Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
A SIDE OF one of Dublin’s most famous Georgian squares – Merrion Square South – has emerged as the main blackspot for illegal parking in Dubin last year, as overall clamping levels in the capital rose by 6% to almost 47,000 vehicles.
New figures published by Dublin City Council show a total of 46,931 vehicles were clamped in the city in 2024 – a daily average of 128 – and an annual increase of just over 2,800, which represents a return to levels last recorded in pre-pandemic years.
Merrion Square South – which is located near the rear entrance to Dáil Éireann – was the prime location for the detection of illegal parking last year, with 704 vehicles being clamped on the street.
It is the first time that the city centre location, which links Merrion Street Upper and Fitzwilliam Street Lower, has topped the list of busiest areas for parking enforcement.
It was ranked in 4th place in 2023 when 596 vehicles were clamped there – over 100 fewer than last year.
Approximately half of all vehicles clamped in Dublin last year were immobilised for the failure to pay for use of a parking bay or have a valid parking ticket.
Over 5,000 vehicles were clamped for parking on a clearway with Clarendon Street and Ranelagh, accounting for more than 20% of all such cases.
Another 3,200 were clamped for unauthorised parking in a loading bay with two locations – Rathmines Road Lower and Foley Street – accounting for more than 10% of the total.
Almost 1,800 vehicles were detected parking on a footpath with 7% of all infringements occurring on New Ireland Road in Rialto.
Another 1,700 vehicles were caught parking in a bus lane with more than a quarter detected on Waterloo Road.
A total of 450 motorists were found leaving their vehicles in a parking space for disabled persons without displaying a valid badge, while 39 were detected parking on a cycle track.
Just one motorist was clamped for misuse of a parking space for electric vehicle charging.
The overall increase in the number of clamped vehicles in Dublin last year comes against a background of significant traffic changes introduced in the second half of 2024, which were designed to restrict private vehicles accessing certain roads and discouraging motorists from using the city centre for cross-city journeys.
Figures provided by Dublin City Council under freedom of information legislation show revenue from parking was unaffected by the changes as income from parking fees rose by 15% to €36.8m – an annual increase of almost €4.8m.
An additional €5.3m was raised in clamping release fees, which were up 9% on figures from 2023.
The council also received €904,523 from parking fines issued by traffic wardens last year – an annual increase of 6%.
Parking fines were reintroduced in the capital in July 2021 to complement the council’s main parking enforcement method of clamping vehicles in order to address illegal parking offences such as parking on footpaths and bus lanes.
Almost 10,600 vehicles were towed away last year for either parking in a bus lane, in a clearway, blocking an entrance to a premise or for being clamped for over 24 hours without payment.
Most motorists pay the standard clamp release fee of €125.
However, if the release fee is not paid within 24 hours, vehicles are moved to the city pound and can only be recovered on payment of a removal fee of €250 plus a daily storage charge of €35 per day.
The figures show one motorist who failed to pay for parking on Summer Street North in August last year had to pay €950 to get their vehicle back.
Twenty-four other motorists had to pay amounts in excess of €500 to retrieve their vehicles.
The latest data shows Merrion Square South replaced Ranelagh – the name of the main street in the southside suburb of the same name – as the city’s main blackspot in 2024.
The detection of illegally parked vehicles in Ranelagh decreased by 40% last year to 518 incidents and fell to 7th place in the rankings.
Clarendon Street – which runs parallel to Grafton Street at the back of the Westbury Hotel – retained its ranking as the second most common location for vehicles to be clamped with 693.
It was followed by South Circular Road (677); Mespil Road (616); North Circular Road (572) and Merrion Square West (531).
The ten main blackspots remained the same albeit with a change in rankings in most cases.
The only new locations to join the top 20 danger areas for clamping in 2024 were Grantham Street and St Anthony’s Road in Rialto, which replaced York Street and Mercer Street Upper.
