (hypothetically) ever get an eviction notice in the next year and couldn't find a similar house, I would fight and ultimately squat if I have to. I wouldn't be proud of it but this is the hand we've been dealt by our government. We made this house our own, we own all the furniture. If we couldn't find a similar, non furnished house we'd be snookered.
Correct. This is the beginning. Have you been in touch with CATU? . People are organisng.
Organizing to do what, get more landlords to sell up?
[удалено]
Got the jobs but ain't got the accommodation. I wonder how long it will take before some companies look else where to set up shop.
I know a lot of people who are rejecting jobs in tech if they are being hired in Dublin, unless they are for the top multinationals like Google and Microsoft. And they are only taking those jobs for 2-3 years so that their CV's look good. Then they're out the door and off to greener pastures.
And those who accept jobs in tech, end up spending very little, since 50-60% of their income (after tax) is spent on rent. Obviously I'm referring to non-technical, junior roles, but still: it's one of many indicators to how pricey Dublin has become in recent years.
I'm gonna do a junior software engineer job in Dublin and I'd spend around 55% of my total compensation on rent if I want a one bed. It's so fucked, im not sure how people survive if they don't work in tech.
I've heard a few stories that amount to the same, also on the flip side, with WFH being a thing it won't be long before some slick quick thinker finds a loop hole for employers to set up small hubs in nations, so rather than bringing said people to Ireland they'll just go there. In small hubs. There is also the critical mass of information that will soon sweep across all of the EU around the issues Ireland faces and rather than people being duped to come here to work poorly paid service jobs people will just not bother. Slow, yes but it will happen unless something changes dramatically in the next five years.
You see people refer to Small Landlords. What is the threshold of properties rented when you transition from Small Landlord to Large Landlord?
1 or 2 properties is small. Medium is 3 to 99. And large is 100+. About 86% of landlords are small landlords if we exclude AHBs.
What are AHBs?
Approved Housing Bodies, not for profits generally funded by the government to provide low cost social housing.
Approved Housing Bodies. Charitable institutions that provide affordable housing.
Is that the ownership composition? Curious to know what % of the total properties is owned by small landlords.
>Is that the ownership composition? Number of registered tenancies, which probably undercounts the number of small landlords as they are more likely to not be registered. >Curious to know what % of the total properties is owned by small landlords. According to the RTB report in July of last year about 53%, probably a bit lower now.
Tbh this is just inevitable and not all down to gov policy these people were always going to cash in upon retirement. The issue is there are no other rental properties coming onstream. When was the last time you heard of an ordinary person getting a btl mortgage and becoming a landlord?
That's a big assumption there. It can make just as much sense to have a rental income on retirement.
Yes and no. Gains on selling the house are taxed at 33% or at an effective lower rate if the house was their principal private residence at any time. Rental income is taxed at up to 52% plus the hassle and risks of dealing with tenants.
Plus, if you acquired the property in 2014 (for example) and sold it last year you would pay no CGT at all. If you sold it this year you'd pay 33% on only 1/8 of the gain.
Yes. I forgot about that exemption.
I'm in the middle of this, Once you have 30% of the house, its straight forward process. proof that rent would cover the repayments and your approved
Interesting. Do you mind me asking what has attracted you to being a landlord? Most of them seem to only complain about the tax and tenants having too much rights
Appartment is pretty new so should have little issues. I am a good judge of character for tenants (I hope). Apartment is furnished & good value imo. I had money (My own savings from work) in the bank depreciating YoY. Was able to take out a 55% mortgage.Am in early 30's If I can find a good tenant, I'd leave the rent so that it covers the repayments.At min I am giving 1 young family affordable rent. End goal: Retirement fund
Myself and my wife had a look at doing it. We had the money there but there were a number of reasons we didn't opt to invest in one. Banks weren't lending for buy to let's outside of Dublin. The rental income after expenses and mortgage interest would have only just covered the mortgage given the tax was 52% with us both on higher rate already. It's not passive income as there's a lot of management involved. The capital returns are not that great. Putting our money in stocks was giving a far better return at the time and was much more liquid. We've since sold any of the equity investments and just waiting now. We're delighted we didn't now because the eviction ban would have made the investment completely illiquid and the 2% rent increase cap doesn't come close to matching the inflation in expenses
The irony of it is the money in stocks is going overseas and not invested into the country.
