cross-posted from: https://lemmy.crimedad.work/post/12162

Why? Because apparently they need some more incentive to keep units occupied. Also, even though a property might be vacant, there’s still imputed rental income there. Its owner is just receiving it in the form of enjoying the unit for himself instead of receiving an actual rent check from a tenant. That imputed rent ought to be taxed like any other income.

  • FluffyPotato@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    1 year ago

    Income tax on no income sounds fucking stupid. Just up property tax on the 3th or 4th house or apartment by a fuckton, watch everyone panic sell their shit crashing the housing market into oblivion and call it a day. Ez affordable housing.

    • el_bhm@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Multiple holder companies incoming. Now that will need to be plugged up.

      Not saying this is a bad idea. But they will find loopholes.

      • BattleOften@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago
        1. Require rental properties to be registered and report when vacant.
        2. Block any new single dwelling rental property purchases.
        3. Only allow more rental property purchases when vacancy rate is below a certain threshold in a metropolitan area.
      • Rekliner@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, there was just recently a big scandal in my city where one guy bought 20 houses with 9 shell companies. Attempted to do shitty flipping jobs. Selling the houses from one company to the next so they didn’t immediately jump up in price in the real estate history.

        The sad part is: if he hadn’t overpriced the market and sold more of them he would’ve gotten away with it, but he waited too long and got stuck. But until that point nobody knew one guy had 20 houses, it was 2 per company on paper.

    • captcha [any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      But then the almighty homeowners home value might collapse too!

      But for real landlords wohld start destroying their own housing stock to take some tax write off or insurance fraud.

      • FluffyPotato@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Most landlords are like massive corporations, if all the property your corporation owned suddenly exploded it may rise a few eyebrows. Someone’s rich aunt renting their second summer home isn’t having that much of a detrimental effect on the housing market as corpos buying up all available housing.

        • captcha [any]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          My point is they would find some way to legally dispose of their stock to artificially decrease supply and raise prices again. Its particularly the big corporations who would do this.

          • FluffyPotato@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            Maybe but then like stop whatever loophole they are using. Doing nothing is quite a lot worse.

            Thankfully the housing market is still fine in my country so I don’t have a dog in the race but people in the US should take some pointers from the French and fucking riot at this point. All of yall have like 5 guns per person yet you are like the most demure country when it comes to politicians and corpos just exploiting the fuck out of you.