Vehicles were found to be parked illegally at around 1,570 different locations across the city by parking enforcement staff from Dublin Street Parking Services operating on behalf of the council.
The greatest number of vehicles clamped in a single day last year was 218 on Wednesday, 12 June.
Data provided by Dublin City Council show motorists are most likely to be clamped on Thursdays, while approximately a quarter of all vehicles were clamped between 8am and 10am.
November was the month with the largest number of clamped vehicles at 4,439.
Figures provided by the other local authorities in Dublin show that illegal parking in some areas surpasses the level of the problem in the city, with 1,586 motorists fined for a parking offence on Main Street in Lucan last year.
They accounted for 15% of all parking fines issued by wardens in the administrative area of South Dublin County Council in 2024.
In Fingal County Council, the worst illegal parking blackspot was North Street in Swords with 1,365 motorists being fined.
| RANK | LOCATION | VEHICLES CLAMPED | PREVIOUS RANK |
| 1 | Merrion Square South | 704 | (4) |
| 2 | Clarendon Street | 693 | (2) |
| 3 | South Circular Road | 677 | (5) |
| 4 | Mespil Road | 616 | (3) |
| 5 | North Circular Road | 572 | (9) |
| 6 | Merrion Square West | 531 | (6) |
| 7 | Ranelagh | 518 | (1) |
| 8 | Waterloo Road | 514 | (7) |
| 9 | Chelmsford Road | 444 | (10) |
| 10 | North Great George’s Street | 438 | (8) |
| 11 | Synge Street | 389 | (12) |
| 12 | Fitzwilliam Square North | 363 | (11) |
| 13 | Parnell Street | 357 | (14) |
| 14 | Hatch Street Lower | 342 | (18) |
| 15 | Grantham Street | 323 | (-) |
| 16 | Baggot Street Lower | 319 | (13) |
| 16 | Hatch Street Upper | 319 | (15) |
| 18 | Marlborough Place | 312 | (19) |
| 19 | Saint Anthony’s Road | 299 | (-) |
| 20 | Commons Street | 294 | (16) |
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Why not higher?
@brian o’leary: because they have a vested interest in enabling this
@brian o’leary: Why not ban vulture fund investment in property?
@Anthony Curran: its a free market and encouraged by the tax breaks you and I give them through the government
@Spanner: Isn’t Ireland just a great little place for shysters, tricksters and con men.
@brian o’leary: 50% sounds good to me
@Spanner: There would be no subsidy in a truly free market.
@Anthony Curran: because they provide the capital to fund the building in the first place. We are over reliant on them to provide the capital required and therefore they don’t really have their finger in the pie, they control the ingredients, how it’s cooked and who gets it. It’s a capital issue. People who say “just ban the vulture funds” don’t actually understand the complexities behind it.
@Anthony Curran: yes it certainly is. And we continue to let them behave as they wish all the while backed by our politicians who won’t rock the boat. Look to the various inquiries when gardai couldn’t use the findings to investigate, the state paying the Lions share for institutional abuse etc etc etc. Bob and Co got it right a Banana Republic ran by a cabal of entitled people
@Eoin Jackson: It’s not that complex, housing was built before vulture funds arrived and will be built when they’re gone, ban them!
@Chutes: true but its a free market where anyone can buy the housing. Funds are given massive breaks that regular person dosent get. Builder get incentives to build each unit but you and I don’t get any such perks.
@Anthony Curran: you’ve summed up Fianna Gael
@Eoin Jackson: What capital do they provide? In Belchamp Manor for example, where nearly all new homes (85pc) were bought by a “vulture’ fund..They provided zero capital for the development of project.. they just snapped them from under the noses of hard working people. Indeed from the departments own figures 1,200 homes have been snapped up by these “vulture” funds in the last few years. I think maybe your confusing developers with “vulture funds”.. and “vulture” funds is not exactly the right term either.. Belcamp was bought by asset manager DWS who are controlled by Deutsche Bank. Whatever we call them, this practise needs to stop .. or made a hell of a lot less appealing to these investment /asset / vulture funds.
