Dáil debates

Wednesday, 8 July 2015

Urban Regeneration and Housing Bill 2015: Report Stage (Resumed)

 

11:20 am

Photo of Mick WallaceMick Wallace (Wexford, Independent) | Oireachtas source

Regarding the size of a site, one could put 20 apartments on a 0.05 hectare site without a problem. I am sorry I do not have 20 minutes on this. I could not tell what the issues were with the repeated use of the word "delete" in the amendments. My points were dealt with in amendment No. 5. One is the provision that the site be suitable for the provision of housing. If this land has been purchased and has been land-banked, if it is not suitable for housing the purchaser should get rid of it and sell it. However, he should be paying tax on it if he is holding it as land that is zoned for development. It is banking and it should be taxed.

The idea that a site should not be taxed because it is not suitable for housing is nonsensical. I do not understand the Government's approach to this issue because, as far as I am concerned, these are investors who have established land banks. Although the site may not be suitable for housing for five or even ten years, the investor is engaging in what I described on Committee Stage as shadow land-banking, which is a more long-term process than normal land-banking. The Government should deal with both practices.

In 2002 and 2003, I bought land from an investor who had purchased it in the late 1980s. My God, did he make serious money on that sale, yet he did not have to pay tax on the site throughout the period in question. The Government is allowing this practice to continue in this Bill.

On the issue of whether the majority of a site is idle, we could argue until the cows come home about the degree to which a site is idle. It does not make sense that owners of land zoned for development who are not building on their sites and may be doing something else with them while they wait for the value of their investments to rise are not required to pay a levy on their sites. This legislation should catch the owners of land banks and ensure there are no loopholes available to them. The Bill is riddled with loopholes and will not catch 20% of those who are engaged in land-banking.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.