Is the Help to Buy scheme fit for purpose or should it be abolished?
is marketed as a scheme that assists first-time buyers to bridge the gap between their savings and the 10 per cent deposit required by
Central Bank
mortgage rules. It has survived for almost a decade despite widespread criticism by experts, and its continued existence reflects the power of Ireland's construction lobby and the political cynicism around housing.
The first criticism of Help to Buy is that it has become a money pit. Initially conceived as a modest scheme that would cost €130 million over its 2016 to 2019 lifetime, Help to Buy has been extended multiple times, and will now remain in place until at least 2029. It has gained weight since its introduction, with the maximum subsidy rising from €20,000 (or 5 per cent of the home purchase price) to €30,000 (or 10 per cent of purchase price). Consequently Help to Buy has become much more expensive than originally envisaged;
Claims amounted to €225.5 million last year
, and
the cumulative sum of claims approved has reached almost €1.3 billion
.
This might be palatable if Help to Buy was well designed and working effectively. However reports by the
Parliamentary Budget Office
(PBO) (
2019
and
2022
),
Mazars
and the
Central Bank
give rise to many concerns.
Evaluations highlight that the scheme carries considerable 'economic deadweight'. According to the PBO a third of recipients did not need Help to Buy to achieve their 10 per cent deposits. Meanwhile
Mazars
, which was commissioned by the
Department of Finance
to review the scheme, found almost half of the funds spent played no part in achieving its objectives.
READ MORE
A further critique is that Help to Buy is socially regressive. Both Mazars and the Central Bank found that it mainly benefits richer households. This is not surprising as higher incomes are almost a prerequisite for considering home purchase in Ireland. However the Central Bank's analysis showed that the average income of Help to Buy households was €15,500 greater than that of other first-time buyers.
Help to Buy also funds more expensive homes. The PBO established that 63 per cent of claims relate to properties whose prices exceed the national average. Meanwhile the Central Bank found that Help to Buy properties were €62,800 more expensive than those purchased by other first-time buyers. Reinforcing the perception that this scheme finances luxury rather than supporting necessity, the Central Bank noted that homes bought using Help to Buy were also bigger.
Mazars, the consultant employed to evaluate Help to Buy, found it unfit for purpose and recommended its withdrawal in 2024. Instead the Government doubled down and extended it for five years
Despite these problems, successive governments have persevered with Help to Buy. This is because it stimulates home building. Indeed, the words of then minister for finance Michael Noonan when he announced the scheme reveal that this is its real purpose; 'There is an acute shortage of new houses being built in Ireland and I am introducing a Help to Buy scheme to address this problem.'
Unfortunately, the way in which Help to Buy achieves increased supply exacerbates rather than mitigates our housing problems. People believe and have been led to believe that increasing housing output will automatically bring down house prices and rents. But this is not necessarily so. Construction activity follows the profit margins that are available, and the outcome for consumers depends on whether these margins are driven by low costs or high selling prices.
With a low cost base, developers can earn a profit while delivering homes at an affordable price. However the policies required to suppress development costs involve difficult, slow-acting interventions that lack voter appeal. Examples include planning reforms which reduce delays and deliver more predictable outcomes for developers, regulation of professional services such as solicitors, architects and estate agents, the encouragement of competition to drive down professional fees, and financial sector initiatives to reduce development finance costs.
Although Irish governments have done some of this, they have favoured the easier approach of subsidies such as Help to Buy, the
First Home Scheme
and the local authority home loan. These 'supports' enable consumers to pay higher prices, and this is what creates the development margin that draws out more supply. Clearly, higher prices are hard-wired into this process.
The
International Monetary Fund
, the
European Union
and the
National Economic and Social Council
have all warned that Help to Buy could drive up prices. However senior figures from the property industry have denied this, referencing the Help to Buy and First Home Scheme price caps as a safeguard against inflation. Clearly, such caps can contain price growth only if they are set at an appropriate level and implemented firmly. Neither seems to be the case in Ireland. The Help to Buy cap stands at €500,000. This is well above the €417,680 median price paid by first-time buyers of new homes, and is exceeded in only two local authorities – so it is hardly binding. Nevertheless, estate agent
Savills is campaigning
for it to be raised to €621,000.
Last week The Irish Times
reported
that agents Sherry FitzGerald offered to circumvent the Help to Buy cap
by unbundling the cost of flooring from the official price of a new home in Wicklow. The company said it had begun an internal investigation. Days later, the First Home Scheme price caps were raised, chasing up the market for the fourth time in three years.
Mazars, the consultant employed to evaluate Help to Buy, found it unfit for purpose and recommended its withdrawal in 2024. Instead the Government doubled down and extended it for five years. This is because it ticks two political boxes. Firstly, Help to Buy is popular, as it is perceived as free money. But the benefits to consumers are illusory because the subsidies result in higher house prices, and everybody pays more tax to fund them. Secondly, by drawing out more supply, the scheme helps the Government to meet its housing targets. Somehow, this has become an objective in itself. But, as we have seen, increased housing output achieved in this way will not deliver the lower prices that consumers expect.
