Questionsquest
New Member
- Messages
- 2
I think you're mistaken. There's nothing illegal / against the rules with taking on a lease which is more than the HAP amount, if you are willing to subsidise / make up the shortfall, assuming i've read and understood your point correctly.First poster here signed up to purely ask this so I hope it gets some notice.
I am on the hap trying to find o somewhere for MONTHS. I know the story it’s an effort landlords aren’t bothered I know…
I saw someone sat on a group on Facebook that people that have hap a lot of them add a couple hundred on at the side in cash, this is obvosely without haps permission.
For example hap are funding me €1850 plus I can add on 159€ so I will not be approved or allowed to rent above €2009….. so this is what people are saying is happening, landlords/agencies are coming to agreement with tenant sending off hap papers that the property listed is €1700 for example but the tenant is paying a couple hundred in cash only because of the crisis and they can afford it and want it. I just don’t know how there bringing it up with landlords or agencies it’s illegal!!!!
For my own research I tried it out of course the estate agent just said they need hap to approve the rent.
I really don’t understand…. But this is why I can’t find anywhere
Opinions?
Are you sure that is correct. My understanding is that it is not allowed.I think you're mistaken. There's nothing illegal / against the rules with taking on a lease which is more than the HAP amount, if you are willing to subsidise / make up the shortfall, assuming i've read and understood your point correctly.
from this link;Are you sure that is correct. My understanding is that it is not allowed.
The tenant's income has been assessed as part of the HAP process, and their contribution to the rent determined. If they then demonstrate an ability to pay extra that would undermine the basis on which they are receiving HAP
Additional rent payments and deposits
If your rent is more than the HAP limits allowed for your household, you must pay the additional amount directly to your landlord. However, your local authority must make sure that your tenancy is sustainable, so you will not get a HAP payment if you can’t afford the rent.
If your landlord needs a deposit, you will have to pay this yourself. The local authority will not pay it for you. In certain circumstances, you may be able to get assistance from the Department of Social Protection to help with paying your deposit. If you are in emergency homeless accommodation, your local authority may help with a deposit.
True.Tenants were always allowed to avail of rent-a-room tax relief.
It kind of does if they have a higher income than their landlord and so don't get a (almost) free house from the State. They work hard and have a good income and as a result have a much lower disposable income and no home of their own. What would you call them?And anyone who is a guest never acquires tenancy rights; neither do they have the tenants responsibilities. That doesn't make them a fool.
Yes, based on each child having their own bedroom and how many children were in the household at the time the application was approved. Children sharing a room seems to some gross violation of their human rights, unless their parents are actually paying their own way.I'm open to correction, but I understood that HAP approval is based on appropriate sized property for the claimant?
I would call them people who "work hard and have a good income"; I would not insult them.They work hard and have a good income and as a result have a much lower disposable income and no home of their own. What would you call them?
Using their taxes to give a house that they can't afford to someone who earns far less so that they can then rent a room in the house they are paying for is insulting them enough.I would call them people who "work hard and have a good income"; I would not insult them.
I've no idea what this meansUsing their taxes to give a house that they can't afford to someone who earns far less so that they can then rent a room in the house they are paying for is insulting them enough.
Property owners pay tax on the rent they receive, be that HAP or not.Allowing their landlord to not pay any tax in the rent they receive is really rubbing it in.
I think that's the problem.I've no idea what this means
Not if they are renting a room under the tax exempt scheme.Property owners pay tax on the rent they receive, be that HAP or not.
I'm proposing that income from the rent a room scheme be deducted from any HAPS payment the householder receives. They should not be able to gain a substantial tax free income from an asset that they are being given the use of by the State at no cost to them, or a very low cost to them.Tenants have always been able to claim rent-a-room tax relief; are you proposing that this should be removed?
Property owner renting out a property they own, registered with RTB etc., pay tax on that rental income, regardless of HAP tenants or not. But I think you understood that.Not if they are renting a room under the tax exempt scheme.