@Anthony Curran: It’s called Capitalism. Least you can do is steer clear of the shysters, tricksters and con men. Best you can do is play the game…. Until!
@Anthony Curran: always was
@Eoin Jackson: They may provide capital but it pales in insignificance to how much they leach from our economy.
@Anthony Curran: Vulture funds do not provide capital. Their only role is to purchase debt, in taking on distressed assets/ securities, and recover money. Whilst these investment/assest management funds are indeed acting like ‘vultures’, they do not fit the economic definition of such. BTW, they don’t provide capital either, what we’re talking about is the bulk buying of homes that developers have developed and at the point of going to market are being snapped up by these funds for rental at exorbitant rates, a practice which needs to stop.
@Anthony Curran: some countries require people to be long term resident or indeed in some cases to be nationals of their country to buy property. For companies to be owned and managed by majority of their nationals. Maybe some rules are needed to stop parasitic companies hiking home costs.
@Brian: the REITs behind most vulture funds absolutely do provide the capital. I am not saying it’s a desirable situation, far from it, but I don’t think people saying “ban the funds” realise the second they do that all large scale building projects stops for 12-18 months. It’s not a simple situation. Should never have gotten ourselves into this place either, very poor governance. But the same people who are screaming stop the funds will also be screaming at the lack of houses being built. Unfortunately it is not as straight forward and black and white.
Why not ban the practice?
@Oh Mammy: as much opposed in terms of blueshirt ideology as building social housing is for them.
@S Suilleabhain: well, SF say there is no silver bullet solution. At first I thought it was a reference to the Lone Ranger. But then I remembered…
@Oh Mammy: Not allowed mess with the global market at a corporate level. They can only keep Irish people away from it, makes it harder for us to get a deal but easier to force limited options on us. Better for tax, keep the money in the economy, etc.
Here we go with all the ffg kite flying to try bribe the voting public in the upcoming general election,
@Robert Halvey: Every proposal SF bring to the table gets shot down by FFG. Until 6 months or a year later, when somehow FFG do a 180 and call it their own. FFG policy in 2024 is 2023 SF policy for slow learners. And they have the audacity to claim SF aren’t fit for government!!
@Robert Halvey: And it’ll work too.
Anything to try sway votes,they’ve done that much damage to the housing crisis they may aswel have went asleep altogether alongside eamon in the dail. Not just people now but GENERATIONS to come will struggle to keep a roof over they’re heads now whether it be mortgage or rent. We cannot house who is in the country when will the penny drop if you can’t house what’s here stop what’s coming in onto a sinking ship or the problem will continue and worsen. Only people with necessary skills such as doctors and nurses etc should be entering at present to get housing availability back up to levels needed and house whats here but it’ll never happen now damage is done.
@Paddy C: stop all social welfare entitlements to those entering now, only issue visas to necessary trades needed. Halt immigration until numbers homeless reduce significantly and housing catches up with demand. This is what USA and Australia do and even now Australia is heading onto recession what happens when we do with huge more numbers needing social welfare where does that come out of????
@Paddy C: Yeah, because it’s immigrant’s fault, clown
@Brian D’Arcy: it’s increasing demand significantly don’t you see that it has a huge effect when people queue to view a home you dipstick. Wake up to common sense its nothing to do with racism or any other nonsense it’s supply and demand, demand now greatly outweighs supply do you understand you can’t fit 100 objects into a box which only holds up to 10?
@Brian D’Arcy: Our current model for immigration is opposed by over 70% of people and I noted that that was true as a redc member, before it was posted elsewhere relatively recently. If the highest number in the past decade are emigrating, housing totally off the table and people completely fed up with endemic failures in healthcare etc so leaving the country, then unelected bureaucrats in Brussels shouldn’t be deciding how many immigrants Ireland takes in (including from ‘safe’ places like Albania & Algeria.)
https://www.thejournal.ie/irish-people-moving-to-australia-6472405-Aug2024/
@Paddy C: doesn’t fit the narrative for people too blind to educate themselves and who get reactive, emotional about the topic.
