Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Dutch cities want to ban property investors in all neighborhoods

nltimes.nl

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 598 posts

Re: Dutch cities want to ban property investors in all neighborhoods

#381

Post by DoubleDerper »

IkmoIkmo wrote: post #328
rusteh1 wrote: post #165

I don't understand how this would work. How do people rent? Obviously many people can't or do not wish to own their house for any number of reasons. Who will own houses that are rented? I used to live in Amsterdam as an expat, and rented from a landlord who owned several homes in Amsterdam. Would she not be able to own and rent these homes under this scheme? The social housing system seemed to be abused when I was th…

This is one of those terribly myopic and symbolic policies that the Netherlands (despite generally one of the best governed countries in the world) keeps falling for. Studies have shown over and over again that investors aren't causing the price increases in the Netherlands. Prices won't improve much. Renting is going to take a beating, which is already an extremely small sector in the Netherlands, among the smallest…

"Studies have shown over and over again that investors aren't causing the price increases in the Netherlands"

Source(s), please.

Re: Dutch cities want to ban property investors in all neighborhoods

#382

Post by ChuckNorris89 »

FridayoLeary wrote: post #293

If the price of properties fall dramatically won't that have an adverse affect on property owners? Imagine shelling out £1M on a house, and spending 20 years paying it off. Now, at the end of that time period the house is worth half of that. I'm not an expert but is closing off an entire section of Capitalism going to work flawlessly?

And what's wrong with that? You still own the house in full and can live in it till you die whether it's worth $1MM or $1. There should be no guarantee for your house to appreciate over time; that's what got us in this mess in the first place.

If you want to turn your housing into an invested vehicle to sell an make you rich then you're basically gambling and should fully accept the risks of losing money in the process like with any other investment.

Capitalism also means letting bad business or poor investments go bust, not prop them up artificially for decades via low interest rates, zoning laws and nimbyism to make them worth more.

Re: Dutch cities want to ban property investors in all neighborhoods

#383

Post by TacticalMalice »

belter wrote: post #324
TacticalMalice wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eviction is already possible after 3 months of not paying rents (and sometimes after 2 months if there's a history of non-payment). The landlord has to get a court order, which is commonly granted. Minors will be placed in foster care if they cannot be placed elsewhere. Taxes on earnings depend on how you structure your work. They are usually in "box 3" where taxes are based on fictitious returns on investment as a p…

Well not at the moment to start with: "Government rules that tenants cannot be evicted during corona crisis" https://www.iamexpat.nl/housing/real-estate-news/government-... Also tenants can sign contract with you ( as landlord) and immediately go to the Huur Commissie and argue their rent is too high. So it will be lowered if they first signed a different contract with the landlord. https://www.huurcommissie.nl/ Conc…

> "Government rules that tenants cannot be evicted during corona crisis"

The above is an agreement between several housing cooperations/companies and the ministry. It is not a law and eviction orders due to backpay have still been granted after June 2020, when access to the courts opened up again for these cases.

And yes, judges will consider the interests of all parties. In the case where a judge won't grant an eviction, the tenant will be ordered to pay missed rent.

> Also tenants can sign contract with you ( as landlord) and immediately go to the Huur Commissie and argue their rent is too high. So it will be lowered if they first signed a different contract with the landlord.

This is only possible for social housing (based on the point system), so this shouldn't come as a surprise for the landlord. This is also a reason to avoid renting out social housing.

The only thing during COVID that's affecting most landlords is that rent increase is maximized. Considering that employees are supported via their employer's NOW-subsidy, I don't buy the argument for this maximization for people that still have jobs. Another benefit to offering only temporary contracts.

> I know a landlord who waited 2 years.

Waited two years before getting an order, or only successfully getting an order after two years?

Re: Dutch cities want to ban property investors in all neighborhoods

#384

Post by imtringued »

itsdsmurrell wrote: post #160
iso1210 wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Round here in Cornwall the jobs are things like surf instructor, supermarket worker, barperson, etc. That's not gonna stretch to the local house prices. That was the case. A colleague of mine, originally from St Just, moved to London for work as so many have to do. Another from near Cockermouth did the same. Both now work remotely full time from their 'home towns' on decent wages. Covid has done wonders for local c…

The real problem is how much the bank earns off the interest it charges you throughout your life while it had to do what?... create new money from nothing into the money supply with special permissions given to it by the government. This is why housing is so expensive to begin with. This bullshit needs to stop.

Well, I personally think that the banks profit margins are way too high but let me explain why they deserve to charge a profit in the first place.

We can make promises to each other. Essentially write debt contracts to each other at no fee. The problem is that we trust each other but if we want a more complex economy than a barter system allows, then we need to make it possible for a third party to trust the debt contract. Through the introduction of banks as middlemen they use their resources to check how trustworthy the debt contract you offer to the bank is. In exchange you get money, which is a liquid claim on your debt contract and thousands or even millions of other debt contracts. Thus the bank is primarily in the business of managing risk and the management of risk demands a net interest margin. If the bank didn't make money off of loans then any bad loan would lose the bank money and it would go bankrupt over the long term. In other words, the surplus profit that the bank made off your loan is its reward for correctly managing risk.

