Vacant Homes tax

A

Attica

Registered User
Messages
47
A country cottage is situated up a long boreen and since original owner died over 20 years ago, inheritor is non-resident so house has not been lived in except for brief periods. It was renovated about 15 years ago but now needs considerable investment such as a new roof (holes allowing mice in) which owner cannot afford. She has serious illness for last 2 years. Can she claim exemption from the Vacant Homes Tax because the house is not suitable for habitation at present?
 
Yes, LPT tax has been paid on the house since it came into being and I know that essentially leads into the house coming under VHT also. But the owner cannot afford to get a new roof and is seriously ill also. The structural works exemption doesn't apply and the illness doesn't apply as it is not her principal residence, but if it is unsuitable for occupation in its present condition without major work being done, would that not be considered an exemption in itself? There must be hundreds of houses around the country in poor condition and vacant accordingly - does VHT have to be paid on them? It's very confusing.
 
Attica said:
There must be hundreds of houses around the country in poor condition and vacant accordingly - does VHT have to be paid on them? It's very confusing.
Click to expand...
Hundreds? There are tens of thousands of them.

My understanding is that such properties are LPT-exempt. That would suggest they're also exempt from this tax.
 
If a property is advertised " for sale" or " for rent" during the year I think it makes you exempt. Does it have to be 30 days in the year for sale or for rent?
 
Attica said:
There must be hundreds of houses around the country in poor condition and vacant accordingly - does VHT have to be paid on them? It's very confusing.
Click to expand...
Just be cautious on that approach. When LPT came in first some who declared their properties uninhabitable (there was even stories of some removing sections of roof) who later sought to bring them back into use as property prices rose found themselves snookered by the planning laws.

If the property is indeed uninhabitable, then they will require full planning permission to bring them back into use, and that will require modernising to current building regulations. A couple in Wicklow who ere unaware of this hit the headlines last year when they were forced to undo major renovation works on a property that had been derelict.
 
Leo said:
Just be cautious on that approach. When LPT came in first some who declared their properties uninhabitable (there was even stories of some removing sections of roof) who later sought to bring them back into use as property prices rose found themselves snookered by the planning laws.

If the property is indeed uninhabitable, then they will require full planning permission to bring them back into use, and that will require modernising to current building regulations. A couple in Wicklow who ere unaware of this hit the headlines last year when they were forced to undo major renovation works on a property that had been derelict.
Click to expand...
Thank you, I see your point. It's a quandary because the owner is ill and cannot afford to repair/replace the roof; meanwhile mice are getting in. She paid the LPT from the beginning but this VHT added to that is going to be very costly. The work done some years ago made the cottage very attractive and she stayed there for brief periods but now it is deteriorating and she really cannot keep up maintenance. Revenue should have exemptions for this sort of situation.
 
Attica said:
Yes, LPT tax has been paid on the house since it came into being and I know that essentially leads into the house coming under VHT also. But the owner cannot afford to get a new roof and is seriously ill also. The structural works exemption doesn't apply and the illness doesn't apply as it is not her principal residence, but if it is unsuitable for occupation in its present condition without major work being done, would that not be considered an exemption in itself? There must be hundreds of houses around the country in poor condition and vacant accordingly - does VHT have to be paid on them? It's very confusing.
Click to expand...
Attica said:
Thank you, I see your point. It's a quandary because the owner is ill and cannot afford to repair/replace the roof; meanwhile mice are getting in. She paid the LPT from the beginning but this VHT added to that is going to be very costly. The work done some years ago made the cottage very attractive and she stayed there for brief periods but now it is deteriorating and she really cannot keep up maintenance. Revenue should have exemptions for this sort of situation.
Click to expand...
Sounds like she should just sell it?
 
I know many people who can't find building contractors to carry out renovations on houses they have, for years, been wanting to put on the market. Lack of competition in this area, combined with the cost of materials and labour going through the roof (no pun intended), many people can't afford the eye-watering costs of renovations. The Government should attempt to improve the shortage of construction workers instead of scapegoating the taxpayers for their inadequacies.
 
Last edited:
Leo said:
No, one of the very purposes of this is to disincentivise this sort of situation where property is let go to ruin where it could be providing accommodation for someone who needs a home.
Click to expand...
Does this also apply to property owned by the councils?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top