This would place HAP claimants on a different tax regime to any other tax payer. I don't think that's feasible. Would you have the same restriction on those who rent social housing? That is also provided at considerable expense to the State.I'm proposing that income from the rent a room scheme be deducted from any HAPS payment the householder receives. They should not be able to gain a substantial tax free income from an asset that they are being given the use of by the State at no cost to them, or a very low cost to them.
Indeed - but the remainder of your suppositions about higher quality of life and disposable income are just that.I'm pointing out that someone....can find themselves renting a room...from a person with a much lower earned income ...
And anyone who rents a room under the rent a room scheme does not pay tax on that income. But I'm sure you understood that.Property owner renting out a property they own, registered with RTB etc., pay tax on that rental income, regardless of HAP tenants or not. But I think you understood that.
Why is it not feasible?This would place HAP claimants on a different tax regime to any other tax payer. I don't think that's feasible.
Yes.Would you have the same restriction on those who rent social housing?
Increasing the State's tax revenue would result in considerable net expense to the State? Is the State sector really that inefficient?That is also provided at considerable expense to the State.
Or mathematics, if you choose to apply logic and reason.Indeed - but the remainder of your suppositions about higher quality of life and disposable income are just that.
I don't know. Do you?Question is - what are the numbers on this?
In 2018 there were 10,000 Council owned social houses in Dublin that were under occupied. With the additional HAPS homes included it's reasonable to suppose that the figure is far higher nationally. At what number does it start to matter?How many HAP claimants have spare space to rent out a room?
In my experience most parents spend the majority of their income on their housing. You must be thinking of the parents who get a free house from their neighbours. That's kind of the point here.Would I be correct in saying that the majority have one or more dependent children? In my experience most parents spend the overwhelming majority of their income on their children.
I don't begrudge it either but I do think it's wrong that people with a higher income end up with a significantly lower net income after income taxes and housing costs than people on low incomes who are in receipt of large social transfers from their neighbours. I think it disincentives work and damages the social contract.I'm not sure I begrudge the additional family income if they are prepared to accept the inconvenience of having a stranger in their home. Plus the fact that there is one more person with a roof over their head.
On first reading this I was put off by the needlessly unpleasant terminology. In fact it is a clear explanation.I think the issue here is that DannyBoy doesn't understand that what Purple is saying is reality, because it seems so far fetched. I'll make it much less PC:
A dole monkey who is gaming the system to get HAP despite working for cash on the side and who lives with his girlfriend 5 nights a week can rent out a spare room in the free gaff they are getting HAP for, and earn up to 14,400 tax free from renting out that room. They do not have to register with the RTB to do this.
The person they rent the room to, has no rights like an ordinary tenant, and may be a hard working middle income earner, in his 30's. He would have to be earning 90-100k, in order to be able to afford the 24,000 EUR after tax that the house would cost to rent (2k eur per month - conservative), (if it wasn't being paid by the state), plus the 14,400 being earned tax free from renting out the room. So that's 38,400 after tax earnings that are being worked for by the tenant, but are being given to the dole monkey for free. Before we even start talking about dole, back to education supports, heating / travel allowances or anything else.
It really does beggar belief if you do some sums. I will admit that this is neither the exception, nor the rule, but it happens too much in the state for it to be acceptable.
If you could get income from the State worth well over €70,000 a year in gross taxable income terms and you knew there was no chance of ever getting in trouble for it why on earth wouldn't you do it?This is a fictional person and written from the perspective of someone disgruntled with government policy. I suspect the actual amount of people that the description applies to is in the sub 5% so definitely not representational, but the fact that it is clearly government policy suggests that the system is disproportionate. Wasn't meant to be offensive.
Yep, the illegal activity is ubiquitous where I'm from and where I work but that doesn't change how wrong the legal activity is.So now posters are complaining about illegal activity.
- claiming Unemployment benefits while working is illegal
- claiming One Parent Family benefit while living with one's partner is illegal (children's birth certificates have nothing to do with it)
Tenants have always been allowed to claim rent-a-room tax relief; there is no illegal activity here.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?