@Paddy C: halt immigration, you say? Except for EU citizens, right? And UK citizens, right? And others with EU passports from mainly South America? And for essential workers across the globe who we need desperately to come here, right? And for refugees, right? How many does that leave in the net migration number, I wonder, that would put a material dent on housing demand to alleviate the crisis? Bugger all, I would suggest. Increasing supply is the only viable solution
@SYaxJ2Ts: you can’t increase supply alongside thousands arriving while building that’s not realistic can’t be done. We need to control numbers entering to get supply to meet demand. Same thing has happened in UK and worsening.
@Paddy C: as I pointed out above, who exactly are you proposing to stop coming here? Shouting stop migration is not viable, nor desirable
@SYaxJ2Ts: you also have generations coming of age coming out of school and college to queues of people with no real options because again demand well outweighs supply. Its nothing racist it’s nothing against immigrants personally or any other nonsense it gets twisted into it simply is the resources aren’t there for those presently here regardless of nationality. So if its not there now how will it be there if demand continually increases across all sectors including health especially.
@Paddy C: enough is enough please treat Irish people with equality and stop cosying up to the European Generals
@Brian D’Arcy: He is actually dead right with what he’s saying,your response is just nonsense Brian
@Paddy C: Well said Paddy! When the bucket is overflowing, the sensible thing to do is turn off the tap. Denmark and Hungary are examples of EU countries with SENSIBLE immigration policies. It CAN be done!
@Paddy C: yes, I know all this. I’m asking about your plan to stop migration. How will this work? Who are you stopping? Because you can’t stop EU or UK citizens coming, or the many others who have dual EU nationalities. Or the many healthcare workers from across the globe. Or refugees. So who is left? How many people are you talking about?
Increasing houses and stopping immigration isn’t exactly the solution to the homeless crisis is it? Many reasons people are homeless, not all homeless are Irish either. Oh yay: more houses, but who the hell can bloody afford them??
@sean mcnamara: Hungary and sensible policy. Iv read it all now.
@S Suilleabhain: The majority CAN be completely in the wrong! I very much doubt those 70% could tell you much about immigration systems that isn’t just personal opinion/bias.
@SYaxJ2Ts: and send the tens of thousands undocumented Irish in the USA back home as well,it’s only fair
@SYaxJ2Ts: it must be curtailed as best as possible. If you’re from a country of the eu yes obviously they’re travelling in between countries within the eu can’t do much about that. We can try to manage countries outside of that by not allowing visas or social welfare upon arrival which will help to discourage it and lessen it somewhat if theres not much benefit in getting here. I’m all for helping those who need it and there’s genuine people who need the help but when you’ve got bus loads of single men entering the country without background checks its obvious there’s a clear danger. If we cannot house our current population which we clearly cannot we must take necessary steps to carefully manage it without causing need for protests etc. Do it sensibly and avoid all that for those entering aswels benefits.
@Criostoir Mac Raghnaill: what are you know about?
@Chutes: and that just goes to confirm the snivelling, reactive contempt you obviously hold towards the people of this country. But you cry xenophobes – spare me
@S banter: if supply increases beyond demand you’ll end up with more houses than what is needed therefore houses won’t sell as quick so prices reduce not by huge amounts you’d imagine but certainly in a better direction than going up continually as they are now. And again therefore giving people a chance who aren’t getting any and won’t as this worsens. No one wants to hear solutions just complain about why thousands of affordable houses aren’t appearing out of thin air,they don’t want to hear reasonable and a fair chance in succeeding solutions.
