Rent pressure zones: What are they and why are there calls for reform?
Rent pressure zones (RPZ) were introduced in 2016 to help control spiralling costs for tenants.
Advertisement
The regulations, which apply to certain areas of high demand for housing, are due to expire on December 31st.
Here is everything you need to know about RPZs, and what the Government might do next.
What are rent pressure zones?
The RPZ system was introduced in 2016 to cap rent increases in areas where there is high demand for housing and rental homes.
An area designated as an RPZ has annual rent increases capped at 2 per cent or at the rate of inflation, whichever is lower, even if there is a change of tenant.
Advertisement
However, not all rented properties in RPZs are subject to rent caps. Landlords can be exempt from the rent caps if the property has not been rented for a period of two years or if it has undergone a "substantial change in the nature of the accommodation".
Where are rent pressure zones?
RPZs now cover most of the country – 111 of the State's 166 local electoral areas are under the rent cap system.
Many of the major towns and cities in the Republic are RPZs, along with touristic areas such as Killarney, Westport and Connemara.
Castlebar in Co Mayo and Tullow in Co Carlow are the latest areas to become RPZs.
Advertisement
Why would the Government want to scrap rent pressure zones?
There is concern within the Government that RPZs have negatively impacted the level of private investment in housing developments, amid increasing pressure to meet new-build targets.
Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael are under increasing pressure to tackle the State's housing crisis after it emerged that 30,330 homes were built last year, far short of the projected 40,000 new builds put forward by the parties.
The debate over RPZs also stems from a report by the Housing Commission that recommended a new form of rent control.
The report published in May last year said landlords had been constrained by the RPZ regime and reported a lack of policy certainty and diminished net rental returns.
Advertisement
It also highlighted that tenants were still experiencing affordability challenges due to historically high rents, while those seeking to find rental accommodation were met with low availability.
The commission said the evidence for the effectiveness of the RPZ system was "mixed", and suggested that rent regulation needs to be made fit for purpose for the longer term.
The report said the Government should regulate market rents fairly and effectively by reforming current regulations and establishing 'reference rents'.
This would replace RPZs with a system that pegs rent to local dwellings of a similar quality.
Advertisement
In the proposed new system, the reference rent rate would be reviewed at regular intervals and rent would not rise more than a certain percentage above this reference rent over a specific period.
This rent regulation would continue to transfer between tenancies, so that if a tenancy ends the same regulations apply to the subsequent tenancy, discouraging the termination of tenancies purely to increase rental income.
This new form of rent control would apply across the country, not just in specific zones.
What proposals are the Government considering?
The Government is now considering tying certain rents to the rate of inflation.
Under the proposals, the current RPZ annual caps would not apply to new buildings constructed after a certain date and rents in the newbuilds would instead be linked to inflation.
The proposal to get rid of the RPZ cap for newbuilds and tie the rent level to inflation is aimed at increasing private sector investment to deliver more housing.
The current 2 per cent rent increase cap would remain in place for existing tenancies, though landlords would be able to change the rents between tenancies, which is currently not permitted.
The changes to the RPZ system would be accompanied by enhanced protection for renters in relation to security of tenure amounting to a minimum of six years.
There would be a restriction on no-fault evictions during this six-year period – a measure that will require legislation.
The landlord would be allowed to reset the rent every six years to the market rate.
When will the Government make its decision?
Asked on Wednesday when a decision on the future of RPZs would be made, Taoiseach Micheál Martin told reporters: 'I would expect sometime in the next week.'
The Taoiseach said the decision will be part of a number of steps towards increasing housing supply, including attracting institutional investors to the sector.
'There'll be further measures taken next week in relation to housing,' he said.
'It's not any one measure that is a silver bullet. It's the cumulative impact of all of them that will lead to an increase and an acceleration of timelines around getting housing units complete.'
Coalition leaders are expected to consider the proposals for reforming the RPZ system when they meet on Monday in advance of a final decision on the plans due to be brought to Cabinet by Minister for Housing James Browne on Tuesday.
What is the reaction from politicians, experts and industry?
Opposition parties have widely criticised any proposals to phase out RPZs.
Sinn Féin's housing spokesman Eoin Ó Broin said said any move by the Government "to allow landlords to increase the rent burden on tenants – a rent burden that is already far too high – will be strongly resisted."
He said the proposed changes Sinn Féin would create a 'four-tier rental market', with different rent-setting and eviction rules for four types of tenants depending on whether or not they live in RPZs, when their tenancies begin, and when their homes were built.
Social Democrats TD Rory Hearne said the housing crisis had deepened into a 'social catastrophe' and disaster'.
He said his party would be 'actively and vociferously' opposing any attempt to remove rent caps.
Lorcan Sirr, a housing lecturer at Technological University Dublin, criticised the suggested change to rental controls, telling The Irish Times that if stability was what the market needed, this in itself was 'policy flip-flopping'.