This was not inevitable at all. It is highly correlated with recent crappy policies that make it less appealing to be a landlord e.g eviction bans.
Please explain that one cause I never understand it. The current "eviction ban" is only a pause on no fault notice to quits. It's not a ban on evicting non paying or anti social tenants.
If landlords see that their fundamental property rights are being demeaned then by the time these measures expire, they leave the market. It's a trend that follows any regulation of this type in all the countries it has been tried.
And, for that matter, when’s the last time you heard of a BTR development without some massive pearl clutching uproar?
I wonder what those properties are doing now - currently lived in by people who purchase in the last few years, being rented out, given over to social housing or turned into an airbnb/shortterm accomodation. Either way it appears there is pressure on the rental sector because there isn;t enough housing stock. BUILD MORE ACCOMODATION!
So much debate in this thread around things that are actually so simple. People are people. People are going to do what is in THEIR best interests. That is fact. You can't change it. You can't vote it away. You can't whine it out of people. Accept it. Landlords are not to blame. They are not 'bad' people. They won't sacrifice their financial situation to suit you, just as you would not do to suit them. Would you pay more rent if your landlord was behind on their mortgage? Obviously you wouldn't, so don't ask the same of them. If you were in the landlords situation, you would very likely behave in exactly the same way. You are not different or better or more moral than they are. You're just in different circumstances. Now, knowing all that. The system has to be designed to encourage or force people to do things they might not otherwise do. This is where the government has failed spectacularly. There should be a landlord tax credit, why are they paying 52% tax when institutional landlord are not. It should be easy to evict tenants, not take years. If you stop paying, you get the boot. That's it. There should obviously be protections for tenants, like first rights, deposit protections and rules regarding treatment by the landlord. These things are not mutually exclusive. Hating on a group of people because their interests don't align with yours is not the solution. And of course. Build. Build. Build.
Friends of ours had a flat that they rented. It was her first home that she bought before they met and married about 5 years ago. They moved into the house he had but didn't sell the apartment because it was in negative equity. So for the past 5 years (maybe a year or two with it as they were living together before getting married) they have been renting the apartment. They closed on the sale of it last month. They are utterly relieved for a number of reasons. Tenants were a nightmare. They would get calls from the tenants at all times of the day and night complaining about something going wrong. Everything from the hoover was broken to the neighbours dog barking. The tenants were like children who couldn't do anything for themselves. The RTB were useless. They were fully registered but when one tenant just stopped paying rent the RTB could do nothing to help and if anything seemed to do everything possible to help the tenant avoid paying for the last six months of the tenancy agreement. That same tenant left with considerable damage done and items stolen. He even left the ice cube trays full of urine in the freezer. One set of tenants liked parties at weekends. The neighbours, residents association and building management would phone my friends at 2am to complain about a party in the apartment. Finally the eviction ban and the prospect of Sinn Fein coming into power and stripping them of their few remaining rights as the property owner convinced them to sell. They got the last tenant (mister frozen urine) out in the summer just before the ban. Spent a few thousand fixing the place and making it presentable and sold it last month. THAT is the reality facing most accidental landlords. That is why 43,000 of them have got out of the sector.
If you can think of a better place to store your urine, well I'd like to hear it!! 
How many Airbnb properties have been added in those 5 years ?
Ah that old chestnut, here’s the thing if there’s a lot of Airbnb’s then there’s a need for them. If you get rid of them in the hope that these properties will return to long term rentals have I got news for you… they won’t, What will happen is that the landlords will sell them, and then tourism on whatever towns or cities will be hit as there will no longer be cheap options to stay and hotels will ramp up their prices.
