ZAP
A new report also points to the requirement for a maximum 35% effort rate for tenants as the explanation for poor uptake of the Rent Support Program.
The Lease Support Program (PAA), created in 2019 to promote affordable rents through the granting of tax benefits to owners, it continues to present reduced results and significant oversight failures, according to the most recent external evaluation carried out by the consultancy Quaternaire.
The report, which analyzed the period between July 2021 and June 2024, warns of the lack of effective mechanisms to control compliance with the program’s rules. According to the evaluators, the Institute of Housing and Urban Rehabilitation (IHRU), the entity responsible for managing the PAA, does not carry out systematic actions to monitor contracts covered by the regime, which prevents the detection of possible situations of non-compliance or improper attribution of tax benefits.
The program was designed to facilitate middle class access to the rental marketoffering landlords total exemption from IRS or IRC in exchange for offering rents at least 20% lower than market values. However, ownership by owners has been very limited.
During the period analyzed, there were almost 35 thousand households with valid applications for the program, but only 2.7% had an active contract under the PAA, which corresponds to less than a thousand contracts. The assessment considers this expression to be residual, especially when compared to the size of the national rental market, says .
Among the factors that help explain the program’s poor performance is the requirement of a maximum effort rate of 35% for tenants. According to Quaternaire, the evolution of family income has not followed the increase in rents in recent years, excluding many potential beneficiaries. The study concludes that lower-middle income households end up not finding a response in the program, while the available offer tends to favor the higher income strata within the eligible universe.
In addition to limitations on access, the report criticizes the lack of robust monitoring instruments for the rental market and considers insufficient monitoring mechanisms currently existing. Since the automation of processes, there is no longer any prior documentary verification of contracts and no regular audits or annual control plans have been implemented.