@S Suilleabhain: educate themselves to what thousands entering a country with a housing crisis. Then as a result minimum availability for maximum cost simply because of huge demand of increased population,you are aware that the population has significantly increased as a result of immigration not birth rate that is declining because people can’t afford homes to start a family. Not a great system considering you’ll have thousands more claiming pensions as time goes on with less coming of age to work similar to Japan and Italy which are not in crisis as a result of it but sure we’ll wait til it happens then discuss it that do wonders.
@Paddy C: haha, you think “busloads of single men” are contributing to the housing crisis? Get a grip Paddy, your mask is slipping
@SYaxJ2Ts: im sure its helping the housing crisis with more entering needi g housing youre right and crime rates increasing also sure sod who suffers in the long run I suppose.
@Chutes: Many of them can tell about social houses being handed out to immigration scammers whilst middle-aged Irish people are still living in the child’s bedroom of their parents house.
@Paddy C: you need to check back again look over the comment thread, I agreed with you.
@S Suilleabhain: my mistake sorry
That will simply be priced into the rent charged to the tenant
@Termaz FX: This point exactly.
@Termaz FX: most likely
Just ban it ffs!!!!. It can be done and it has been done in other countries. It is not done here because of the significant money sitting td’s are making from the housing crisis. Its not called out much because the opposition is in on it, too. Ireland can be incredibly frustrating!!!
@G: well said, I got abused on here just after the locals for pretty much saying how FG were operating at this stage was as if to practically guarantee that housing is a NO GO topic for countless in their 30s and up and just a week ago the journal itself reported on a surge in people emigrating. ‘Let’s go round again!’
@S Suilleabhain: it’s pretty blatant. I would say 70% of members of the 4 largest parties are landlords. The current crisis suits them and its that simple. They are making a fortune. I’m not having a pop at landlords in general here. They are not responsible for the current crisis even though it suits them. The td’s can sort this crisis out but grey simply don’t want too. On a side note..no other government is wasting so much money with so little to show for it.
@G: From a Journal article in February this year:
According to last year’s annual return, 31 TDs derived an income from being a landlord last year, in comparison to 28 in 2022 (before additional interests were declared for that year).
They included 12 Fianna Fáil TDs (exactly a third of the party’s TDs), nine Fine Gael TDs (27% of its Dáil representatives), six Independent TDs (30% of all unaffiliated TDs), two Sinn Féin TDs (8% of the party’s total), one Labour TD (13% its deputies), and one Green Party TD (8% of its deputies).
I know this is a list of TDs and not members, but it’s staggering that the gap between FF/FG/Independents and the rest of the parties is so big.
@G: need to keep telling it to the ‘oh but there’s higher taxes in countries like Norway’ which I got again recently enough. these people have absolutely no clue. Many who think like this get bratty and resentful when the comparative standard of living is contextualised.
Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael do not see Ireland as a society, they see it as an economy and it’s citizens as mere worker ants. Until they’re both in opposition, nothing will change.
@Anthony Curran: been that way since the country tanked due to Laissez-faire policies, self regulation and leprechaun economics.
Good man Michael Noonan. Now the words horse, stable and door spring to mind!
@Padraig O’Brien: the man’s existence is an affront to all of the senses. Would he ever F off and retire done so much damage as it is. he reminds me so much of James reilly, an absolutely devout mé feiner cute hoor
@S Suilleabhain: At least you with your anti-immigration patter can stand tall to represent the opposite to a “mé féiner”, right?
@Chutes: anti illegal immigration. Proudly so
Which you should be too. Mouth breather
@S Suilleabhain: Don’t presume to tell me what to be. Mouth breather?
@Chutes: hypocrite much? Practice what you preach. None of your business
@S Suilleabhain: What? I didn’t tell you what to be. If it’s not my business what makes it yours?
@S Suilleabhain: the “Grace” inquiry seems to be on hold until he kicks the bucket!
That’ll stop them, of course it won’t because they want Cuckoo and Vulture funds in the market. We are just apart of the evolving market and the fact that we elect them matters not a jot, supported by the establishment media. Mick Clifford attacking Sinn Féin’s housing plan that has received praise by expert, how can you win.