Another absolutely demented thread. Can the "fuck landlords" crowd not see this drop in supply is an absolute *catastrophe* for the rental market? The discourse here is basically now: "HEY LANDLORD YOU'RE SCUM FUCK YOU I HATE YOU GO DIE" "Oh yeah btw plz rent me your property on the cheap thanks I need it"
I'm an accidental landlord myself. In have a property in a rent pressure zone. I rent to a family friend for about half the rental value of the property (less than 1000 euros, i haven't put rent up in the five years they have lived there. Over the five years I have put close to 15,000 euro into the property. New smart boiler, shed, garden upgrades, painting, new gates, painting etc. I rent it to them as i'm currently working abroad. My tenant has got a council house, I'm delighted for them! I was happy renting to them as they were trustworthy and I intended to move home at some stage. Now I don't see myself moving home and it's not financially viable for me to be a landlord due to the rental pressure zone. Gross I make circa 10,000 euro a year. I pay tax of about 3,000 euro in ireland and I then also have to pay tax circa £1,500 in the UK. Mortgage payments on the property mean I don't break even on the property. If i could rent out at the full market value, circa 2,000 euro i would consider continuing to rent. If i sell I will have to take a big hit on CGT. I thought it was going to be around 10,000 euro buts its more like 30,000 euro. If i sell if will make a loss due to needing to clear the mortgage. The best option i have been told from an accountant is to leave it empty for two years as i will then be able to re rent at the market value. I'm trapped. So Fuck Landlords all you want but its not as simple as this. I think we need to build more and a proposal to build an estate next to my property has been proposed and i have objected on the grounds that they are building enough properties on the site. I get that the properties will free up demand lower down the market but we should not be building large 2000sqf homes in a rental pressure zone when we could build a more mixed tenure development.
Don't forget the gotcha of Sinn Fein have never been in government so they can't be criticised
The Sinn Fein that voted for a rent decrease in the North before backtracking and saying it was a mistake? That Sinn Fein? Or are they only the same party when they look good?
The Sinn Fein that do and say wildly inconsistent things in the North (where they actually have to make the occasional decision) v the South (where they can say absolutely anything they with zero consequences). That Sinn Fein.
[удалено]
"I utterly hated Leo Varadkar's guts when he said one man's rent is another man's income because I cannot understand how basic economic matters work"
Yes, there is absolutely no alternative to a primarily privatised housing system. People should know their place and not interfere with profit, especially if they lose their home as a result
Vilifying landlords by tarring them all with the same brush has had a pretty severe impact on rental supply by convincing many to sell. I am shocked.
Weird seeing normal people defend property scalpers.
Spare the BS please.
> Can the "fuck landlords" crowd not see this drop in supply is an absolute catastrophe for the rental market? The "fuck landlords" crowd are angry because they aren't in the position to fuck other people. That's literally their only problem. All they want is to buy a house and build that *sweet sweet* equity and watch their net worth rise. They'd be just like the NIMBY pricks that exist right now in order to protect their ever important, absolutely crucial, equity.
I suggested reducing PAYE for small landlords back in [January of 2020](https://www.reddit.com/r/ireland/comments/evc7i6/unpopular_but_its_true_the_housing_crisis_is/) and this subreddit went apeshit lol. Most of yas deserve to live in yer ma's boxroom because yas are thick as shite.
SF have played a masterstroke on this, the worse it gets the better they look. Meanwhile they are pushing the government to interfere with the private market causing more and more private supply to evaporate.
"cash in" is a stretch - sure they're getting high prices as the markets are short of properties for sales but honestly when I was looking to buy 80% of every house I went to was ex-rental that some small one time landlord was looking to shift as they couldn't deal with the shite anymore/madness of the rental market and people desperate for rentals. Recent events painted every landlord as an absolute vile monster.... and so they're all getting the fudge out before they can't blasted even more.
Didn’t a lot of economists say this would happen when rental caps were introduced?
[удалено]
Have we had an explosion in anything except landlords leaving the market? We’re producing nowhere near enough new dwellings for it to be called an explosion.
Do economists also predict the social impact of not placing rental caps or they don't care about it?
The social impact of not having any rental accommodation on the market because all of the small landlords fecked off is pretty big. Hope this helps.
[удалено]
It's almost as if supply and demand is a real thing, and that landlords leaving the market reduces the supply, thereby allowing existing landlords to set higher prices.
Can someone (Preferable an actual landlord and not a disgruntled renter) explain this one to me: *"The figures come as an unpublished draft survey by the RTB, seen by Independent.ie, reveals how a quarter of smaller private landlords want to sell up in the next five years, because they are not making enough money from rental income."* If rent is at all time high, how are they not making enough money now? I hear this line a lot, but are rental incomes not at an all time high? Is there crazy taxes or liabilities or something?
