Recently, there was a report in the media that the Social Democracy wants to give rent allowance to anyone who rents behind the apartment inhabited by him he pays more than one third of his income. The proposal is very eagerly supported, for example, by a Member Stanislav Křeček, among other advocates of regulated rent. I will be the owner house, so I would support this proposal. I could make a great profit on that.
The only thing the CSSD will cause with this proposal is that will increase mainly market rent at the expense of us all. However, this is not the only idea from the CSSD workshop that increases the rental price. As?
"No one will pay more than a third of their net income on rent. If this limit is exceeded, there will be a right to a financial contribution, "Paroubek promised.
What will be the impact?
Imagine you are a rental owner house, tenants rent an apartment for a market rent, rent regulation is up to you House does not apply. Before the introduction of the CSSD's contribution to housing, you had to consider any increase in rent - there are more rental houses in the area, there is competition.
You know that if you increased the rent too high, you would probably lose some tenants. With a high rent new you will find it quite difficult. However, one day the above-mentioned proposal of the Socialists will be approved, according to which no one will pay more than one third of their income. At least for a period of time, but permanently in people over 65 years of age.
What are you going to do at that moment? You will increase the rent. For how much? Whatever you want. For example, from 11 a month to 30 a month. What about tenants? Nothing, because they know they will receive a contribution from the state.
Let's take a closer look at the situation. Before you increased the amount of rent, you went to see Mr. Novák, who has lived with you for a long time. You suggested an interesting solution:
You, as a homeowner for a period of time, can Mr. Novák receive a state contribution, you increase the rent from 11 thousand to 30 thousand. However, Mr. Novák has an income of 17 - ie he can officially give a maximum of 000 crowns for rent. The state will contribute to Mr. Novák with the amount of 5 610, -. As the owner of the house, you will suggest to Mr. Novák that you share 24:390. Mr. Novák will gain another roughly 12 crowns, so he actually lives for free. Rent increase signs with pleasure.
Let's say your next tenant is Mr. Kingwhich is 67 let. He takes his pension, he doesn't have much money, so you come up with the same tactics - you share the profit 50:50. Mr. King, whose pension is a little over 8, - will gladly agree - 000 thousand will not just refuse. However, Mr. Král is very smart, so he will offer you an improvement - you will rent him another apartment, where Mr. Král will live, and you will rent the current apartment to someone without a lease, for example for 10. You will also share 50:50. Next five thousand both for you and for the King.
Golden Czech hands…
Who will spend it? All taxpayers over time (the cost of this "program" will be enormous, which will greatly increase spending from the state budget) and honest people. I would not be surprised if, a few months after the introduction of contributions, the Czech Republic was the country with the highest rents in the European Union. Then social democracy would come again (which caused all the chaos) and with great pomp would say that it would "save ordinary people" by "regulating immoral rents", causing the CSSD to cause lack of apartments.
Another proposal of the CSSD is that the minimum duration of the lease should be 5 years.
What will cause this proposal?
This will reduce availability housing, especially for young people. As?
The owner of the house will not want to rent you an apartment. The practice at present is such that usually the owners home they rent flats for one year with the possibility (preferential right to) of extension if you were a "problem-free tenant". The owner of the house usually does not know you and does not know to whom he entrusts his property. A one-year contract is less of a risk for him than renting an apartment for five years, but he may not just get rid of the problem tenant.
The landlord will either not rent the apartment to you at all (it will depend much more on first impression), or rent it, but for a higher rent, because he is obliged to rent for a longer period, which is a higher risk, which will compensate in the rent.