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

Barcelona Fines Landlords Who Let Buildings Sit Empty

citylab.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 332 posts

Re: Barcelona Fines Landlords Who Let Buildings Sit Empty

#81

Post by charlesdm »

kradroy wrote: post #10
Scoundreller wrote: post #2

Why is it a fine? Why not a tax? Taxing unused spaces sitting idle makes a lot more sense than income (ie: people’s work).

In the US fines are not tax deductible, so that's one fiscal difference between taxes and fines. I have no idea if Spain considers fines to be tax deductible or not.

As these are investment funds, they would generally sell off the SPV holding the property. Whether they are tax deductible or not ultimately doesn't matter, as they are not collecting rent (i.e. they'd only pay tax on the gain).

Re: Barcelona Fines Landlords Who Let Buildings Sit Empty

#82

Post by adrianratnapala »

mey wrote: post #79
tschellenbach wrote: post #76

It sounds nice, but the real question is why are people letting these building sit empty. There is probably a good reason for it. Maybe some renter protection laws that went too far?

More likely it's worth it to them to keep rates high and limit supply.

So all the landlords in Bercelona conspired to do this somehow?

Re: Barcelona Fines Landlords Who Let Buildings Sit Empty

#83

Post by xenadu02 »

bradleybuda wrote: post #69
CydeWeys wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The claim I was responding to was that people should be able to do "whatever they want" with their properties, which encompasses a lot more than just leaving them vacant. But to answer your specific question, the most obvious negative externality is increased rents for other people, because an apartment that could be being rented out (increasing supply) isn't being rented out. Having lots of vacant residences also po…

Are you currently selling your unused possessions on Craigslist? That camping gear or extra set of kitchenware? By not selling your things, you are making those things more expensive for everyone else. Therefore, you are creating a negative externality by not selling your things, and storing unused property in your garage and basement should be illegal. What you are describing is not an “externality” in the way that…

People need homes to live. Shelter is essential in the way very few things are.

Re: Barcelona Fines Landlords Who Let Buildings Sit Empty

#84

Post by forkLding »

tschellenbach wrote: post #76

It sounds nice, but the real question is why are people letting these building sit empty. There is probably a good reason for it. Maybe some renter protection laws that went too far?

Probably makes more sense for these companies to reduce supply and rent for a higher price than have to rent or provide a lower price to renters. Speaks more to the market structure and power of both sides here.

Re: Barcelona Fines Landlords Who Let Buildings Sit Empty

#87

Post by graeme »

elihu wrote: post #46
pbiggar wrote: post #35

Does anyone know why is it that seemingly every major city is having an affordability crisis at the same time?

My take on it is that there aren't enough desirable cities available to employ and house all the people who want to live in them. This can be addressed by either increasing the capacity of those cities, by making existing undesirable cities more desirable, or just creating new desirable cities where no city currently exists.

Spot on. I think zoning is a big part of it. It would be illegal to build most of the world’s desirable cities now. Local zoning requires less mixed use, wider streets, more mandatory parking, etc

My dense, desirable neighbourhood in montreal couldn’t be build elsewhere in north america. But itnisn’t a safety ir code thing. The local zoning is actually reasonable: it’s just the laws are more anti-urbanist elsewhere.

Re: Barcelona Fines Landlords Who Let Buildings Sit Empty

#88

Post by l4yao »

parthdesai wrote: post #65
pier25 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Spain at least a lot of it is attributed to AirBNB.

While Airbnb is not the sole reason, it definitely is one of the factors if not a major factor for the steep rents here in Toronto. Just to give you an example, when i moved in my current condo back in 2017 my rent was $1700/month. 2 years in and my landlord wants to suddenly "move back in" and now the rental price for similar units are around $2200/month. I find it hilarious top brass of Y Combinator talk about thin…

I find this argument a lot whenever Airbnb is mentioned. Do you have a source available?

Rent has increased significantly in Toronto recently. How do you know Airbnb is a significant factor?

Re: Barcelona Fines Landlords Who Let Buildings Sit Empty

#89

Post by em3rgent0rdr »

tschellenbach wrote: post #76

It sounds nice, but the real question is why are people letting these building sit empty. There is probably a good reason for it. Maybe some renter protection laws that went too far?

It seems to me that the speculators are legitimately communicating useful information, and fining them is hampering that communication and discourages other investors from building more housing.

The useful information that high priced vacant housing communicates to me is that there is an anticipation of significantly higher future demand that isn't satisfied by current supply. That should signal for others to build more housing, as there is a lot of money to potentially be made. Or it could be signaling that there are too many things hampering construction of new housing.

Post reply on HN