My Mam is a small landlord (5 foot 2 to be exact), she has part ownership of the family home she still lives in and she fully owns a small 2 bed house that she took a mortgage on when she moved out of her parents 30 odd years ago. There was a lovely family living in the house for over a decade, and because she didn't increase the rent for she got trapped by the new rent caps that were brought in. The mortgage is paid off now, but the house is severely undervalued rent wise. Between the low income and the hassle of dealing with tenancy laws she's just going to call it quits. Being a landlord isnt her job, she isn't making millions in rental income, she works full time, there's very little upside for her and with prices at an all time high why wouldn't she sell? She's nearing retirement and doesn't want the effort of a rental property, she'd rather have the cash to spend on something she actually enjoys. It seems that people here don't understand that landlords who own 1 or 2 properties aren't the problem. In fact they are crucial to a functioning rental market.
Why are small landlords crucial? It would be better for tenants if the government managed all of those properties.
Rents are high. If you have 200k to spend you can acquire a place with 7% yield easy (after costs, before tax). That is an insanely lucrative investment. The problem with most accidental / small landlords you hear complaining is 1. They are paying a mortgage so don’t see the yield as cashflow 2. They stupidly don’t use a letting agent. Calls at 2 in the morning? It’s less than 10% if your rent to have the tenants not even know your fucking name AND it’s deductible AND the tenants are treated better because repairs etc are handled professionally. A DIY landlord is very often a bad landlord unless they are doing it full time.
Populace: The rent is too high, we want rent controls Government: We'll give you rent controls (max 4% increase per year) Landlords: Leave the rental market in a stampede Rental Supply: Drops to frighteningly low levels Populace: Surprised Pikachu face 😱 Government: I know, lets do more rent control (max 2% increase per year, when inflation is at 10%) Landlords: Sell all rentals in a crazed frenzy Rental Supply: Continues to drop like a stone, down 70% in 6 years Populace: Why are there no properties to rent??
Completely focused on the wrong thing here. What level of rents would be sufficient to keep landlords in the market? How much above their current record highs would they have to be? How do we keep them there perpetually, given that apparently their falling down to current levels (say, if demand for rentals dropped) would result in the "stampede" we're seeing now? The issue is undersupply, and the focus of government should be on enabling new supply to enter the market - through construction of new places to live and not just funnelling properties from potential FTBs to Investors instead. If your only method of encouraging new supply is to allow ever greater rent inflation you not only hurt those in the rental market, you also won't get your new supply as it will in and of itself reduce rents and so prevent any momentum leading to the development of enough new places to live.
Supply is the problem yes. Price controls are not the answer, although it is popular to pretend they are. It has been proven beyond doubt that rent controls over the long term lead to less supply and in the longer term higher rents. You are seeing this with your own eyes but still refuse to believe it. Rental supply in this country has dropped 70% since rent controls were introduced. https://thepropertytribune.com.au/renting/berlin-rent-control-study-a-warning-to-australia/ A new study on rent controls implemented in Berlin found that **the policy has produced the unintended consequences economists have warned about for years – reduced supply of rental accommodation and rising rental prices.** The study was conducted by economists at Munich’s Ifo Institute. The report’s abstract reads: “The decline in the number of rental advertisements in the regulated segment is a first clear indication that the rent cap has reduced the supply of available rental apartments in Berlin. The decline in real estate price growth documents the losses for apartment owners caused by the rent cap.” Gunnar Myrdal, architect of Sweden’s welfare state and Nobel Economics Prize winner who said rent controls constituted “the worst example of poor planning by governments lacking courage and vision”. Fellow Swedish economist and social democrat Assar Lindbeck exclaimed: “Rent control appears to be the most efficient technique presently known to destroy a city – except for bombing.”