And they voted down a Sinn Féin motion to increase it, tells you everything they say about Sinn Féin not offering solutions to be complete lies.
@Brian D’Arcy: not to mention Mr inept himself Neale richmond has made a fool of himself in terms of conduct while next to various SF representatives he’s been parroting away the same unworkable nonsense that rural Irl turned out in force to back in the locals. Ah well. Its not like its a crucial time to do something different in this country, or anything.+well over 60000 votes for the celebrity jockey MEP
Electioneering shenanigans. Neale has to be seen to ‘care’ about the electorate in the run up to the election.
@AnthonyK: the same electorate he despises
How come the only action this gov can take on anything is tax. Carbon tax to same the planet, stamp duty tax to stop bulk buying, property tax to live in Ireland, USC tax to pay for the government of 2008, etc. Why not try something else like legislation against bulk buying, better land, and tree management to help the planet, etc. Tax is not solving anything as far as I can see.
Why do they keep letting this lad talk to the media. Every time he’s on the television he makes a show of himself with the amount of knowledge he simply does not have
@Mick O’K: he has significant contempt for the public also. very petty in social posts and quick to block anyone who questions them. a male Regina.
Up it to 1000%.
They’ll pi$$ off then.
Wrecking the country.
How many votes from silly people who read this and forget that its completely because of FG FF that we have this toxic soup of vulture funds in the first place, will FG get? enough to stay in power when they’re rule over Ireland should have come about years ago!!
@S Suilleabhain: come to an end
Better still don’t let them bulk buy!
Or just stop vulture funds purchasing homes? This measure won’t change a thong. They can well afford to pay it. All this will do is drive up the rents and resale prices on those properties.
this is just a kite, what about tackling AIRBNB lettings to free up mush needed homes, this short term letting is far more damaging to our housing crisis than vulture funds
Stamp duty is exempt from new builds for first time buyers. Surely buying an entire estate means your not a first time buyer. If you buy a second hand house you don’t get the grants and you pay stamp duty. But I suppose that’ll keep everything else is just for us minions
That will stop f all.
Do any of these vulture funds directly or indirectly donate?
A lobby isn’t the reception in a hotel.
Double not enough.
Quadruple minimum
Shur he can call for whatever he likes….. won’t happen
Additional SD charges will roll on to the tenants. Vulture funds should be limited to small purchases or got out of the market entirely.
Of course he does and he’s not saying that because there’s an election around the corner…..
Funny, not a peep from the usual pro-government/ anti SF shills on this one.. they were all over SF Arts policy article like a rash earlier, and now FFG is looking to implement a policy, a SF policy, that they themselves shot down only a few months ago, they’ve gone very quiet.. lol.
Won’t make a blind bit of difference as they are now going after the second hand market, with the eviction ban over, the consolidation of “living to work” is almost complete
@Mike B: already is sure there’s thousands working and are still home with parents or friends with no hope now of having they’re own homes with less chance again as time goes on and it worsens which it clearly is.
Two things here, 1. A company buying up houses is a sure fire way of guaranteed payback to builder, thus no fear of defaulting mortgages via bank (banks are therefore protected. 2. The purchasing company will most prob rent out the properties, thus an increased move towards ‘You will own nothing and be happy’ etc, ad nuasum. This last move ranges from apps on MS Windows to renting e-books from Amazon, and now to property.
This would not increase home provision overall. Stamp duty on home provision should be abolished, but profits on rental investments, REITS, should be same as all enterprise taxes, whether trusts, offshored, or local developers.
Ireland has huge multinational enterprises, staffed in part with immigrant personnel, many on term appointments.
These require rental accomodation which such development enterprises can provide.
The state needs to concentrate on provide homes outside this particular segment for the general population .
@William Kelly: 58% of new homes this year were bought in group sales .
@sean weir: That can’t be true ? If it is, then it’s absolutely obscene
Any tax breaks that could help developers and builders needs to be introduced ASAP.