Meanwhile, Eddie Byrne, chief executive of Irish Residential Properties REIT (IRES), which owns about 4,000 homes in Dublin and Cork, welcomed the Government's efforts for reforms that could boost the supply of rental properties while also protecting renters.
Michelle Norris, director of the Geary Institute for Public Policy at UCD and member of the Housing Commission, said the majority of members in the commission agreed Government should regulate rents but that the RPZ system needed to be reformed so that there was stability in regulation and a move away from constant change.
Ireland
Rent pressure zones decision due within a week, sa...
Read More
The enforcement of any regulation was a key concern of the commission, Prof Norris told The Irish Times, as well as a move away from a 'flat' rate regulation of rent.
'Other European countries have rent regulations that are linked to a reference rent being charged for similar properties in that location that are of a similar quality and size.'
John Mark McCafferty of housing charity Threshold said that without RPZs tenants would likely face substantial rent increases, pushing them into financial distress and 'even possible homelessness'.
Irish Property Owners' Association chairwoman Mary Conway expressed concern at the potential for a 'two-tier market' with 'old rents versus new rents coming in'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
an hour ago
- BBC News
Jersey trawling and dredging area limited from September 2026
More than one fifth of the island's territorial waters will be designated as marine protected areas and off limits to trawling and dredging from September 2026, the government has politicians voted unanimously for the Marine Spatial Plan in October, which included a pledge to increase the area of protected waters from 6.5% to 23%.Marine protected areas prohibit mobile gear fishing, which includes trawling and dredging, to stop damage to habitats and government said it will work with licensed fishermen in Jersey and France to support adjustment to the new rules. A timeline for implementing the plan released by the infrastructure and environment committee also shows part of Les Sauvages reef will be off limits to all fishing. Only commercially licensed vessels will be prohibited from fishing in the protected netting, rod and line fishing and all recreational activities are unaffected by the changes. An additional 4% of territorial waters are being researched and could be added to the protected marine areas by 2030, the committee said. "This will be a seismic shift for marine management in Jersey waters, significantly changing the face of fishing," it said."The Economic Impact Assessment will assist in understanding the livelihood impact of these changes and government will work with licensed fishermen in Jersey and France to support adjustment to the new rules."
Telegraph
2 hours ago
- Telegraph
HMRC ‘catches pensioners off guard' with record number of tax bills
HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) is set to issue a record number of shock bills this year, as more pensioners are dragged into the tax net. The tax office said it will issue 1.4 million simple assessments for the 2024-25 tax year, a rise of 80,000 from 1.32 million the previous year. This marks the highest number on record and nearly double the average annual volume for the previous seven years. A simple assessment is a way of collecting tax without requiring the taxpayer to complete a self-assessment return. It is typically used for pensioners or employees who underpay tax. HMRC has previously said that one of the main reasons for the rising number of simple assessments was the freeze to income tax thresholds which have pulled more pensioners into the tax system. Experts have warned that the tax demands 'catch pensioners off guard' and that retirees have become a 'casualty' of the threshold freeze, which is due to remain in place until at least 2028. While income tax thresholds have failed to rise with inflation, the state pension 'triple lock' has pushed up retirees' weekly payments, meaning millions more have been dragged into the tax net – or higher tax brackets. Most retirees also receive income from private pensions, meaning the tax they owe is collected automatically via their tax code. However, those without private pensions may be sent a simple assessment tax demand. HMRC data shows a steep acceleration in the number of taxpayers being automatically assessed for underpaid tax in the four years. In 2021-22 – the year income tax thresholds were frozen – HMRC issued 675,000 simple assessments, less than half the current figure. The tax office issues a simple assessment when it believes the calculation is straightforward, often where it holds enough information about a taxpayer's income. While intended to streamline tax collection, their growing use reflects in part the increasing number of pensioners being drawn into the tax system. Jon Greer, of wealth management firm Quilter, said: 'Simple assessment letters are a prime example of the consequence of stealth taxes in action. 'Much of this rise is down to how frozen tax thresholds and higher state pensions are creating more tax liabilities for older people. 'A lot of these people will not even be aware that they may owe some sort of tax on their income and can catch many off guard.' Sir Steve Webb, a former pensions minister, now partner at pension consultants LCP, said: 'These figures highlight another casualty of the long-term freeze of personal tax thresholds. 'With every passing year, more and more pensioners on modest incomes are being dragged into the income tax net. 'With thresholds being frozen for years to come, more retired people will have to deal with this process in future'. Separate figures released by HMRC show that the total number of claims for overpaid tax on pension withdrawals has now surpassed 500,000 since 'pension freedoms' rules were introduced in 2015. The reforms allowed savers to take ad-hoc amounts from their pensions but meant they were charged an emergency rate with HMRC's systems assuming a one-off withdrawal would be repeated each month. Hundreds of thousands of retirees have overpaid tax as a result, with nearly £1.5bn reclaimed by pensioners who were overtaxed. A Treasury spokesman said: 'We are committed to help our pensioners live their lives with dignity and respect, which is why in April the basic and new state pension increased by 4.1pc. 'Pensioners will receive a boost of up to £470 to their income in 2025-26. Our commitment to the triple lock means millions will see their pension rise by up to £1,900 this parliament.'