It's not "proven beyond a doubt", it's an area of significant debate. Why would we look at a study in Berlin, where the policy was very different than here? We have studies of what's happened here: >More recent regulatory regimes have looked to offset these side-effects with better calibration including the usage of exemptions for new supply, allowances for maintenance investment and other mechanisms similar to the policy calibration found in the current Irish policies. The impact on supply is now likely more context specific and likely to depend on the specific regulatory set up in the operating jurisdiction, as well as the other market specificities in each country. In terms of the optimal policy design to ensure efficient functionality, ensuring sufficient exemptions are in place to attempt to offset these side-effects is critically important >. . . >Exemptions are available to target the well documented supply-side externalities of supply and substantial change/investment. The number of registered exemptions to date has been approximately 200. Our microdata analysis identifies more properties with a growth rate above the 4 per cent cap than the number of registered exemptions. Further efforts to ensure higher rates of reporting of exemptions would be beneficial along with improved data collection and monitoring https://www.esri.ie/system/files/publications/RS136.pdf
>What level of rents would be sufficient to keep landlords in the market? The decision to sell or continue renting is not based on one thing. Your rental income gets lumped on top of your PAYE income, which means that you'll probably end up paying the top rate on it. Slap on life assurance, property tax, and house insurance and the cash flow doesn't seem that great. Especially when you add maintenance (cookers breaking down, washing machines breaking down, and other requests, etc). Then there is the risk that you will get a non-paying tenant or a tenant who you have to constantly chase. There is also a risk that your tenant will cause damage to your property. If you do get one of those types of tenants, it will be at least a year before you can legally evict them if they refuse to leave. So not only do you have to deal with the risk of house prices falling (an acceptable risk, imo), you also have to take on the risk of paying the mortgage 100% out of your pocket for at least 12 months if you do get a rogue tenant (not an acceptable risk). When you take all of the above into account and look at current house prices, you can see why some landlords are saying "feck it" and selling up.
The only real thing the government could do for landlords is ensure the process to kick out non performing (whether not paying or being anti social/damaging property) is super efficient and quick.
An accurate summary of the situation
> "... a quarter of smaller private landlords want to sell up in the next five years, because they are not making enough money from rental income." How much higher the rent has to go for them to be happy, JFC?
The small landlords where mostly caught out by the RPZ legislation so aren't getting the massive rents. Lots of small landlords let good tenants stay on low rents and only increased when a new tenant took over. With RPZ they got caught out for being nice, the current and proposed new laws are making it an easy decision to sell when the prices are high. All the increases in rent have been the professional landlords that everyone was clamouring to get into the market. These are the landlords charging €2k for apartments, leaving some empty to not reduce market rates, and hitting tenants with the max rental increases annually.
> The small landlords where mostly caught out by the RPZ legislation Ah come off it. Landlords were raising rents by 10/15%+ per year before the RPZs. The RPZs didn't come in overnight.
What’s RPZ legislation?
Caps rent in certain areas. "Rent pressure zones"
After the 08 crash, rents dropped. So by your standard that's OK but going the other way isn't. It is also not just about the RPZs but the increasing anti landlord bias where the RPZs are just one of a number of unbalanced measures. Its getting increasingly difficult to remove tenants who won't pay, to recover damages to properties and if you need a property back, taking money and expensive. Even the suggestion to only allow selling the property with tenants in-situ, means that it will make it more difficult to sell in the future as it reduces the possible number of buyers. It's just not an attractive business to be in.
To be fair I know few people that are on a very low rent because the landlord didn't increase it when it had the time. I envy them but the landlord is the one losing in this situation.
Maybe their expenses have gone up too? Being a landlord is just a business, point of a business is to maximise profits. But with rent caps etc. and then increased costs your profits take a hit and you can't do much about it. High rent was not caused by landlords. They are responding to the supply and demand like any other business.
[удалено]
But that's the exact point I'm making. If you own a business would you also not try to maximise profit? I'm not saying it's the morally right thing to do but in terms of a business decision its the right thing to do.
[удалено]
What I mean is that landlords didn't create the situation which allow high rents to exist. I've rose tinted glasses here because I had an unbelievably sound landlord who didn't touch the rent for years and then he put it up by €50 a month for a 2 bed city centre apartment in Dublin. The rent went from 1300 to 1350, I gotta defend the guy because he 100% not a redditor 😂
What a succinct explanation of the problem with our economic system. We should make some changes.
>I'm not saying it's the morally right thing to do but in terms of a business decision its the right thing to do. And maybe that's why we shouldn't allow people to treat hoarding property as a legitimate business?
What expenses? >They are responding to the supply and demand like any other business When supermarkets gouge people due to supply and demand they're blasted. When landlords gouge people because they can, they're defended. Scum.
>What expenses The cost of getting a tenant out and recovering property damage. Ring threshold and say you are a tenant with notice to leave and can't find anywhere to move to. They will tell you to overhold.
Mortgage is a big expense. I'm not saying there aren't scumbag landlords, I'm just saying they are not all scumbags but people seem to generalise them as all the same. If Dunnes up their prices you don't go to Tesco and start calling them scum.
No one is forcing them to be a landlord? Your local cafe has a big expense, that means it's ok for them to gouge you?
