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

US will ban Wall Street investors from buying single-family homes

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 1001 posts

Re: US will ban Wall Street investors from buying single-family homes

#271

Post by OGWhales »

Noaidi wrote: post #218
roadside_picnic wrote: post #48

The key word here is "Wall Street". And this statement is playing off a popular misconception around corporate investors buying up American houses. There has been a bit of a panic around "Investors buying up all the property!!!" With people often citing Black Rock and Blackstone as the main culprits. But most of the "investors" buying up property are individuals purchasing investment properties. Here's an article on…

If "Black rock isn't buying up all the housing" then how do you explain why Blackrock lost $17 billion in capital today? https://xcancel.com/KobeissiLetter/status/200899449445747946... It matters, you just dont want to know it matters.

I don't think a stock market reaction is a good way to measure their impact on the housing market. It's not that they aren't involved in the market, it's that their impact is questionable given the relative size of their participation.

Re: US will ban Wall Street investors from buying single-family homes

#272

Post by jspaetzel »

sharpy wrote: post #265
bs7280 wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I propose two changes to (try) and broadly solve this: - Additional property tax if you do not live in your home fulltime. This includes vacation homes. - First time, US Citizen, non-corporate homebuyers can get a loan at the federal interest rate. If I were to try and buy the condo I rent, due to interest rates, taxes, and HOA's I would be paying $1000 more per month. At the end of my mortgage I would given the enti…

That sounds nice, but I think that increased tax will just be passed down as higher rent.

Higher rent means more people will opt to buy. That's not necessarily a bad thing in perspective. Assuming the other side effect is a decrease in costs due to a lower profit margin.

Re: US will ban Wall Street investors from buying single-family homes

#273

Post by w10-1 »

As others have noted:

- Whether this is needed or helps depends not on percentage of owners or buyer/sellers, but on the effect in the market of such players. REIT's have an outsize effect because they are repeat players, and thus lucrative clients for brokers, who qualify themselves by skewing local markets accordingly.

- Policy-wise, it's hard to distinguish by size: second homes, mom-and-pop with a few rentals, REIT, private equity. (This is how corporations get free-speech rights.)

- Politically, it's a shame that a real problem is addressed via scapegoating

- Practically, it will have little effect since REIT's and home builders are sitting on a lot of inventory that they can't sell, so they've stopped accumulating (and they're resorting to secondary offerings to pay off the original investors). Indeed, to the extent this stimulates buying, they're all for it.

- Ethically, the US has been a magnet for money laundering, much of it via real estate, which has pushed up asset prices and de-conditioned professionals. Scapegoating only delays reform.

Re: US will ban Wall Street investors from buying single-family homes

#274

Post by tootie »

legitster wrote: post #34

Investor owned housing is a bit of a sensationalist scapegoat. Publicly traded companies account for a tiny, tiny fraction of available single family homes in the US. And so long as the tax code doesn't change, it strongly favors private/individual homeowners, and corporations only account for the margins where housing appreciates so fast or rental incomes are disproportionate to asset values. This is an easy thing f…

Yeah, this move is maybe a net positive, but will have a tiny impact on actual home prices. It is absolute red meat for the internet conspiracy machine though. Especially on the left.

I also have no idea what statutory authority he has to enforce this. Surely it requires Congress or at least the FTC chair. And if there's enough vested opposition it's going to be challenged in court pretty quickly.

Re: US will ban Wall Street investors from buying single-family homes

#275

Post by andromeduck »

bs7280 wrote: post #260
roadside_picnic wrote: post #48

The key word here is "Wall Street". And this statement is playing off a popular misconception around corporate investors buying up American houses. There has been a bit of a panic around "Investors buying up all the property!!!" With people often citing Black Rock and Blackstone as the main culprits. But most of the "investors" buying up property are individuals purchasing investment properties. Here's an article on…

I propose two changes to (try) and broadly solve this: - Additional property tax if you do not live in your home fulltime. This includes vacation homes. - First time, US Citizen, non-corporate homebuyers can get a loan at the federal interest rate. If I were to try and buy the condo I rent, due to interest rates, taxes, and HOA's I would be paying $1000 more per month. At the end of my mortgage I would given the enti…

It'd be simpler to just have a high LVT and treat it as a credit instead of deductible.

Re: US will ban Wall Street investors from buying single-family homes

#276

Post by kccqzy »

HeyLaughingBoy wrote: post #194
only-one1701 wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just tax non primary residences at a much higher rate. Housing crisis solved.

They already are.

Not enough. Things like 1031 exchanges should be removed from the tax code.

Re: US will ban Wall Street investors from buying single-family homes

#277

Post by bs7280 »

sharpy wrote: post #265
bs7280 wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I propose two changes to (try) and broadly solve this: - Additional property tax if you do not live in your home fulltime. This includes vacation homes. - First time, US Citizen, non-corporate homebuyers can get a loan at the federal interest rate. If I were to try and buy the condo I rent, due to interest rates, taxes, and HOA's I would be paying $1000 more per month. At the end of my mortgage I would given the enti…

That sounds nice, but I think that increased tax will just be passed down as higher rent.

That is a good point, and this tax would need to be well thought out. I specifically would increase the tax rate the more properties an entity owns (Not a lawyer so IDK how to treat one guy owning 10 companies as 1 entity the right way). That way smaller local landlord's can still exist (and keep rental prices competitive), but massive orgs will be forced to sell properties. The idea is to create a disincentive for hoarding properties in supply constraint markets.

Re: US will ban Wall Street investors from buying single-family homes

#279

Post by wordpad »

bs7280 wrote: post #260
roadside_picnic wrote: post #48

The key word here is "Wall Street". And this statement is playing off a popular misconception around corporate investors buying up American houses. There has been a bit of a panic around "Investors buying up all the property!!!" With people often citing Black Rock and Blackstone as the main culprits. But most of the "investors" buying up property are individuals purchasing investment properties. Here's an article on…

I propose two changes to (try) and broadly solve this: - Additional property tax if you do not live in your home fulltime. This includes vacation homes. - First time, US Citizen, non-corporate homebuyers can get a loan at the federal interest rate. If I were to try and buy the condo I rent, due to interest rates, taxes, and HOA's I would be paying $1000 more per month. At the end of my mortgage I would given the enti…

Property taxes are directly and immediately translate into higher rent.

Making rent more expensive doesn't make ownership cheaper, just makes it more attractive relative to renting.

Post reply on HN