Today I do not have a Section 482 property to write about because I find visiting difficult. My regular readers will have noticed that over the past couple of years I have been writing more often about properties that are publicly owned. I do intend to continue visiting and writing. But I realise my blog puts me in a difficult position. Most owners, understandably, do not want their private property written about on a website.

I have mixed feelings about the Revenue Section 482 scheme. The public are deprived of the amount of income tax that Section 482 owners save. Is it value for money? Should the government be urged to consider doing away with the scheme?

It’s not that I disagree about the value of historic houses. I love historic houses! I love to visit them, I love their history, their architecture, their gardens. I love to stay in them when I can. However, inclusion is too broad. I don’t think every property is actually worth visiting.

When I began visiting the properties, I had no idea that Ireland had so many wonderful houses. So I assumed that the few we have are worth saving. When I discovered Mark Bence-Jones’s landmark  A Guide to Irish Country Houses I learned that there are at least 3000 such houses. Perhaps the ones still standing are worth saving, I thought.

After more than five years pursuing my project, I have learned that Mark Bence-Jones only touches the surface. The National Inventory of Architectural Heritage lists thousands more properties. Nearly every week a gorgeous historic property is advertised for sale. Each one could be a Section 482 property. Could every rectory and old farmhouse be included on the Section 482 scheme?

Criteria for inclusion is that the property is of horticultural, scientific, historical, architectural or aesthetic significance. Application of the criteria is sometimes tenuous.

Ostensibly, the scheme helps owners to maintain their historic property because it is worth maintaining. It seems that thousands more properties could be included at little inconvenience to owners (more on this later). With the housing crisis and the ecological impact of building, every building is worth maintaining. If one owner has their income tax reduced by spending on house repairs while another owner does not, there should be a very good reason.

The Scheme requires that the historic properties must be either open to the public for specified periods, or provide tourist accommodation. I have criticised the latter before as there is no limit on what can be charged. I wonder why more B&Bs and hotels don’t apply for section 482 status. Why don’t all castle hotels apply, for example? Is it to do with what sort of ownership meets criteria? The government should definitely do away with the part of the scheme that allows a property to fulfil its obligations by providing tourist accommodation. Most are too expensive for the majority of Irish people. The public does not benefit at all. I suspect this was not originally part of the scheme.

Worst are the houses that only do “whole house” rental. In those cases, we can be grateful that someone is maintaining a wonderful piece of history, but since we will never get to see it, we should not be expected to fund it.

That leaves us with the houses that are open to the public for specified periods. I am sure I am not the only person who arrived to a locked gate, or was told that the open day was not convenient. It’s hard for owners, I understand! I know I couldn’t do it, showing people around my home, having it tidy, being there to open the door, not knowing who would arrive. Fortunately, I think only people who are genuinely interested go to see the properties.

And so, I would hope, only people genuinely interested look at my website. I do have owners who have asked me not to write about their property at all. I understand. But that’s when I return to the value of the scheme. Is it because we value these houses, their beauty, their history? Aren’t owners receiving tax benefits because they are acknowledging the value of their property to the larger public? And if so, can they really ask me not to write about them? By highlighting their aesthetic and historical significance, my website encourages people to believe historic houses are worth maintaining.

I am not saying I am convinced of this, and therein lies my problem. Which is why I have only visited one private section 482 property in the past year or more. I completely understand that an owner does not want me to write about their property. I understand that an owner wishes nobody would visit. So I find it hard to make myself visit. I would love to know others’ experience.

And if you are an owner, please let me know if I am welcome to visit! Because I find it hard to ask.