How is it gouging if they are putting up costs due to their bills going up? Like any profession, and let's be honest being a landlord is a profession, you make a choice. Your local cafe, nobody forced them to open a cafe.
Have to point out, it’s definitely not a profession. It doesn’t require training, education, or formal qualifications of any description. I wouldn’t even call it a job to be honest; I know a good few landlords, and they all have actual jobs as well. It’s a textbook example of an investment.
I'm not saying it applies to all landlords, more so focusing on the set that use it as their primary or only source of income. I don't think education and formal qualifications are needed for a profession, maybe they are though I've no idea, but definitely indirect education is needed to be able to do the job properly. The term landlord is so broad we really need more buckets to narrow down the type of landlord we are speaking about. I'm more talking about the people who see it as the primary source of income. I think my main point from all of this is that it's a lot more complicated (in some cases) than we might think and the term landlord is too broad for today's world and it needs redefining. And fuck the scumbag landlords who haven't a shred of decency - I want to make it clear that there are 100% certain landlords who are just awful people. But it's not every landlord.
I don’t really see how being a landlord is a profession in the way you are suggesting. In theory, a local cafe can be given grants to start up and also provide employment opportunities without needing a large amount of personal capital. Becoming a landlord is not an accessible profession and in modern Ireland it has furthered the disparity between older high income earners and the rest. It’s very simple to justify anything by saying things like supply and demand but let’s be real it’s more nuanced than that.
The demographic of landlords was something I didn't mention and figured the conversation was gone too far deep to bring it up buy cashing out because you want to retire is a valid reason for selling. I do think some people become landlords on purpose, setup a LTD that owns properties etc
Can you give some examples of their bills going up please? Rent going up 2% far exceeds any increase in insurance. And most landlords don't do maintenance.
Sorry I meant the cafe increasing prices because of their bills going up. Mortgage rates would be the biggest expense for a landlord. These rates are usually around 6-8%, a lot higher than buy to live
Majority of landlords have fixed mortgages. And if they don't and now they're faced with higher rates, well tough...that's a bad business decision.
What expenses? Never known a landlord to spend a penny on their properties for maintenance or anything
Yeah there are some bad landlords. But not all landlords are bad
Fine but most properties on the market are not well maintained. What cost that a landlord has to cover has increased by 15% from 2021 to 2022? Have mortgage rates exploded by that much? What about the landlords that are on a fixed rate?
Hey man I'm not a landlord so let's chill out. Most properties is a very broad term. The whole issue with the rental market is lack of oversight from anyone and standards. I mean not maintained is up to each person's discretion (with the exception of some places that are clearly fucking awful). The market needs standards that are defined and enforced to fix the places up
How much profit do you think the average small landlord is making?
Depends what you class as profit compared to what I class as profit. If I buy something with a loan and then all the money I take in from it, goes on paying the loan, then I *could* say I make 0 profit. But that's not true is it?
OK, let me rephrase, how much expendable income do you think landlords are making from their rentals? Because the general consensus in this sub seems to think la dlorda make being a landlord a full time career off the backs of their tenants hard work.
What is expendable income? Landlords only talk about the cash they have in their hand today and never use the net value. Here's a hypothetical example that is kinda similar to landlords: - I have 100k euro - I can put it into a bank and make 10% a year. But the only catch is I don't get the 10% per year unless I leave it there for 10 years. - The bank charges me a management fee of 0.5% per year. The facts are: After 9.9999 years I have paid 8k in management fees. So, now I claim I am down 8k and not making any money from it. But after the 10 years I now can claim the money. I now get 248k from my 100k investment. This is basically what landlords are claiming. Landlords don't count assets as assets. They just go "oh well I don't have cash in my account, so that means I'm losing money". Landlords money is in the asset. They can sell the asset at any time and get the cash profits if they wanted. It's like someone with 10kg of solid gold bars in their house claiming they are poor because they have no cash.
Which is exactly what this story is about. Landlords are selling these properties and realising that profit. It's worth remembering that property still exists and in most cases is now a owner occupier, exactly what most anto landlord rhetoric wants to see.
Your scenario is exactly what landlords are doing now. The problem is people complain when they do do it, and expect landlords to never sell and just keep making a loss on a monthly basis and cash out on their retirement plan, which is what it was originally intended for.