@brian o’leary: Are you joking, they caused the recession and you want them treated with love, get real
@brian o’leary: Yes, let’s give the likes of Johnny effin Ronan more taxpayers money on top of the billions we gave them when they bankrupted the country 15 years ago.
@Brian D’Arcy: I thought the global recession was caused by banks dishing out credit to anybody with a pulse? Isn’t credit currently under control? We need more residential units , why not help the people that supply them?
@Anthony Curran: don’t give them money, just don’t tax their materials, labour and profits as much.
@brian o’leary: And do you think they’ll pass on those savings to people buying a house? Because if you do, I’ve a bridge to sell you!
@brian o’leary: hear hear, the EU and the cowboys running Ireland had no part to play in the implosion of our phoney economy. none whatsoever
(tumbleweed)
@Anthony Curran: no, they’ll try and get as much as they can. But if lending is under control and the increased competition with extra units being produced would help keep prices lower.
@S Suilleabhain: in hindsight we could have been better prepared, certainly a bit inexperienced yes,, but we have learnt lessons,isn’t credit under control? Isn’t our economy export lead?
@brian o’leary: isnt credit under control? The imposition of 64 billion in foreign debt from Brussels has been so thoroughly normalised that those of us who find it shocking and appalling wonder whether it is we who are just mad.
@S Suilleabhain: legacy debt is different that current bank lending/credit.
He was Minister for State & one of his roles was Retail & he was going to sort out the extortionate cost of Groceries, he did nothing. He is currently a Minister for State with Financial Services & Insurance in his roles, again the Insurance Cartels hiking up Insurance despite all the reforms put in place for them, Neale sits on his hands. The Central Bank this week did away with their Consumer Complaints Dept despite Tracker Scandals & ongoing issues, Neale again did nothing. Now he wants to tackle Vulture Funds, despite his party being in power & responsible for giving Vulture Funds Free rein. Neale is an empty vessel, great on the Tonight Show pontificating to everyone, but has done nothing as a Minister. Just more electioneering from another Waffler.
Why not do it… More pre election lies
Outside of the construction phase I can’t think of any benefit to society of limited liability companies owning residential housing units.
The election must be closer than they are saying if they are floating this kind of populist horses##te.
If it sounds to good to be true????
On this Holly Cairns is right, it should be 100%. Large corporations, with deep pockets paying minimal tax should not be competing with families for houses. Increasing stamp duty by a few % is performative at best (election coming?). Canada has it right – ban all foreign investors buying houses, homes should not be comodified. Promise that & you have my vote.
Should be much much higher to stop corporate purchases, our people need to be able to purchase homes before others. Rent needs controlling as far too high by anyone’s standards
If vulture funds were taxed in Ireland the same way an Irish landlord is taxed then they wouldn’t buy any properties here. FFG/g ensured vultures could scoop up everything and pay no tax.
People do realise that if funding is not provided by Vulture Funds, some of which are Irish, lots of these homes will be ever be built. And for anyone who thinks building homes and financing them is easy, well they can start a construction company and see how they get on
@Peter Byrne: You seem to be confused, Peter. Vulture funds, by definition, invest in distressed assets/securities. This term is thrown around mostly incorrectly to describe the investment/assest management funds that snap up homes with zero capital outlay. As exampled by Belcamp Manor in Dublin where 85 percent of the houses were snapped up from under the noses of ordinary people by asset manager DWS who are controlled by Deutsche Bank. Do you mean developers Peter? You do realise they are different things… don’t you?
Why am I being called Nicki Noel’s or did we both just comment the same at exact same time?
It was probably the only incorrect decision by the last government to allow vulture funds to purchase houses that should be sold to those wishing to buy a house. So any proposal to impose extra tax on these funds must be considered, as a priority
@James O’Grady: the only incorrect decision by the last government was it? Reality check needed James!!
Why just ban them?
have your say