>This is why housing is so expensive to begin with.

Or it could be that housing is in high demand and banks offer financing so people have more money but since location is a monopoly, supply never catches up with demand in popular areas. Speculators themselves simply predict that there is sufficient demand for you to be willing to bay $400k for a house. Speculators didn't create that profit margin, it is the monopoly of land that created it and they merely exploit it.

Re: Dutch cities want to ban property investors in all neighborhoods

#385

Post by joelbluminator »

samsonradu wrote: post #358
joelbluminator wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I was living in NL I knew a guy who had a mortgage for a house in Australia, a mortgage on a house in Groningen and then he was looking to get another mortgage for a house in Den Haag. Banks don't seem to cooperate internationally or even nationally; he never told the banks he has mortgages already.

You’re right, banks don’t cooperate internationally in this area, but it cuts both ways no? How can one get a mortgage in Holland without being a resident/having income declared there? The bank will not loan a foreign resident in those circumstances. Did he pay taxes in all those countries?

He is a Dutch resident but no bank knows he has other mortgages. He is not even allowed to rent out his house yet he does.

Re: Dutch cities want to ban property investors in all neighborhoods

#386

Post by imtringued »

Yaa101 wrote: post #218
dan-robertson wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Banks don’t get to create money. Quantitive Easing isn’t something banks can call up on demand and it isn’t banks getting loads of free money. Instead they sell certain slightly risky assets to the government at a slightly higher price than they would be worth without QE. This small price difference is the free money but the bigger difference is that the banks have more liquid cash to use for e.g. making loans. I thi…

"Banks don’t get to create money." nope, they create debt, which is the same in practice.

Well, if we want to use correctish terminology then banks grant credit (the number on your bank account) when debtors offer a promise to pay (the debt contract).

Re: Dutch cities want to ban property investors in all neighborhoods

#387

Post by einpoklum »

IkmoIkmo wrote: post #363
einpoklum wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If buy-to-let is banned, rental supply drops This seems to contradict your earlier claim that: > the municipality already has laws in-place which fine owners of vacant homes

I don't see the contradiction, could you explain?

If "rental supply drops", that means the people who own apartments they don't live in won't let them out. If they don't let them out, they're subject to the anti-empty-apartment laws.

Re: Dutch cities want to ban property investors in all neighborhoods

#388

Post by marcinzm »

throw0101a wrote: post #257
saddlerustle wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your first point is a misleading anecdote given there's actually data on this. The amount of empty homes in London is at a historical low [1]. Broadly, cities with the highest amount of empty homes tend to have the most affordable housing, because obviously that indicates there's more than enough housing to go round. [1] https://i.imgur.com/jX1OpmS.png

Contra: > The Square Mile has the highest percentage of empty homes in the entire country, fresh data states. > Some 42.4 properties per 1,000 sit unused in the City of London, leaving it top of the charts and the only London authority to feature in the nationwide top 10. > Data compiled by insurer Admiral also shows that as many as 29,242 London homes have been unoccupied for at least six months, to a collective val…

4.2% is a lot less than 70%.

Re: Dutch cities want to ban property investors in all neighborhoods

#389

Post by [deleted] »

joelbluminator wrote: post #331
Freak_NL wrote: post #190

This is desperately needed. And not just in the major cities; this is happening in every Dutch town. Amsterdam may have prices beyond absurd, but the whole nation is burdened by this problem. In the street I live in the capital of the northern province of Fryslân (Frisia) most homes are owned by their inhabitants, but in the past few years we've seen several houses being bought by small-time investors (who already ow…

When I was living in NL I knew a guy who had a mortgage for a house in Australia, a mortgage on a house in Groningen and then he was looking to get another mortgage for a house in Den Haag. Banks don't seem to cooperate internationally or even nationally; he never told the banks he has mortgages already.

[deleted]

Re: Dutch cities want to ban property investors in all neighborhoods

#390

Post by joelbluminator »

berkes wrote: post #373
joelbluminator wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I was living in NL I knew a guy who had a mortgage for a house in Australia, a mortgage on a house in Groningen and then he was looking to get another mortgage for a house in Den Haag. Banks don't seem to cooperate internationally or even nationally; he never told the banks he has mortgages already.

While banks may not check this on signing, they'll certainly check it when you start defaulting. This really is the worst advice ever. It's a sure way to get you in Real Trouble when shit hits fans. This is not legal advice either, btw. Just someone who read the tiny letters in the mortgage contracts.

If he defaults. From his point a view he is not risking too much; he never put his own money as down payment it was 100÷ mortgage which NL is too generous with. Then the rent he earns is higher than the mortgage due to the low interest. So best case he ends up with 3 houses in 25 years. Worst case he gets some angry letters from the bank and loses houses that arent really his. I am not condoning his actions but they are not irrational.
Post reply on HN