Dr John McCartney is a lecturer in property economics at TU Dublin and adjunct associate professor at UCD.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Times
an hour ago
- Irish Times
Twitter challenges €500,000 WRC award over ‘enhanced opportunity' to depart job
A senior Dublin-based manager with Twitter who was deemed by the company to have resigned when he failed to sign up to the new 'hard-core' work environment set out by Elon Musk had, in fact, availed of an 'enhanced opportunity' to depart with severance pay, the company has told the Labour Court . Twitter International Unlimited, now X , is appealing awards totalling €550,131 made to Gary Rooney by the Workplace Relations Commission last year over the circumstances of his departure from the company's Dublin office where he had been employed for nine years by late 2022 when Mr Musk bought the firm for $44 billion (€38.15 billion). Mr Rooney, a financial manager with global responsibilities in a number of areas, says he was unfairly dismissed and continues to be more than €16,000 out of pocket per month due to the cut in salary he has taken since starting work with a bank as well as the loss of substantial bonuses linked to Twitter's share performance before its sale. He puts his total losses to date at €689,406 and is seeking that amount. Cathy Smith SC for X, contends Mr Rooney resigned and described the estimated losses as 'wildly inaccurate'. READ MORE Mr Rooney characterised the atmosphere within the company in the weeks after the Musk takeover as 'chaotic' as thousands of employees were made redundant and senior managers from other Musk companies were brought in to decide who should be retained or let go. About half of the firm's staff lost their jobs, he said, with senior Twitter managers given no opportunity to say which members of their teams should be impacted. He said the situation caused widespread 'fear and anxiety' among the remaining workers. [ Twitter ordered to pay record €550,000 to senior executive in Ireland Opens in new window ] On November 16th, Mr Musk sent an email titled 'Fork in the Road' to the company's remaining employees. In this, he said that to 'build a breakthrough Twitter 2.0 and succeed in an increasingly competitive world, we will need to be extremely hard-core. This will mean working long hours at high intensity. Only exceptional performance will constitute a passing grade.' The email required employees to click 'yes' in a link at the bottom of the email. Anyone who did not do so by 10pm Irish time the following day, it said, would receive three months' pay in severance. 'Whatever decision you make, thank you for your efforts to make Twitter successful,' Mr Musk said. The following morning the company followed up with an Frequently Asked Questions document in which it said those who did not sign up in the way outlined in Mr Musk's email would subsequently receive documentation outlining the terms of the departure. Mr Rooney, who received gross pay of €334,114.84 during 2022 until December 18th when his employment formally ended, said he did not know what the implications of signing up would be as he already routinely worked in excess of 40 hours per week and had been recognised through a variety of significant bonuses to be a high performer. He said he approached his manager seeking additional information but he did not have any and both of his US-based immediate superiors had already been fired. 'I didn't really know what to think. I always would have considered myself to be a high performer but I didn't know if that high performance would meet that passing grade. I already worked long hours but I didn't know whether I would be expected to work longer hours or have them assigned to me'. He said he was also unsure about how benefits included in his remuneration package might be altered as the FAQ said detail of this would be provided in the following days. Asked by counsel, Padraic Lyons SC, briefed Barry Kenny of Kenny Sullivan Solicitors whether his situation might reasonably be described as 'an enhanced opportunity' to go, as Ms Smith, briefed by Mason Hayes and Curran for X, had suggested, he said he didn't know how it could characterised as such. 'I had no way of knowing what the implications of ticking the box might be,' he said, adding that he did not believe the 12 hours he was effectively allowed to make a decision from the receipt of the FAQ document was reasonable. Asked if he believed he had tendered his resignation by not ticking the box, he said: 'No. Absolutely not.'
