I refer to Lorcan Sirr’s article “New rent rules will make the market even more dysfunctional” (February 5th), in which he discusses the Residential Tenancies Miscellaneous Provisions Bill 2026 and his reference to the multiplicity of legislation applicable to the residential rental sector.
The reality is that since enactment in 2004 of what the 2026 Bill references as “the Principal Act” there have been 14 amending and related Bills enacted; the 2026 Bill is the 15th. Add the 2026 Bill to the mix and the law will be an incomprehensible jumble of complexity, incomprehensible to the general public, practically beyond any common sense oversight and only intelligible to specialist lawyers with the capacity to engage in intellectual legal gymnastics of an Olympian standard.
The complex and arbitrary provisions contained in the 2026 Bill and key omissions not only render it unfit for purpose but practically guarantee the ultimate success of a constitutional challenge under principles enunciated by the Supreme Court in 1981 in Blake v the Attorney General.
In that case, which government seems to have forgotten in the mists of time, the Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional our old rent restrictions laws. The 2026 Bill does not fairly address and protect constitutionally recognised property rights and balance them against interests of social justice and the common good (see article 43 of the Constitution) but drives an ideological horse and carriage through them. There are serious questions of constitutional propriety overhanging some current provisions and a constitutional challenge may result in a collapse of the entire legal edifice.
READ MORE
The Bill is a classic example of legislation developed in an ideological silo and because of a consensus across the Dáil that appears to depict landlord property ownership as an evil necessity, it is unlikely there will be any serious critical constitutional and technical examination of the Bill in the Dáil during its rushed enactment – beyond throwing brickbats about the housing crises and denigrating landlords.
A glaring anomaly among many relating to the Bill is that should a landlord die and by will leave rental properties to a son or daughter or another who is compelled to pay inheritance tax and can only do so by a property sale, such sale may be constrained or properties arbitrarily devalued by the presence of a tenant with a right to remain for a further five years.
Another interesting question is how any such property will be valued for inheritance tax purposes.
This deeply flawed Bill will not in any way resolve the issue of high rents because of the shortage of residential rental properties. Only the incentivised increased construction of such properties and encouraging landlord investment in them can do that.
However, as already known the Bill is not only driving landlords out of the market but erecting barriers to new individuals entering it for investment and pension purposes.
There is an urgent need for a rethink and for all residential tenancy laws to be incorporated into a single consolidated Act. It is also crucial, should the Bill be enacted in its current form, to avoid uncertainty and legal chaos that it be referred by President Catherine Connolly to the Supreme Court for a determination as to its constitutionality. – Yours, etc
Alan Shatter,
Dublin 16.
Sir, – The rental reforms slated for March 2026 are a pragmatic evolution of a system that has relied on price caps since 2016. By finally allowing a market reset every six years, the Government admits that a decade of price suppression has failed. However, clinging to a “lower of 2 per cent or inflation” annual cap remains a half-measure that ignores the basic laws of supply and demand.
The core flaw in this policy is the belief that price caps solve shortages. In reality, they do the opposite: they artificially inflate demand. By keeping rents below the true economic cost, the State encourages more people to enter or stay in the rental market than the system can support. Simultaneously, it strangles supply.
When rent is capped below the actual cost of maintenance, labour and interest, property becomes a “declining asset”. This forces the small-scale landlords we desperately need to exit the market, shrinking the pool of available homes.
Furthermore, after nearly 10 years of artificial caps, the very concept of a “market price” has become a fiction; true market value is now almost impossible to determine.
By forcing a “one-shot” reset every six years, the State creates a high-stakes gamble. If a landlord miscalculates that initial rate, they are effectively “screwed” – locked into a suboptimal yield for more than half a decade while their own costs continue to float with the real economy.
True housing security requires diversity of choice. Current legislation has effectively outlawed “naturally affordable” housing by mandating a uniform standard for every unit. By making it illegal to offer basic, “cheap and cheerful” accommodation, we force those on a budget to compete for a dwindling supply of high-spec units.
We need a free-market approach where prices function as signals, rather than arbitrary caps that guarantee a permanent shortage. – Yours, etc,
Xiaoyu Sun,
Royal Canal Park,
Dublin 15.
