Read on Twitter
This landlord thing is really bothering me. So if I get the argument that the Landlord representatives are making in their complaining tv interviews is that the new laws are a major problem to them. /1
The legislation that requires them to provide a fit for purpose product, like every other industry is required to provide. Like shoe makers, toilet paper makers and food manufacturers. There is compliance costs in every country, for every business. /2
But what is the downside to the consumer?
The landlords that stay in the market provide a good product to their tenants. They are required to make it livable and stable. Keeping the tenant from having to go in and out of the market /3
The landlords that stay in the market provide a good product to their tenants. They are required to make it livable and stable. Keeping the tenant from having to go in and out of the market /3
But, you say, many will exit the market or stop increasing their portfolios and the ones they have they will make less money on.
And? /4
And? /4
The housing stock is the housing stock, NZ already has an aggressive state house building program and the constant complaint is the slow building - so landlords pulling out of the market will only serve to cool the prices. It will allow more first home buyers into the market. /5
A generally more stable housing market brought about by FHM buyers and better tenant protects will actually improve the housing market as well as assist in stabilizing labour markets. A housed worker is a happier, healthier worker who will stay with your business. /6
I honestly do not see a downside to putting more legislation around the protection of tenants as a real lever to assist the housing crisis. /fin
