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

441–450 of 1001 posts

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

#441

Post by cosmic_cheese »

jazzyjackson wrote: post #324
mycodebreaks wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Controversial, but for affordability reasons, there even should be a cap on how many homes an individual can own for rentals. For the sanity in the housing market, members of society need to be driven to participate in other business activities for income/revenue, not rentals.

This is basically a maximum wage for landlords, bound to start a secret society. IMO it's a crooked notion that landlords are rent seeking and nothing else - they do create supply and maintain housing. Issue is when they want to politically and artificially raise the value of their property by preventing more housing from being built, so, if you're going to ban something, ban artificial regulations on construction! N…

If nothing else, landlords should be held to much stricter standards for maintenance and the overall state of their properties.

What’d make sense for me is if a rental has a documented history of being poorly maintained, past some threshold the property can be auctioned off, with the proceeds going towards funding public housing. This should help filter slumlords and bare-minimum-effort speculators.

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

#442

Post by [deleted] »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #193
IncreasePosts wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should you be allowed to create a corporation that has no actual purpose other than a shield for your own private concerns?

Ideally, it should not be possible for random hateful people to easily get name/address records from local governments, but that's unfortunately not the world we live in yet.

[deleted]

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

#443

Post by smileysteve »

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.

Only on a local level.

And businesses can already expense that tax, so it's 20% off, while individuals have been subject to the SALT cap

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

#444

Post by derangedHorse »

m4ck_ wrote: post #329
chasd00 wrote: post #112

idk how this would work effectively. There's lots of affordable homes they're just located where no one wants to live. You'd have to focus on HCOL locations and make them not so high cost which seems something that should be done at the local level. You can increase supply but investors would just snatch them up. Maybe the feds could put a cap on the value of a single-family home that an institution can own and then…

>There's lots of affordable homes they're just located where no one wants to live It's probably more accurate to say "they're just located where no one can get a job." You can give up you SWE job or whatever and move to a small town/rural area, but you're not going to convince anyone to give you a mortgage off your income from the subway at the local truck stop, or whatever labor gig you can get at the local industri…

> You can give up you SWE job or whatever and move to a small town/rural area, but you're not going to convince anyone to give you a mortgage off your income from the subway at the local truck stop, or whatever labor gig you can get at the local industrial concern

There's certainly SWE jobs in LCOL places but even if there weren't, one's savings from a HCOL area should go pretty far in a LCOL one. Also, thinking that you can't get a mortgage off working at Subway in a small town is just out of touch. You'd probably have to work a lot longer than a cushy SWE job, but it's still possible.

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

#445

Post by BeetleB »

beembeem wrote: post #379
BeetleB wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have an LLC registered in Nevada. I neither live there, nor do business there. Most states allow for this - I don't know about California, though.

This is an often conjectured example. California allows for that, but it falls under a foreign LLC registration to get it recognized by the state. It turns out that the annual foreign registration fee matches the in-state one. So this ends up costing more if you want it to be enforceable.

> California allows for that, but it falls under a foreign LLC registration to get it recognized by the state.

That's what I mean: California may be different.

In my state, I don't need to register anything for the Nevada LLC.

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

#446

Post by mattmaroon »

63 wrote: post #158
mattmaroon wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Banning people from other countries buying home is both more sensible and more practical than this, which is why very many countries do it.

"From" other countries is overly broad and I assume not what you intended. I am actually interested though in the idea of legislating how frequently home owners have to actually be within range of the home, for example. A friend has had a hell of a time with a landlord in Malaysia who's never seen the property.

They do it by citizenship, and you might be surprised how many investment properties are vacant homes, but I’m not necessarily advocating for this in any case. The real cure would just be right to build laws.

The problem is, you can’t do that at the federal level, and the people who vote at the local level are the homeowners who benefit from housing restrictions.

The federal government has a very difficult task. They want to make home prices basically stay flat for a long time, and they have limited tools with which to do it since they can’t do the one thing every economist agrees would solve the problem.

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

#447

Post by johncolanduoni »

observationist wrote: post #283
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…

It's not that simple - the problem is that those institutions are market makers. They are a tiny portion of the market, but a huge driving force in setting and manipulating prices, because their properties get leveraged, instrumentalized, and securitized, with derivative products, speculation, and all sorts of incentives that you don't normally want operating in the arena of housing. The things that they do have mass…

If you have a model where you can do price manipulation of something while owning 1% of it, I understand why you wouldn’t share it. Where are you on the Forbes Billionaire List, out of curiosity?

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

#448

Post by woah »

mycodebreaks wrote: post #261
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…

Controversial, but for affordability reasons, there even should be a cap on how many homes an individual can own for rentals. For the sanity in the housing market, members of society need to be driven to participate in other business activities for income/revenue, not rentals.

That's a surefire way to make sure that all rental properties are controlled by people who are able to de facto own a lot of properties with family members (or "family" members) on the paperwork, and who are able to enforce their ownership with extrajudicial means.

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

#449

Post by orangecat »

CPLX wrote: post #126
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…

This is absolutely, violently, incorrect. Private equity has absolutely been buying up (and building ) U.S. residential stock, and this is addressing a real problem. The fact that Trump's doing it doesn't change my opinion at all, but it's absolutely the right thing to do and hopefully will be bipartisan.

Private equity has absolutely been buying up (and building) U.S. residential stock, and this is addressing a real problem.

Building more housing is the opposite of a problem.

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

#450

Post by IncreasePosts »

darknavi wrote: post #339
galleywest200 wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They could just buy it from data brokers.

Indeed. I was in Sweden and learned that you can look up someone's address and pay on a government website. I think there are some "are you human" checks, but it's basically all in the clear. It creeped me out a bit and then I was angry when I realized it's the same way in the US, but maybe worse. In the US this is possible too, you just have to pay private data brokers and a bunch of middle men make a cheap buck. Em…

If you know the region they live in, many counties in the US now let you search property records by name from a simple web form.
Post reply on HN