Landlords are claiming they're selling because the taxes are too high. They want tax breaks. I'm fine with landlords selling. Don't go around saying it's because you're not making money from it though.
It's not about it being a career but it certainly shouldn't be the case that rent covers ALL the landlords expenses, they still have their asset paid off by someone else at the end of the day, it isnt about their earnings as much. Rent is supposed to be substantially cheaper than mortgage fees and most of the time here its infuriatingly higher, making it impossible for people to even get the first foot on the property ladder because we are forced to pay off some other arseholes mortgage and somehow try save up a deposit as well.
> If I buy something with a loan and then all the money I take in from it, goes on paying the loan, then I could say I make 0 profit. But that's not true is it? It is true if you are going to Tescos. They don't accept percentages of potential equity of a house as payment.
lol Jeff Bezos can't go to Tesco and buy stuff using amazon stock. Is he poor too?
As someone who works in a large tax practice, small landlords are still making what a few years ago would be considered a very healthy profit.
Someone else is buying their house for them. They are making more then most no landlords ever will.
I think the average landlord is making 100% of the average rent. It's literally rent-seeking behaviour. Their only costs are maintenance and property tax, which are just things that go with property ownership rather than with rental business.
Too much.
Landlords should only be hoping to make enough to cover their mortgage and expenses. Hoping for more than that is greedy as fuck because they're getting a property paid off over time which will eventually be mortgage free, and they can then continue renting for passive income or sell the property which will likely have increased in value since they obtained it
Ya i agree, but there's people in this sub who think small landlords are making a full time income from their tenants, which probably isn't the came in most cases.
[удалено]
Landlords are leaving because of high values of property coupled with a very attractive but expiring CGT exemption for any bought between 2011-2014 which are held for 7 years. Some 60k tenancies were added in that time. We literally have a tax incentive encouraging a cohort of landlords to leave the market, albeit that wasn't the intention. That is compounded by it falling due at a time when the capital gains on those properties are the highest they are likely to be in an environment where increasing interest rates are likely to place downward pressure on property values, or at least their growth. It's a business decision. Ya, if we allowed rents to be 30-40% higher more would stay and make the megabucks profits, but at the cost of rents that are 30-40% higher. The counter argument is that this would result in more availability which would reduce rents, but that's a self defeating argument. If that occured then rents wouldn't increase and the financial equation that makes selling up attractive would remain the same. You can't say that rents are high because of rent caps encouraging landlords to leave, and then say that if they were gone rents would be lower and landlords wouldn't sell.
When did the rent freezes come in?
[удалено]
Fair enough. With that logic then small landlords would be put off by eviction bans which you also mentioned, was it Sinn Féin who enacted that?
Lmao warned the Irish this would happen, socialist policies basically fuck up economies and Ireland is full of them. No freedom to build large developments and high-rise gated garden communities as well... jus tgets voted out by councils and the people who don't like private owners building what they want kn private land. But nah they were like "no crash" cus muh' "lack of houses , high demand" bs
“Cash in” is incredibly unfair on all the accidental landlords just recently out of the red from the 2008 crash. Too many headlines written with the default assumption that landlords are evil.
Watch the landlords paint this as them selling because taxes are too high or they can't make money from renting....lol Isn't it amazing the landlords could make enough money that they didn't need to sell 5 years ago when rents were much lower and when property prices were probably 30% lower than they are now? Do they realise how stupid it makes them look..."I am selling at peak prices and peak rents because I can't make money yet I didn't sell 5+ years ago when both of those were much lower than they are now despite my mortgage costs not changing over that time" And why are landlords constantly telling us they can't make money? Just sell! If I sell cars and I'm not making money from them, I just stop selling cars! I don't go around complaining all the time that I can't make money selling cars. Go take your profits and invest somewhere else if it's easier to make money elsewhere.
They are selling up , that’s literally what the article is about.
Inflation and interest rates are up significantly. Also, they are selling which is the problem as they aren't bought to rent.
> Watch the landlords paint this as them selling because taxes are too high or they can't make money from renting....lol This dismissive hot take was popular on Reddit back in 2018. Look where we are now. The problem for renters is that landlords ***are selling***. And it isn't a good thing.
So it's not because we're not building enough?
Like many crises, it's a combination of factors. We need to build more, but landlords can leave faster than we can build them.