The Independent
3 hours ago
- The Independent
Heathrow's third runway plan is wrong – and not just because of noise and pollution
Here we go again. To say there is a deja vu aspect to the latest proposal to build Heathrow's third runway is an understatement. For reasons that are not clear, Sir Keir Starmer has determined the airport's expansion to be a key plank in the government's economic growth strategy. Seemingly, he did not take into account the issues that grounded the plans in the past, as far back as 1968 – namely, Heathrow's unfortunate and unavoidable proximity to the M25, the rivers and their valleys that cross that part of west London, the additional noise pollution, and the need for improved and costly transport links to and from the centre of the capital that will result from the vast uplift in passengers. On the constant sound from the increased number of planes landing and taking off, the prime minister will insist that great technological strides have been made in curbing the din. It is true that new aircraft are less noisy. However, they are still extremely audible, there will be more of them, and they will be flying over a heavily residential area. As for the rest, nothing has altered fundamentally, environmentally and logistically, since Heathrow last submitted a scheme, pre-Covid. Inflation means the bill is now an eye-watering £49bn. The bill, ultimately, will be borne by the air passenger, and Heathrow is already the most expensive airport in the world. Will the airlines and their customers stomach at least a doubling in charges? There is the thorny problem, too, of public transport to and from London. The London mayor will be expected to find a way to enable an extra 60 million people a year to use Heathrow. Transport for London is strapped for cash, struggling to upgrade the Tube network. How the additional demand will be met is not clear. What has shifted as well is the nature of air travel. Post-pandemic, business travel is down and looks unlikely to recover – that, certainly, is what the industry is saying. During the outbreak, holding meetings remotely came into its own and employers took a hard look at their budgets – Zoom or Teams often represent a better alternative in executive time and expense. That therefore raises a major doubt about one of the main claims made for Heathrow's extension. It is said to be necessary to enhance London and the UK's standing in the business world, but how, if the commercial users are not there? There has been movement too, and not of the positive kind, in attitude towards Heathrow the operator. The power outage that shut down the plum in Starmer's vision for resurgence and global acclaim was a shocking episode; it not only highlighted a neglected infrastructure but also a failure of management. Thomas Woldbye, who is seeking permission to build this national project, is the same boss who slept through the night as Britain's busiest airport ceased to function. Heathrow's reputation in the sector was already poor, but this took it to a new low. Woldbye has an idea that is different from the one previously suggested, which is to build the third runway over the M25, taking the motorway underneath – and all without any disruption to road users. This is fanciful even without a track record that hardly inspires confidence. Which raises another question. Why? Why should Heathrow as a company get to preside over the airport's improvement and reap the benefits? If we're all agreed that it is a vital national asset, holding a pivotal place in the economy, then why should the incumbent be in charge, not to mention entrusted, with its development? Those who wax lyrical about Heathrow's importance like to reminisce about how Britain led the transformation of international aviation. Boosting the airport is seen as completing that journey. It is the case that we once did. That was in the Margaret Thatcher era, when British Airways was freed from the shackles of state ownership. Thatcher did more than that, though. She enabled and encouraged competition, giving a steer to the challengers and disruptors, notably to Richard Branson at Virgin and Michael Bishop at British Midland. The newly privatised BA was forced to raise its game, and together, these three set new standards. There appears to be an assumption that Woldbye's company must be given the job. But there is another option. Surinder Arora, the self-made billionaire who has masterminded the building of leading hotels at Heathrow and other airports and is a substantial Heathrow landowner, has his own remedy. His is much cheaper, envisaging a shorter runway that does not affect the M25. It is easy to dismiss Arora. But he is popular with the airlines, he rails rightly against Heathrow's pricing, and he knows a thing or two about customer service. He also possesses heavyweight advisers in the shape of Bechtel, the US engineering, construction and project management giant. He deserves to be taken seriously. Heathrow needs a competitor. Likewise, if neither the airport operator nor Arora is selected and the third runway is again kiboshed, then surely serious thought must be given to expanding rival airports. Heathrow has been resting on its laurels for too long. As for Starmer, he perhaps should ask himself how it is that someone who professes to be forensic legally is so capable of displaying rushes of blood to the head politically. Giving Heathrow such prominence smacks of impetuousness. He's done it and has been left with an almighty headache.