Irish Times
3 hours ago
- Irish Times
White House confirms 15% tariff rate will include pharma and semiconductors
The White House has confirmed the tariff rate of 15 per cent in the trade deal struck with the European Union on Sunday will include pharmaceuticals and semiconductors. The two sectors are key to Irish exports, accounting for the bulk of the €72 billion of goods shipped to the US last year. The Government and the European Commission both said on Monday it was their 'clear understanding' there would be a tariff ceiling of 15 per cent in those sectors. Senior figures in the commission said its negotiating team had been given commitments by US president Donald Trump's administration on this point, but there remained some lingering concern owing to the unpredictable nature of Mr Trump. READ MORE However, a 'fact sheet' published by the White House contains a line stating the tariff rate of 15 per cent will apply to pharmaceuticals and semiconductors, albeit couched in terms that suggest the tariffs will be paid by the EU when in fact they will be borne by US companies or consumers. [ How the EU's 'lopsided' US trade deal was done Opens in new window ] 'As part of president Trump's strategy to establish balanced trade, the European Union will pay the United States a tariff rate of 15 per cent, including on autos and auto parts, pharmaceuticals, and semiconductors,' the White House said. EU Commission trade spokesman Olof Gill noted that the framework agreement was in effect a 'political commitment' rather than a legally binding document. He said Europe and the White House were now working on a joint statement, which will be treated as 'an agreement in principle' that will give the bloc a 'political road map to where we take it from here'. 'Both sides are working very hard now to get the details of that signed up,' he said on RTÉ Radio One. 'We're hoping to do that before the deadline of August 1st set by the US.' At that stage, he said, the EU would be in a position to say 'very clearly' what the next stages are, and will use the joint statement as 'a platform to look at other areas where we can reduce tariffs'. 'This is how it's going to work,' he said. 'Fifteen per cent is across the board. That's going to cover all sectors. It's going to cover pharma. It is going to cover digital. 'What we're talking about here are political commitments. This joint statement I mentioned isn't a legally binding document. These are commitments.' Separately, it has emerged Irish butter entering the US will return to the tariff level in place before Mr Trump came to office, which was around 16 per cent. In a briefing to members this week, business lobby Ibec pointed out that butter had been subject to a tariff based on the weight of the product, rather than a percentage figure which is more common. This worked out at about 16 per cent of the value of the product. Under the finer details of the deal, products which had been tariffed on this basis are to return to their original level rather than the 15 per cent which will apply more generally. This returns Kerrygold, sold by Ornua, to a tariff level at which it has managed to grow its market share in recent years. Since Mr Trump imposed his additional 10 per cent tariff in April, Irish butter imported to the US has faced a punitive tariff of around 26 per cent. Meanwhile, the trade deal has been described by an academic from University College Cork as 'a capitulation' by Europe that will cause 'long-term negative results'. Dr John O'Brien, an academic on financial markets and investments, who was previously an investment manager in London, said the EU had projected 'weakness'. 'The EU commission, and Ursula von der Leyen in particular, has capitulated in the US trade deal with the US,' he said. 'The deal will negatively affect growth. In the short term, this is a better outcome than a trade war. 'However, the projection of weakness by the EU, surrendering to economic threats and accepting a one-sided deal will be noted globally with long-term negative results. China and Russia will be particularly interested in this weakness. 'The financial markets reacted by selling the euro, signalling an expectation of lower growth across the EU. This view was repeated as stock exchanges across the EU also fell.' Dr O'Brien said the 'supposed benefit' of certainty was 'overstated', and, echoing the comments of Mr Gill, noted that the current deal was just a 'political agreement'. 'There are many failure points before a deal is signed,' he said. 'Having conceded once to Trump there is no guarantee that he will not come back for more having sensed weakness. Business planning on the basis of 15 per cent and done may be surprised before the end of the year.' Matthew Ryan, head of market strategy at global financial services firm Ebury, said estimates of about a 0.3-0.5 per cent hit to the bloc's GDP in the next three to five years was 'moderate, but not enough to fuel recession concerns'.
Irish Times
7 hours ago
- Irish Times
Bank of Ireland profit falls 31% amid impairment charge as tariffs weigh
Bank of Ireland reported a 31 per cent drop in net profit for the first half of the year as its net interest income declined and the bank increased loan impairment charges as US tariff-related risks weigh on the economic outlook. Still, the bank marginally increased its full-year net interest income forecast and maintained its medium-term financial targets. Bank of Ireland's net profit fell to €608 million in the first half, it said in a statement on Tuesday. While its net interest income declined to €1.67 billion from €1.8 billion for the same period last year, the result was better than the company had expected, it said. READ MORE The lender hiked its net impairment losses to €137 million from €50 million, driven by an increase in 'loan loss experience' and as management took a €40 million general provision to reflect 'the evolving macroeconomic outlook'. While Bank of Ireland's economists upgraded their Irish economic forecasts in recent weeks, this was caveated on the EU reaching a trade deal with the US that wouild leave tariffs on most Irish goods at 10 per cent. However, an accord reached over the weekend will see a 15 per cent tariff apply to most imports from the EU. Looking ahead, the bank now sees its net interest income coming in at €3.3 billion, up marginally from €3.25 billion previously forecast. It reported €3.56 billion of net interest income last year in a higher interest rate environment. It continues to expect its so-called business income – including income from its New Ireland life business, Davy, and shares of joint ventures – to expected to rise 5 per cent. 'The group had a good first half performance,' said chief executive Myles O'Grady. 'Against an uncertain international backdrop, the Irish economy is resilient. Bank of Ireland is well positioned to navigate this environment, generating strong levels of capital to support customers, grow our balance sheet, invest in the business and deliver attractive shareholder returns.' Bank of Ireland reaffirmed its full-year guidance of delivering net profit equivalent to about 15 per cent of shareholders' tangible equity in the business. Having recommenced interim ordinary dividends in 2024, the bank announced that it will pay an interim dividend of €243 million on its result for the first half. Since the start of 2023 the group has returned €2.6 billion to shareholders through a series of buybacks and dividends, it noted.