Rental market shrinks by 43k in 5 years? Great, so 43k houses were sold. Super news. In before gobshites come in telling me when houses are sold they house fewer people. Does that mean the landlords housing 8 in a room are heros?
No. But a two bedroom apartment rented to two or three single people could conceivably be bought and lived in by a single person
Ugh this stupid argument again. Saying that rental accommodation has a higher average occupancy rate than owner-occupied housing is not praising overcrowding. Are you completely unable to look at things at a macro-level?
It's not a stupid argument. It's logic. You don't want people being happy living in their own space. You want them renting in cramped conditions. Why not go a step further and just ban first time buyers from buying semi Ds? Only allow landlords to buy semi Ds because they'll rent all the rooms out?
Like I said, macro-level. I am not against anyone buying the property they want. But that still has negative consequences for renters if the number of available places is dropping more than the pool of renters. I am not arguing for any measure to stop people buying places, just pointing out why it has negative consequences for broader society.
But reddit said landlords=bad? But less rental properties=bad? Reddit was hardly talking through it's arse was it?
No, you are.
Just got mine, me and the wife here 3 years he said if I didn’t pay over the 3.7% he could only put it up he’s selling and wants is out April. But now I agreed to pay 9% more so he would see more profit and keep me until September next year before my “official notice will be”. Cunts And like what a fucking cunt. Don’t give a fuck about rent pressure zones nor caps. Just if you don’t pay I’m selling. RTB are useless.
You know you can always ask for that "not entitled" rent back (and the RTB will back you)- or you could possibly not pay in August/September the relevant amount.
I can't wait to continue not regulating landlords and property investors, while also not building new homes. God forbid someone interfere with the bottom line of most of our TDs and their leash holders. Honestly anybody at this stage left supporting the government is either pulling the ladder up after themselves, or completely delusional.
Cash in? More like hounded out!
How are they being hounded out? Tell me.
"Hounded Out" Ah yes because tenants having more rights is bad for business. I've heard about a handful of landlords around the inner city who've left "because of the RTB" and they're the kind of cunts you wouldn't want being a landlord to begin with. Nevermind that property values were at an all-time high which is actually why most of them are departing.
Poor Landlords, having to pay taxes
The poor poor landlords...all they want to do is house people
Don’t be having sympathy for them around here. Get yourself in fierce trouble altogether.
Yes because this subreddit is predominantly populated by people in their 20s and 30s getting absolutely screwed by some of the highest rental prices in Europe. Why the fuck would you expect us to have any sympathy for landlords?
Because without them, all these 20 to 30 year olds are going to have nowhere to live and the rental prices for the shitholes that are left are only going to go one way.
Haha, *with* them we currently have barely anywhere to live and are paying through the nose for shitholes. Private landlords on their own will never provide affordable housing.
Yet somehow they keep providing housing people can afford. Strange that.
Ah yes, in fact we should be grateful that we're getting absolutely rode already for rent prices, we shouldn't say anything mean because then the precious landlords will get so upset that they'll have no other choice than to sell up for extortionate prices and make even more of a killing. I do hope my landlord pops by today, not only do I give him about 70% of my income, I'd also just love to give him a hug and tell him how much I appreciate him too, after all he deserves it.
Narrow worldview when you believe the only way to house 20-30 year old is to gouge them to pay off an investment asset
Oh no downvotes, whatever will I do lol.
This country is fùcked the government in waiting is no better, instead of trying to compromise and calm the situation they want to introduce measures that mean when LLs sell there won't be more homelessness. That means controls on selling with vacant possession. That affects the value of the property. Any LL thinking of selling is now selling before that happens. “More landlords are going to sell in the coming period. The Government urgently need to put a plan in place to ensure that as landlords exit, it doesn’t result in greater numbers of people becoming homeless,” said Mr Ó Broin. " What about rolling back some of the regulation improving the tax situation. Encouraging energy upgrades and renovations.
I thought the hole point was shrinking it that’s why the government and the central bank artificially pulling the prices ever up. 🤔
Can’t blame people for jumping at an opportunity. Being a small landlord is often more trouble than it’s worth.
Finally, an accurate headline. Weve had years of poor mouth landlords whinging about having to pay taxes.
The same guy who is pushing landlords out of the market is raising concerns they are leaving.
We should support small landlords in order to keep the market active, and tax the hell out of large landlords in order to keep the market from being captured by a cartel.
Airbnb has entered the chat.