91–100 of 137 posts
Tax something like $1,000 per day that a unit is unoccupied (aka not in residential lease or commercial with x number of employees assigned there).
Buy and hold empty is not sustainable. Also Airbnb can go to hell.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This isn't a distribution problem. We don't have enough pie (houses). We need more houses. Not a campaign to distribute a massive shortage slightly more evenly.
There are more empty second homes than homeless people in my state. By a factor of 10. It's a distribution problem.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> don’t see how those are trivially worked around in a country with a half decent government Look at how people abuse rent controlled apartments. (All the way up to the current mayor.) > People are not just going to give their relatives title to their property This is literally what happens in places with such taxes. I wouldn’t bat an eye buying a house in my partner or a parent’s name if it saved 3x property taxes.
> I wouldn’t bat an eye buying a house in my partner or a parent’s name if it saved 3x property taxes. That sounds like the policy had the desired effect. I.e home ownership is spread out across many people. Those people cannot then own properties without being subject to those extra taxes. They'd be giving something up to help you, so would presumably benefiting somehow from your scheme.
...neither can an individual today. The point is one person still controls multiple properties.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why is everyone (ok, fine, mostly economics & tech people) convinced this is such a wildly viable slam dunk of an idea? Have y'all ever opened up a wall before and seen the electrical, plumbing, etc mechanical bits that make up a home? Any idea of what it'd cost to chop up that office space and feed every individual piece the necessary bits? It's outrageous that we're even talking about this idea still. It'd require…
Houses are like a million dollars. Some plumbing is maybe 10k?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> it's trivially easy to monitor or seize real property Anyone who owns property should be horrified at the notion of making it “trivially easy” to seize real property. That turns this into electoral toast. Its only utility is in distracting from zoning reform. Also, the homeownership rate is 65% [1]. Second homeowners aren’t the problem. [1] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/RHORUSQ156N
> (Also, homeownership is 65% [1]. Second homeowners aren’t the problem.) Is there a breakdown on what portion of this 65% own multiple homes? Personally, I’m not a fan of anyone who has more than 2 homes. One primary and one vacation or rental. Why does anyone need more than that?
Genuine Question, why can't we just charge a federal property tax 3-4x local property taxes for individuals who own >1 property (which would likely be distributed back to the locality, specifics not important), apply the same rules we do for pass-through taxation to mitigate loopholes, and automatically charge this elevated rate for properties owned by non-natural persons? I think this would just price in the externa…
What would actually help is the reverse, i.e. abolish property taxes and reduce rents by that much.
If that was done I'd save money faster and be able to buy 1 house for myself sooner.
Genuine Question, why can't we just charge a federal property tax 3-4x local property taxes for individuals who own >1 property (which would likely be distributed back to the locality, specifics not important), apply the same rules we do for pass-through taxation to mitigate loopholes, and automatically charge this elevated rate for properties owned by non-natural persons? I think this would just price in the externa…
> Genuine Question, why can't we just charge a federal property tax 3-4x local property taxes for individuals who own >1 property (which would likely be distributed back to the locality, specifics not important) I am that person. I own two duplexes in addition to my primary residence, for a total of four residential rental units – all 2/1s made up of ~750 sq ft each. Those additional properties that I own provide hou…
https://legallysociable.com/2021/12/28/new-publication-more-...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Genuine Question, why can't we just charge a federal property tax 3-4x local property taxes for individuals who own >1 property (which would likely be distributed back to the locality, specifics not important) I am that person. I own two duplexes in addition to my primary residence, for a total of four residential rental units – all 2/1s made up of ~750 sq ft each. Those additional properties that I own provide hou…
Fellow housing provider here. To your point about scraping the lots and building SFHs, I would counter the solution to that is to outlaw zoning for SFHs for tear downs. Raw land, go for it. But if a structure stood on a parcel, you can only increase density when rebuilding and upzone. This also potentially avoids situations like Naperville, Illinois, where you have a housing shortage at the same time obscenely wealth…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are more empty second homes than homeless people in my state. By a factor of 10. It's a distribution problem.
Only if you have such a loose definition of vacant where it includes people who haven't yet moved into their newly acquired house.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fellow housing provider here. To your point about scraping the lots and building SFHs, I would counter the solution to that is to outlaw zoning for SFHs for tear downs. Raw land, go for it. But if a structure stood on a parcel, you can only increase density when rebuilding and upzone. This also potentially avoids situations like Naperville, Illinois, where you have a housing shortage at the same time obscenely wealth…
That would be a bad idea because the problem isnt the need to increase density, that is obvious and wanted by nearly everybody building. The provlem is the zoning often limits lot coverage to one or two units and some percentage less than 50 % coverage. You dont jave to be a dick to the one guy in the hundred building that wants a small single family and lots of land, you need to let the other 99 act in their own sel…